Marcianos 3 minute bomb run on the durable Don Cockell

I can see why you would want to buy into this conspiracy theory. But it’s still just a theory put out there by one guy Susan knows?

Why not look at what the people of the day must have been thinking? Lastarza was getting mileage out his “unfair” split decision loss to Rocky wasn’t he? He was able to preserve his stature as the guy who got robbed if he did not get a shot. There was a market for a Lastarza championship fight. It sold well.

The “rematch angle” was Lastarzas gold ticket.

 

There's a market for a Wilder v Fury fight does that mean Fury merits it?

 

Not getting personal with you at all. I like you. I am making fun of Choke.

The injury in the gym happened in either 52 or 53

Joe Rein didn’t give a medical diagnosis but he did say no way would Jackson beat a healthy live Henry

 

The problem with Marciano nuthuggers are they love to overvalue and overrate lastarza, cockell, and Matthews. Why? I don’t know. Maybe some insecurities? Cockell and Matthews wouldn’t crack the top 15 best of 1950-1955 and lastarza barely skates in the top 15. The 1950-1955 was a fairly average to below average era. In stronger eras, Matthews cockell and lastarza wouldn’t even be a factor in the division. Matthews was really a light heavyweight and cockell was really a middleweight/light heavy

No one at the time thought much of cockell or Matthews AS heavyweights. Matthews own manager didn’t think much of Him. Archie Moore called Matthews a “west coast hype job.” Marciano Nor al Weill thought much of cockell. “I can’t get up for this guy, everyone knows I’m going to murder him.” The American press laughed at Cockell. Lastarzas own manager was quoted in the 60s as saying he turned down fights with big names in fear of being eliminated from a title shot.

 

Yes Hurley was offered a bout with Maxim but he wanted the big pay day for Harry,he knew once the bubble was burst the pots of gold would diminish rapidly!

 

Cokkell and Mathews were not world beaters. I don’t “love” or “want to overrate” either one of them. I just defend their position at the time they fought Rocky in the context of that time. It’s neither here no there who turned out to be better on the decade. Nobody knew this or could possibly know this. It’s like saying you always knew the titanic would sink. You didn’t. You weren’t there man.

what’s this? Hindsight again isn’t it. “***ell and Matthews wouldn’t crack the top 15 best of 1950-1955 and lastarza barely skates in the top 15”. They did crack the top 5 legitimately!

yes those stronger eras... 1970s heavyweight rankings were chock full of guys like Chuck Wepner, Jose Urtain,Joe king Roman, Jack Bodel, Domingo D’Ella, Howard Smith, Stan Ward, Randy Neumann... take your pick out of these guys. They made the ranks, they apparently paid their dues in a much tougher time.

yes I am sure he did. And that’s because he didn’t fight him. Had Archie fought him I am sure he would have nicer things to say about Mathews who was always better than Yvon Durrell.

Boxing is a business. Are you going to say whoever was guiding any other leading contender also did this or are you limiting this to the white guys Rocky fought? Did Cleveland Williams beat rated guys to earn his crack at Muhammad Ali? The top ten in the year of 1966 was loaded with guys Williams never met socially that year never mind in the ring.

 

You have no idea what they were thinking do you? You just love to twist words around to suit your agenda?

Forget hindsight. The press, experts, fighters, Marcianos camp knew how good Cokkell Matthews and Lastarza were at the time. The 50s was considered a weak era by the press if you read articles from that period “garbage dump” by the New York Times in 1954, and those 3 cracking the top 5 in yearly ratings is a big reason why!

Matthews was a light heavyweight whom his manager cashed out on against marciano...Matthews had zero credibility in the heavyweight division at the time


Cokkell was a middleweight with a medical condition that caused him to balloon up. He had no business fighting at heavyweight and he was chosen as a soft title defense to test Marcianos nose

I’ve said my piece on Lastarza. Protected, carefully matched, and overhyped. He milked that split decision loss against a very green marciano for as long as he could


None of these 3 went into the marciano elimination/title fight given any chance to win. They all were shortish smallish weak hitting fighters who couldn’t threaten marciano with a KO and who didn’t have the punch to keep marciano off of them


Forget hindsight, no one thought much of these guys in a weak era!

 

Great post!

 

Ali gave Williams and Folley title shots because he felt bad they were both ducked out of title shots in their prime

“Matthews better than Yvon durelle”

How do you know?

“Archie say nice things about him”

Why would he? Archie had been campaigning for a title shot for 10 years and Matthews was in his way. Both lived in the same state but Matthews was too scared to fight Archie. Manager Hurley knew Matthews wasn’t good enough to become a champion so he turned down the maxim 175lb title fight and cashed out against marciano, a fight he knew Matthews couldn’t win

Matthews may have been one of Archie’s easiest fights. The st Paulies boxing style wouldn’t play well against Moore


Cokkell Matthews and Lastarza wouldn’t crack the top 10 in the 80s. Fighters like Tony Tubbs Carl Williams would clown all three of them

 

Every era was considered a weak era by the sporting press who cover more than one sport. But Talk to the trainers with a full time interest like Don Turner for context.

being wise after the event is just plain silly.

Mathews beat Layne right when Layne was rated high enough. And that my freind was the legitimate way to earn that ranking. He was not given it for nothing.

the era was full of great fighters exactly that size. Charles, Moore, Johnson and Bivins. They hammered bigger guys. Size was seen as much less of an issue. Using hindsight and applying modern findings on men that were bigger now that did not apply to the men that were bigger then is pointless.

forget hindsight? Hindsight causes the revision of history.

 

Yes forget hindsight. Let’s use hindsight and be cleverer after the event, That must be great..

As great as saying the sinking of the titanic was predictable..

 

No thanks I don't want to talk to Don Turner or hear anymore of his opinions. I think he's full of it!
Hook and jab pads are BS.
Andre Ward is an ordinary fighter.
Floyd Mayweather Jnr would be a 6 round prelim fighter in the 50's.
Cut men are a scam and an unnecessary expense.
Marciano would ko both Klits the same night.etc, ad nauseum

He has zero credibility with me!

 

I'll tell you what was predictable, Cockell getting brutalized by Marciano,that was eminently predictable!

 

"Matthews was better than Yvon Durelle"

"How do you know?"

He certainly had the better record.

Seriously, no one has any proof, or even evidence, Matthews wasn't better than Durelle. Durelle lost to all sorts or ordinary fighters over the years. Matthews, after his 18th birthday, only lost to four men who were top five rated fighters in 17 years during which he earned ratings in three divisions.

A lot of fighters can be scored as "hype jobs" but we should keep perspective that they were not ONLY hype jobs. You critique Marcel Cerdan as a hype job. I critique Jake LaMotta as somewhat of an after the fact hype job. We both can make points, but just dismissing a fighter totally is unfair and simply bias.

As for Matthews as a heavyweight, he was rated in the top ten in that division, and beat Rex Layne who in turn had a victory over the then champion Walcott. I remember reading an article years ago which said that Matthews was rated #2 at heavyweight going into the Marciano bout by the NBA. I don't know for certain about that, but he was #5 in The Ring's ratings, which I have.

 

Trainer of the year wasn’t he? Surely Turner holds nuggets of priceless information.