Should Floyd Patterson be criticized for for defending his title against

Thanks.

I assumed off Judge Kaufman's decision that the NBA was the one that rated Folley #1, but it appears it was The Ring, with the NBA rating Machen #1. Interesting, the NBA, purely an American organization at that time, I think, moved Folley to #1 rather than Johansson after Johansson KO'd Machen.

*Just a question for you Suzie. Would you complain about Patterson if he had fought The Ring's #6 man here--Valdes?

**Hopefully, someday it will be possible to get the NBA ratings.

 

And? This is not what you I claimed said, I never argued RING vs NBA.

I only have acess to RING ratings and The Valdes win you were hyping failed to elevate Machen past Pastrano on their scale.

 

"Machen actually sued Johansson for breaking the clause of a guaranteed rematch."

Well, Machen sought an injunction to prevent the Patterson-Johansson fight from going forward.

This was obviously carrying water for the IBC.

The judge ruled the contract, which was not signed by Johansson, but only by his advisor, who did not have power of attorney, invalid,

on other grounds, namely that it illegally sought to limit Johansson's right to pursue his occupation and earn a living.

The questions of whether Ahlquist could bind Johansson, or whether a contract made under duress was legal, never came up as the judge threw it out on other grounds.

What happened is that Machen and Johansson signed a contract in May without a return bout clause.

On September 13, the day before the fight, Machen threatened to pull out of the fight unless Johansson signed a return bout clause giving exclusive promotion rights to the IBC. If Machen didn't agree to a return, Johansson couldn't fight anyone in the US or for the championship anywhere. Ahlquist would have been ruined if Machen withdrew from the fight, so he signed for Johansson.

My comments

1----If Machen took Johansson as lightly as some imply, why did he insist on this sort of return-bout contract, including the IBC as promoters?

2----Machen was obviously carrying water for the IBC. If this contract held up, Johansson effectively couldn't box except for the IBC, which could in turn demand he sign exclusive promotion rights with them.

3----Machen and his management should have realized that if they pulled a stunt like this, Ingo might just tell them to go to the devil about a rematch. I would. No one likes this sort of coercion.

 

Another thing to consider.. Machen apparently was only rated THE #1 for roughly 5 months. Losing that standing in just his next fight, an ordered elimanator by apparently his own organization.

 

Johansson was rated #1 by the NBA after he beat Machen. The NBA ratings were published regularly in the newspapers.

What some people here dont understand is that by the late 1940s and early 1950s the IBC with a lot of help by the mob, completely dominated the sport. They had the top fighters signed to exclusive contracts, they owned the top venues, and they had all of the TV air dates. If you tried to break out on your own and operate independantly you either got blacklisted (as Cus D'Amato did) or got the **** kicked out of you (as Ray Arcel did). When Cus got Patterson the IBC tried to stage a fight between Patterson and Maxim. Instead Cus went with Teddy Brenner to promote the fight at the Eastern Parkway. Patterson ended up losing a controversial decision that both Cus and Patterson claimd was a robbery (and I agree). During this period, according to both Patterson and Cus, people from the mob/IBC were constantly trying to either take over Patterson or gain a percentage of him in order for Cus to do business. Cus wouldnt play ball and as a result spent a lot of time building up Patterson in independant venues such as the Parkway and taking on the occasional IBC fighter to move up the rankings. When Patterson fought the IBC's Hurrican Jackson in an eliminator the IBC had little choice but to allow it and hoped that Jackson (who was more proven at HW at that point) would keep Patterson away. Even then, for that TV date, they offered Patterson $4,000 of the TV revenue. Jim Norris would have made $50,000. This was a big point of contention for Cus against the monopoly throughout Patterson's reign. When Patterson beat Jackson the IBC tried to block Patterson's bout with Moore. When Patterson won the title the IBC was embroiled in an anti-trust case with the federal government that it would eventually lose. This gave Cus room to operate. Patterson's first defense was against the IBC's Hurricane Jackson who was also the #1 contender. That fight was promoted by Emil Lence, the guy who was promoting fights from the Eastern Parkway during the IBC monopoly which allowed Patterson to get national air dates. This was the first HW title fight in nearly a decade not promoted by the IBC. Less than one month after defending his title against his #1 Patterson took a huge payday to fight what as essentially an elective. However it was an elective that had captured the public's imagination due largely to Rademacher's persuasive self promotion. With those two fights Patterson's earnings had bumped him into the 90% tax bracket. Essentially if he had fought once more a significant purse in 1957 he would have been fighting for the government, not himself. At this time Machen and Folley were the NBA's #1 and #2 but they were also pledged to the IBC. Cus D'Amato was having nothing to do with the IBC and his war with them became so public that Jmi Norris who had retired after a heart attack came back in order to try to put pressure on D'Amato. The IBC then promoted and televised the Folley-Machen elimination to force Patterson's hand. That fight turned out so bad that Truman who was nominally running the IBC declared "where does this leave us now." Nat Fleischer stated that neither had a chance with Patterson. Jack Dempsey stated that both were a year away from being ready and argued that Harris #3/#4 depending on when you look at the ratings and taking into account his military service was the best bet for the division. The Jack Stevenson, writing for the AP stated that they "failed by far to determine a clear cut challenger" Joe Louis called the fight "terrible." Another AP report said that the fight added further confusion to the division and that the winner HAD THERE BEEN ONE had planned an immediate challenge of Patterson. The crowd itself was booing from the second round on and from the 7th on they were calling for Pete Rademacher to get into the ring. Jack Russell, seated ringside said "Floyd Patterson today is free to defend his title against Pete Rademacher, Roy Harris, or Groucho Marx. His top two contenders disqualified themselves with a static "strictly payday" fight before 14,000 (12,000 paid) fans booing their lungs out at the Cow Palace last night. Scott Baille criticised Machen saying that despite the fact that he has been criticised in the past for being too timid he was once again too timid. Jim Gilmartin said that the bout was so timid "it bordered on the 'let me call you sweetheart' stage" and that "neither man appeared worthy of a crack at the world title." He also added that Machen looked more like a preliminary fighter than a contender. Red Smith stated that both fighters stunk out the place and disqualified each other. In fact he intimated that if D'Amato didnt want to fight either one as some had said he should have just sat back and waited for them to put on such a deplorable performance and nobody would have been calling for him to face them. He added that neither man made a showing calculated to bring pressure on Patterson or D'Amato. An immediate rematch was discussed in order erase the stench of the first fight and both fighters were eyeing a lucrative TV date against Pete Rademacher. However, Machen claimed an injury in the fight and was sidelined so Folley immediately pursued a fight with Rademacher (they split two fights in the amateurs). All of this clouded who would get a title shot aided by the fact that Machen had been the #1 contender. Folley had been the #2. Folley was also a 2 1/2 to 1 underdog. Many felt Folley had deserved the fight but most had it a one round swing. Had Folley been given the fight with Patterson how do you justify it over Machen? Had Machen been given the fight with Patterson how do you justify it given that most felt Folley eaked it out? Meanwhile Patterson needed to get active and the Texas boxing commission petitioned the NBA to approve a title defense for Harris, the #3. The NBA agreed given the cloudy picture and that fight was made. After that Machen was knocked out by Johansson (who was made #1) and turned in several **** poor performances almost in a row. He was done. Right after that Folley lost to Cooper. Patterson was signed to fight his #1, Johansson and would have picked up a fight along the way against Cooper but Cooper renigged on a previous agreement for the price and asked for way more money so Patterson and D'Amato went after London who had just fought Cooper. From then on Patterson and Johansson tied up the title with their three fight series. That isnt Patterson's fault. Obviously Patterson is going to want to win back his title and in order to do so he had to sign a rematch clause. Blame Ingemar for that. Keep in mind that Sonny Liston was stripped of his rating by the NBA for due to his criminal record and him stopping a woman and pretending to be a police officer and wasnt made their #1 again until one month before Patterson fought McNeeley and a large swath of the public didnt want him anywhere near the title. Yet after a hard three fight series Patterson took an understandable tuneup and the defended against Liston. Context is everything.

 

klompin2

I think all you posted is right on, but there are two small points--

"Johansson was rated #1 by the NBA after he beat Machen"

In Machen v Johansson, Federal District Judge Irving R Kaufman commented--

"On September 14, 1958, the fight was held between plaintiff and defendant, resulting in the surprise knock-out of the plaintiff by the defendant in the first round. As a result of his dramatic victory over Machen, Johansson was immediately thrust into a position of prominence in the boxing world. The November, 1958 issue of Ring Magazine stated that, as of September 16, 1958, Johansson was the number one contender, and Machen number five. The National Boxing Association listed Johansson as second and Machen as fifth."

I consider Judge Kaufman a very solid source (more solid than newspaper reporters), and don't believe he would have put this into his written decision if it wasn't true, so I still think the October quarterly NBA ratings had Folley #1. His loss in October to Cooper ended all that and I'm certain the NBA, either right after the Cooper fight, or in their next quarterly ratings in January, moved Johansson to #1. Anything else would have been ridiculous at that point.

*I have watched the film of the Maxim-Patterson fight several times and don't see it as a robbery. To me, Patterson fought too passively while Maxim plinked away with his jab and an occasional right. I remember that the late John Garfield, who was at ringside, saw it for Maxim.

 

The NBA met monday November 3, 1958 in Milwaukee and installed Ingemar Johansson as their #1 contender based on his victory 6 weeks earlier over Eddie Machen. Brian London was installed as #2. London would get bumped down after he lost to Cooper shortly thereafter. Machen was dropped to sixth, not fifth. Henry Cooper was placed #3 based on his win over Folley. Lamar Clark was named outstanding prospect. Cooper was named fighter of the month. Folley was rated #1 over Johansson briefly while the NBA tried to organize an elimination between the two because Johansson had beaten Machen (who according to some sources "shared" the top spot with Folley). But when Folley lost to Cooper who had also been stopped by Johansson it cleared up the picture significantly and Johansson became the clear #1 contender. We are talking a very short period of time here where events unfolded rapidly.

We can agree to disagree but I thought Patterson was a clear winner against Maxim, just like I do against Ellis. The opposing arguments are the same. You either believe Patterson lost because he wasnt active enough, or you award the decision to the guy who landed the harder punches throughout and made the fight. I score professional fights like professional fights, not like European amateur fights from the era. Its not about playing pitty pat and thats all Maxim was trying to do.

 

Greetings Saintpat! Your hyperbole is duly noted.
I think what many don't realize is the context/climate at the time which led to this bout.
I could start with MANY HW Championship bouts that were much more inane. Holmes-Marvis, Ali vs. Dunn/Coopman/Blin, etc. I could go on and on.
To put a little perspective on their fight, consider golfer Bobby Jones way back when competing against the pros as an amateur.
My father told me that there was a bit of excitement surrounding Floyd and Pete's s****.
Consider:
Pete was a career amateur and Gold Medalist at the Olympics.
He was seven years older than Floyd.
He outweighed Floyd by 20 or something pounds.
As a new 'pro' he wanted to make up for lost time in a hurry, fighting Zora Folley in his next bout.
Not a terrible career, holds a clean win over Chuvalo.
Pete's Seattle backers put the bucks up for the s****; it was money in the pocket for Floyd.
Most, in dad's opinion, didn't expect it to be so one sided (forget the knockdown, Floyd as usual off balance and rose with a smile on his face.)
Today is different; given the same scenario today, it might well be a total farce BUT... not at THAT time.
Enough of the Floyd-Pete fight being some sort of a joke. :huh

 

Yeah if Pete was such a huge joke why was he so in demand by the IBC for television air dates?? Why was the public so enamored with him? Pete wasnt a joke. He was a big strong guy who could box. His only problem was that he rushed himself because he was getting on and wanted to cash out. The guy is smart as hell and very good businessman. Furthermore if you can make as much as Patterson did in 1950s cash money you wouldnt be turning your nose up at it. Especially not if you were a poor black kid from the ghetto.

 

Kudos klompton :good

 

Well, I was certain Kaufman was right, but Folley had to drop after losing to Cooper.


I'm not certain pitty pat is fair, as Maxim had a good jab and scored consistently with his right. He just wasn't much of a puncher,

but it also is hard to judge his fights as Maxim was the type of guy who could slip and dodge better than most and much of what Patterson threw wasn't really hitting.

I had Patterson losing to Ellis also. Same reason, he just waited too long before launching an attack while the other guy jabs and jabs and works three minutes a round.

"making the fight"--I don't penalize shifty boxers for boxing as long as they don't run. And Maxim didn't run.

Yes, best to agree to disagree.

 

Really great series of informative posts there. Great job everybody, this thread should be linked anytime someone accuses Floyd of ducking Zora and Machen.

 

I dont think you proved anything except that you are blinded by your bias for certain fighters and dont really understand the era that you profess to love.