Should Floyd Patterson be criticized for for defending his title against

How is that sour g****s? He personally insulted me for the past 5 days in a row. I think he did bring in some good background inside information, but he also brought some of his bias views and bias scorecards into play.

I don't think he proved that much at all, my rankings showed Machen and Folley were rated well within the top 1-5 every year from 1957-1961 by the National Boxing Association and Ring Magazine, yet neither received 1 title shot.

 

Why don't we take a public poll then? I know there are quite a few boxing minds on this forum who didn't chime in, like McGrain, whom rates Eddie Machen very highly and has gone on record stating harold johnson vs willie pastrano was a robbery. I would love to hear from someone like him.

The title of the public poll should be "Should Floyd Patterson have given Eddie Machen and Zora Folley a title shot"

 

You didn't kick anybody's ass

You think you're big time

 

Mongoose

I wouldn't say that

1. I admitted yesterday to Edward that Roy Harris was better than I originally thought

2. I accepted that machen Folley I was a stinker and the press criticized both fighters...however I didn't accept the logic presented by choke lab that because the 1 and 2 fight to a draw it automatically skips then to the 3rd man despite the 3rd rated guy not beating either of them

3. I accept your timeline of events in 1957..however my argument is there was a 5 year window 1957-1961 where machen and Folley could have been granted title shots but we're not. 4 men who Patterson gave title shots too never reached number 1 contender status during there careers while machen and Folley did and remained in the top 3 throughout those years..all I'm saying is Patterson probably should have fought those 2 somewhere between 57-61