Would beating Valdez and Satterfield have significantly increased Marciano's legacy?

The bottom line is, neither of these men were better than the fighters Marciano was beating at the time. We can talk about how Rockys best opponents were old and undersized, but at the end of the day, they were the best fighters around. All those younger and bigger fighters couldn't get past them, so it's not fair to penalize Rocky for beating the most proven fighters, regardless of their age and size.

It would have been interesting to see Rocky fight a larger opponent, but from a legacy standpoint they weren't good enough to provide a significant boost to his resume.

 

Cleveland Williams was still beating up on cans when Rocky was the champion. The most interesting fight on the horizon was definitely Patterson. His youth and speed could have bothered Marciano, who was slowing down.

 

Satterfield wasn't any heavier than Marciano and his chin was none too clever, beating him would not have proved much imo.
If Marciano had beaten Valdes, and maybe Baker, it might have confirmed how he would do against bigger guys .I think he would beat both and probably by stoppage.

Defending against young Clarence Henry would have been interesting from the point of view of Rocky facing a young prime guy who could hit,and was better defensively than Layne.

 

Henry fight, I agree. That should have happened in 51-52.

Your argument on size with baker and Valdes doesn't hold water. Marciano fought 213lb Joe Louis, the same size as those men. Only an inch shorter.

 

Satterfield ko'ed Cleve in 1954...and Bob was an exciting fighter, where "anything" could happen....and probably did.

 

Louis- 6 fight win streak including Bivins and Savold. Because Savold was recognized as champion in Europe at the time, Louis would have been by todays standards some kind of "titlist." :

The "Interim" Across the Pond Champion

 

While these hypothetical wins would have been worth less than the ones he has, they might shift the boundaries of the Marciano debate, for all the wrong reasons.

Speaking as somebody who has defended Marciano against his vitriolic detractors, over a few years now:

The hypothetical Valdez win would have strengthened my position, in fantasy fights against modern superheavyweights.

The hypothetical Satterfield win, would have strengthened my argument in favour of his chin, but not by much.

Of course his detractors would have said that Valdez was a big skilles oaf, so his size counted for nothing (yes size really does mean nothing if it benefits a small old timer).

They would have said that Satterfield was too small, so he never hit that hard anyway.

Ultimately Marciano would still have to fall back on his perfect record!

 

The big guys weren't as good as the small guys.

That is clear for that era.

Valdes would clearly have added value though.

 

Louis was a relic, and he is the only man of any class that is that size that Marciano beat. The fact that you and others have to continually trot him out as some kind of proof that Marciano was proven against 200+. heavies of ability says it all!

BTW I don't know how many times I've said this, but Louis was six feet and one and a half inches tall.Source Joe Louis ,in his autobiography.

 

Vitriolic detractors? Saying he had poor balance, slowish feet and average handspeed ,had a tendency to cut , and no jab is vitriolic?

 

Of course not.

 

Who do you think has been vitriolic in his attacks on Marciano? I've been here ten years ,I can't really say I've noticed much vitriol.:think

 

It can’t have escaped your notice that we get an anti-Marciano fanatic on here every few years.