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

Yes I would have ranked Ray higher, solely based upon the fact that Charles and Walcott went on to win the title after he beat them.

Ray's record appreciated after he retired, while Mauriello's remained about the same.

 

The other possibility is that I just think that Mauriello was a lot better than you are making out.

 

"When Ray beat Walcott, he was beating a former journeyman with a spotty record"

"Nova was #1 when Louis beat him, then Savold beat him, then Mauriello beat him and Savold."

I think this a weak argument. Savold was a former journeyman with an even spottier record than Walcott, so why does beating Savold matter so much. Nova? He was coming off a KO defeat to the former journeyman Savold, and would later lose again to Savold as well as to former journeyman Lee Oma.

I don't see knocking Walcott as a former journeyman but then praising Mauriello for beating former journeymen Savold and Oma or a guy who lost to these former journeymen like Nova.

"color line"

I don't care for the color line argument with Mauriello or LaStarza. Suzie hits on that one. They obviously didn't draw the color line. There is a valid point though that both men missed a lot of black contenders which weakens any argument that either, and the case is usually made only for Tami, faced the toughest opposition out there.

 

If Mauriello, Lesnevich, Bettina, and Baksi were all black, I would still rate Mauriello last as Lesnevich and Baksi beat him, and Bettina just has a much better overall record.

And when we drew up that top 50 list, a lot of white fighters rated ahead of Mauriello, like Rex Layne. Why did I rate Layne above Mauriello? Because he beat two champions near when they were the reigning champions.

I might be being overly harsh on Mauriello, but he doesn't do well on the criteria I consider most important, beating the best out there, nor is his depth of resume quite as impressive to me as it is to some others.

All that doesn't mean he wasn't a pretty good fighter. He made our top fifty list for 1930 to 1960 after all.

"It's just stupidity."

Actually, the real stupidity is telling another person what his motivations are. What exactly is wrong with considering Ray better than Mauriello because Ray ended up beating better men who became champions?

 

I don't think Suzie has focused on Bettina.

I did that.

Yes, I think Bettina was a better fighter than Mauriello. Okay, he was stopped in 1947 by Lesnevich, but so was Mauriello, and Mauriello lost all four of his fights with Lesnevich.

But Bettina simply beat better men. Mauriello lost both times to Bivins. Bettina split even with Bivins in three fights, winning one, losing one, and drawing one.

Not even counting middle champions like Apostoli and Krieger or top lightheavies like Mose Brown and Booker Beckworth, Bettina's resume at heavy is much the more impressive with victories over,

Tiger Jack Fox, Gunnar Barlund, Buddy Knox, Red Burman, Gus Dorazio, Pat Valentino, Jimmy Bivins, Harry Bobo, Lou Brooks, Buddy Walker, Curtis Sheppard, and Eddie Blunt.

Bettina lost and drew only to Bivins between 1941 through 1946 while beating a better group of opponents than Mauriello did.

 

After Savold beat Nova, many in the media were calling for Louis to defend his title against Savold.

When Jacobs was asked about a possible Louis Savold fight, he said that Uncle Sam owned Louis for the foreseeable future.

When Louis final fought Savold, it was arguably as much unfinished business, as when he finally fought Bivins!

 

Yeah, he avoided Ray to fight a guy called Joe Louis.

 

I don't think I rate Tunney that highly ,he barely gets in my top 20. Two wins over Dempsey, albeit an old Dempsey still top anything Ray did ,imo.Dempsey ko'd Sharkey in between the Tunney fights.

 

I wouldn't rate Tami above Ray ,but I wouldn't put him 40 places below him either.

 

Okay Pal, I've been polite to you and given credit where it is due.. You want to be a *****, fair enough.

 

Of course back then a world class talent could be a "former journeyman" just by having bad management, but such a fighter would generally have to work harder to prove them self.

How impressive would an SD win over Walcott have looked, when Walcott was coming off a UD loss to Joey Maxim?

No crystal ball please.

How impressive would a win over Charles look, in only his second fight at heavyweight?

I have conceded that Ray ranks higher than Mauriello in hindsight, but when you take away the crystal ball, I would probably be liking Mauriello's body of work better.

Do we accuse Kubrat Pulev of avoiding every contender ranked in the top ten who he didn't fight?

Do we even examine his record in meeting certain minorities?

A contender should be free to navigate any path to the top that they choose.

I would only criticize them if they sat on the #1 ranking for a long period, by avoiding certain dangerous contenders.

If the #4 contender doesn't want to fight you, then you just fight somebody else.

Mauriello's reasons for not fighting these men, might simply have been geographical issues, or inter management politics.

 

This is my thinking on the matter.