Who was the better heavyweight Tami Mauriello or Elmer a Ray?

I don't see their color as being particularly relevant.

I would say that is highly debatable.

Louis was obviously the most dangerous man he fought, Pastor was the second, and you could make an argument for a few people being the third.

I don't think that the evidence that he avoided them is very strong.

He fought Bivins twice whatever the outcome.

You have not been able to produce evidence that the others tried to arrange fights with him, with the sole exception of Ray.

There could be any number of reasons why those fights did not happen.

If I had made the list, then Mauriello would have been significantly higher, and Ray probably a bit lower.

 

I agree with this.

 

Why would Mauriello take a chance with Ray when he had a title shot lined up with Louis that year? What would he gain ? Do you think if the roles were reversed Ray would have stepped in with Tami?

I like Drew's earlier post here.

"Ray might have the better wins and might have been a more dangerous opponent for Louis. But by mid 1946, when Louis had agreed to face Mauriello, Tami had faced better opposition over the course of the previous two years than Ray had, and I think deserved to be rated higher as a result at that point in time/

From 1943, when he got KO'd in one by Turkey Thompson, to the point when Louis faced Mauriello, Ray faced a grand total of zero rated contenders. It was the quantity of his work, rather than the quality of opponent, that allowed him to surge from #8 to #4 from 1944-1945. Eventually, he did finally face a couple of rated guys in Savold and Walcott, but by that point Louis was already about to face Mauriello. But in mid-1946, a fighter who had amassed a heavyweight record of 37-4-1 with several good results against rated fighters (UD Savold x2, KO NOva x2, 2 out of three against Oma and a KO over Top 5 rated Woodcock) probably had a better case to be rated higher than a guy who had feasted on journeymen since his loss to Thompson. Yeah, Mauriello missed some contenders, but it's not like Ray faced Sheppard, Murray or Thompson in a rematch either from '44 to mid-46"


Gotta love your passion Suze!

 

Ok, I stand corrected. Ray defeated one contender during his fun from 1944 to the time he met Savold. But, Mauriello still faced many more contenders during that time than Ray did. So, my initial point stands. Mauriello still faced more ranked contenders and better fighters in general during his run to the title than Ray did during his extended win streak.

Also, Ray was generally a come forward fighter who went looking for the KO, but could get dropped (as he did against Walcott) and stopped (as was the case against Thompson). Early vulnerability plus an aggressive approach doesn't really stack well against even an aging version of Louis. If Ray initiates a shoot-out, a still dangerous Louis would still be favored to finish it.

 

I don't understand this post, as critics of our view of Mauriello will simply disagree with where we rate him.

 

Maybe their opinions are as valid as yours?

 

Maybe they didn't see it as earth shatteringly important as you seem to?