Would "Donavon Ruddock '', Have Had a Field Day In The 1950 s?

Yes, too big, too much reach and power for any fighter in the 50`s, Walcott might have out-boxed him though.

 

Wrong jersey was to small and out of date would be ran through

 

Really doesn't make sense it was said jersey would outbox him, to me looking at jersey he fought in the style of mike not as fancy with the head movement though, and not as great with angle switching and plus as I said a lhw and had mutiple flaws that boxers didn't make in razor era

Mike koed razor mind you it was a out of shape razor who still hit hard And was tough,,
Jersey as I explained was a basic ver of mikes style so jersey would last I say the 1st cause but that's all he gets koed 2nd

No he wouldnt be a deontay cause razor never was trash,deontay is he only had 1 punch and all his other punches look bad plus his defense

 

He had the tools to have a lot of success in that era yes. Only thing I would say is that he might have to adjust for long range fights. He wouldn’t
always be able to knock every man out early and with one punch. He’d need late round stamina and the ability to match opponents with high output.

 

Sure he would need to match opponents who he already would have way more athletic ability than....smh

 

If by “ athleticism “ you mean being big with a muscular physique and the ability to hit hard then he’s nailed that PART of the equation. But there’s also these little things like speed, stamina, work rate and skill. Just minor details that don’t mean that much if you can bench 300 on a weight bench

 

Wrong, @mark ant that if anyone could successfully survive and outbox Ruddock it is Walcott. Walcott is so much more technically proficient than Mike Tyson and has little to no similarities speaking stylistically. Walcott is a master of footwork, head movement, and defensive boxing. See his performances against Louis, Charles, and Marciano. He also packed a punch in his own rite, the man could throw, and stick and move as good as the best of them.

What the hell does out of date even mean? Walcott is technically proficient in any era. You are just confidently incorrect and I admire that, but you're still wrong.

 

Ruddock was too one dimensional. His over reliance on his power would actually hurt him more in the 50’s. I could see Ruddock making the rankings in both the early or late 50’s, but don’t see him having much more of an impact.

In the early 50’s I don’t see him beating Louis, Charles, Walcott, Moore, Matthews, Satterfield, Marciano, Kid Riviera, Nino Valdez, Bob Baker, Clarence Henry, Jimmy Bivins, Charlie Norkus, Joey Maxim, or Harold Johnson.

He might beat guys like Rex Layne, LaStarza, Brion, Coley Wallace, Baski, Gene Jones, Gardner, Billy Gilliam, Hein Ten Hoff, Bucceroni, Earl Walls, Cockell, Willie Bean, John Holman, Hank Thurman, Lonnie Malone, Frank Buford, or Embrell Davidson, or Vern Escoe.

In the late 50’s I don’t see him beating Patterson, Machen, Liston, Johansson, Pastrano, McMurty, Moore, Harold Johnson, or Zora Foley.

He might beat guys like John Holman, Hurricane Jackson, Cleveland Williams, Nino Valdez, Roy Harris, Besmanoff, Summerlin, Chuvalo, Henry Cooper, Charley Powell, Alonso Johnson, Brian London, Albright, Amos Lincoln, or Young Jack Johnson.

 

He’d be what he was in the 80s the 80s version of Cleveland Williams. How did he do?

 

no
he wasn't that good

 

i dont disagree but early ruddock was very fast and had a good gas tank. even later he was still pretty fast

 

Do you think he’d have a chance against Patterson, Johansson or the aged version of Marciano who fought Moore in his last fight ?