Funnily enough, Williams did beat Simmons. Even as a novice, he did it far easier than Marciano ever could with scores of 62-38. 61-39, 58-42 in a beyond lopsided decision. Marciano on the other hand, struggled quite a bit and had to resort to illegal tactics which enabled him to KO Simmons late. "Marciano was in trouble early before winning—and not before drawing some boos from the Providence crowd for hurling a few low blows." Simmons had also "given Marciano a pretty good fight.” and even stunned him according to contemporary papers.
Layne vs Williams is a better fight. There's good cause to pick Williams there. Same with Williams vs LaStarza. Here though, you have to assume that Marciano does what he normally does. He overwhelms them with volume, then breaks his guy down before stopping him late. Williams may be fast, may hit hard, but Marciano has dealt with that from better fighters. Liston beats Marciano up though. The fact that Liston is 30lbs heavier, a better fighter, a much harder puncher and one of the worst styles possible for Marciano means that - while, yes, it is an opinion - it's the only opinion which is backed up by something tangible which isn't deluded, lovecraftian ramblings about how Marciano was too tough, or too determined for Liston.
Yes, Keene Simmons isn't a name Marciano fans should really be bringing up. As the local paper described it, Simmons had him badly shaken in the second round and afterwards took everything Marciano could throw at him without ever hitting the canvas. https://pasteboard.co/JO9u1y2.png
Yeah, I'm very puzzled as to why Chok bought up Simmons. He was a 9-22-1 fighter who game Marciano hell, and who Williams beat with relative ease as a teenager, even if Simmons went the distance. If I was a rabid Marciano fan to the degree Gazelle and Chok are, I'd avoid bringing Simmons up like the plague.
I’m not sure to be honest. Maybe his draw w Machen? His one good win over Terrell? That would be good enough for a three ranking. You’re barking up the wrong tree though. I don’t put much stock in rankings. Especially when a whole career can be looked at. I don’t hate Williams he looks fine on film. But he was very flawed and the upper echelon of fighters proved it. I never saw your top five Williams wins but if you did them you’d know that it’s not an impressive list. Not one that can be compared to other contenders that were considered great contenders.
Eh a few low blows early in the fight really aren’t something to pitch a ***** about. Evander Holyfield for example was known for his head butting and dirty tactics. Arguably they went a long way with knocking out Tyson but we still regard that as one of his most notable wins. Im legitimately not sure where you read that Simmons stunned Marciano but at the end of the day an older Simmons went the distance with Williams and was knocked out by Marciano. In a picture of the fight Simmons’ face looks grotesque. All cut up, bruised, and puffy with Marciano further distorting it by landing a crushing right hand to the side of his face. I don’t really think that guy was even close to winning. edit: scratch that part about not knowing where it says Simmons stunned Marciano. Didn’t see that link a few posts above until now.
which was precisely my point. The fact Williams was not beating established trial horse types like this inside the distance says something doesn’t it? Williams went the distance, and for all you like to use the excuse that he was still “just a kid” or whatnot, this kid was also meeting Olimilo Agramante about this time. A tough washed up Cuban who had been in with Valdes, Walcott, Louis, Bob Baker, and others, but still good enough to expose out and out hypejobs. Williams was reasonably legit to beat a trial horse like that. On points, And he could live with Simmons. Yet he couldn’t stop Kenny Simmons. Who was another tough guy who had been in with Brion, Marciano, Lastarza, Norkus and Valdes. Williams Losses that came after this point become a worthy enough win for the victor on that basis. On this basis, The Satterfeild loss is significant in regards to comparison with Layne. why not? Being a fan of one fighter shouldn’t mean you excuse difficulty earlier in a career in the way Williams boosters do. Marciano overcame some difficulty here. This is a plus not a minus.
This content is protected Here is Keene Simmons holding his own against Charlie Norkus the same year he fought Marciano. He looks a tough billygoat of a fighter. Another 5 points defeats later he also takes 27-0 Williams the distance.
The trouble with something like this is it's so utterly devoid of logic that it's very hard to formulate a response. At age 19 Williams was good enough to beat a fairly good journeyman like Omelio Agramonte... therefore he should be treated as though he was in his prime from that point on. It makes no sense at all.
I didn’t say prime, but you must know young fighters who get to the thirty fight point, are past excusing on grounds of being a totally different fighter than they became later on. That many fights, they are not so far away. look at film of Joe Louis, Muhammad Ali and Mike Tyson as young fighters. All of them wonderful physical specimens at the age that Williams was losing to Satterfeild. All of them good enough to be beating good fighters at this age. Are you telling me that at 19 or twenty, with thirty fights experience of knocking out so many grown men as well as going the distance with cagey fighters it is utterly devoid of logic to suggest whoever beat Louis, Tyson or Ali at that point had not beat a decent fighter?
I never saw the fight but read many times Charles really got robbed in that fight and Dempsey was the prime crook. As far as the thread matchup , there is obviously no question as to who was the greater accomplished fighter but really about how would Marciano match up against a much bigger, fast starting, very hard punching fighter with good speed and a huge reach. We really don’t know since he never fought anything close to it other than the severely faded Louis. I think it would be a very dangerous fight for Rocky.
According to who? To my understanding Marciano had a cut above one of his eyes but I don't recall reading that the doctor was about to stop the fight over it. If I'm wrong I would appreciate a source verifying that the fight was indeed close to being stopped by an official because of a cut. That would clear up any ignorance on my part. Simmons was getting beat up so badly that he literally could not see well enough to walk without aid after the fight. Outside of that, Simmons was not ahead on the scorecards by any margin and therefore had no real chance of winning.
