Elmer Ray vs...

Elmer Ray weighed about 20 pounds more than Ezzard Charles when he won a highly disputed split decision in their first bout that was scheduled for 10 rounds. It was felt that Charles "won" the bout handily. In their second bout, Charles, while being outweighed by 17 pounds, knocked Ray out in the ninth round.

Ray and Walcott fought each other three times. Walcott knocked out Ray in two rounds during 1937 and won by a majority decision over him in a 10-round bout during 1947. Ray won over Walcott by a split decision in a 10-round bout during 1946.

In a total of five bouts while facing Charles or Walcott, Ray did win two, both by split decisions, and lost another one by a majority decision. Ray's win by a split decision over Charles was considered highly dubious with many feeling that Charles "won" handily. Moreover, Ray was stopped twice in the remaining bouts. That is a flimsy resume to use in order to prop up Ray.

- Chuck Johnston

 

How about the first two fights for the light heavyweight title? Lesnevich ever stop Tami like Lewis did Ray?
Maybe Gus would beat Ray too?

 

Maybe Mauriello had already signed for his September title fight with Louis? If he had it would have been a bit silly to take on Ray in March.

 

Lesnevich an average light heavyweight champion, defeated Tami four times! Even when tami was in his heavyweight peak days!

Care to comment on that?

Or how about Ray defeating a prime Ezzard Charles? Lesnevich and his manager refused to fight charles for the light heavyweight crown he was so scared of him. He eventually fought him for the heavyweight crown and he got demolished

And let’s not forget mauriello ducked Ray by turning down a big fight in Madison square garden


John Henry Lewis defeated Ray in the 1930s when Ray was just 11-9! Ray had yet to meet his manager O loughlin where he go 74-3 under his new manager. But I’m sure you will keep bringing up losses ray had in the 1930s as if he was near his peak

But I know you’re trolling here. You’re not actually dumb enough to consider mauriello on the same level as ray

 

It was a fair decision

The United Press scorecard had it 5-4-1 for Ray, while the Associated Press card scored the match 5-4-1 for Charles. Here is the description from the Middlesboro Daily News account: "The gallery gods went into ranting hysterics last night when the burly negro who once wrestled alligators for a living smashed the myth which was Ezzard Charles. The boxing bigwigs, who had been grooming Charles for a fight with Joe Louis, laughed. Once more they had given Joe Louis, the heavyweight champion, an excuse to dodge the violent one. For from 10 rows back it looked like Charles all the way. He danced and jabbed and landed a lot on Ray's bobbing pate and Elmer's busy elbows. But inside 10 rows you could see the devastation wrought by Ray's jarring hooks, blasts which raised the sheaf of Ezzard's cheek. “No holding,” was the continual admonition of referee Eddie Joseph. But Ezzard, of the winged retreating feet, had to hold for his life, and in doing so he made of Elmer Ray a modern Sam Langford."
According to the Nevada State Journal, "Ezzard had clicked off 15 straight victories since he received his discharge from the army 18 months ago, including nine knockouts, but he was unable to overcome his heavier and more experienced opponent, and he was unable to score a single knock-down against rugged Ray, who kept marching in, bobbing and weaving and throwing hooks to body and head. Although Ray admits to 31, which would make him at least five years older than his opponent, it was Ray who finished stronger in the 10th round and thereby apparently wrapped up the bout by a close

 

Whose side are you on here?

In our top 50 heavyweights of all time list, we had ray in the top 10 and you argued for a while why Mauriello shouldn’t make the top 50.

Don’t play devils advocate here.

 

No I'm not dumb, not clever either,but I think I'm smarter than you actually.I asked you did Lesnevich ever stop Mauriello ?You didn't answer .He beat a young Mauriello at lhvy twice and beat him twice when he was a heavy. Ray had tons of unofficial bouts before he even officially went pro. you imply he was some green horn when he faced Lewis ,he was 26 years old and the fight was in1937!

I'm bringing up losses when Ray wasn't prime like when he was 26 years old and was kod by a light heavyweight?
Yet its okay for you to mention Mauriello's first two losses to Lesnevich when he was 17 and18 years old! Okay I see how this works!lol
Strange how Ray never was ranked above Mauriello when they were contemporaries, guess the Ring was full of dumb trolling writers eh?

 

The question is who was a better heavyweight Mauriello or Ray

My answer is Ray. Is your Mariello? If it is you’re going to have a tough time winning that argument


It wasn’t hard for a white fighter to be ranked above a black fighter during a racist era where the color line was drawn. I’ve already displayed two newspaper articles which clearly state many of the top white contenders including Mauriello, ducked showdowns with Ray at the garden

Mauriello not only lost to lesnevhich when he was 17-18, he also lost to him two times in 1947 while weighing 200lb, which I had to correct you on!!

Again the question is who is the better heavyweight? Ray defeated prime versions of Charles and Walcott. Who does Tami have on his resume that stacks up against that type of quality?

 

The Ring thought the answer was Mauriello.Charles prime was at175lbs imo Walcott also lost to Joey Maxim the year he lost to Ray.prime? Young green 26 years old Ray stopped by old experienced 23 years old Lewis is that how it works?

 

I'm not on any "side"

I think Ray overall deserves to rate well above Mauriello and pumped for that rating in our list.

But focusing on losses to Lesnevich by Mauriello when he was 17 and 18? I am just being fair. These fights were actually great efforts for a boy that age, perhaps the greatest in boxing history. Did any other 17 year old come within a split decision of winning a world title?

Also, those fights were at light-heavy. Mauriello really did much better at light-heavy than he did later when he filled out at heavy. The extra weight apparently did him no good. Our list was for heavyweight.

Aside--I would like to see a film of Mauriello against Lesnevich in 1941 to see how he looked at that point. He was 25 lbs. heavier against Louis. Why didn't he fulfill he early promise? Weight? Did what was offered when he came of age--nightclubs, booze, older women--entice him off track? I don't know.

 

Again,

Who had the better heavyweight career Mauriello or Ray? Your answer awaits

Charles was a heavyweight champion, so rays win over him carries significant meaning

Walcott was heavyweight champion so rays win over him carries significant meaning

Who did Mauriello beat at heavyweight better than Charles and Walcott?

 

Mauriello also lost to lesnevich at age 23 in 1947 while weighing 200lb. Bottom line, lesnevich had his number


Mcvey is trying to argue Mauriello was a better heavyweight than Ray

 

one thing--Ray won the 1946 bout. Walcott beat him on March 4, 1947 in the rubber match. This is important as it makes Walcott the #1 contender for most of 1947, coming off a win over Ray.

 

Nobody

 

Lesnevich might have had Ray' s number too, 23 years old Lewis stopped 26 years old Ray. What was the weight differential there?
Not really, I'm just trying to look at the whole picture.It's like when you flat out state Ray ko's Sam McVey it raises my hackles a bit because I think ,given that you've only seen a few brief seconds of McVey and nothing at all of Ray ,how can you be so adamant , so certain ?