How would you rate Bob Satterfield's punching ability?

He was a two fisted banger, who was fast...his power KO'd Big BOB Baker as well as a 9 Count over Nino Valdez and Bob only weighed 174....also rocked and staggered Ezzard Charles before getting KO'd but Satterfield had power like JJackson and Shavers only faster than Earnie .....I would say Satterfield was one of the most devastating punchers off all time and LB 4 LB up there with JJackson,Rosario,etc.

 

He did NOT have power like Julian Jackson or Shavers. That is a fantastical over-statement by someone longing for a different era. The facts do not support this statement. And yes, I have seen film of him, and yes, I have read reports by his contemporaries. Bob Baker was KO'd by little guys before and after Satterfield. Valdez was hardly a study in sturdy chins having been KO'd by complete bums earlier.

He was a better than average puncher for his weight.

 

Satterfields weakness was his chin but I dont think anyone would say he could not punch with the best as a matter of fact he is always listed by the experts as one of the most dangerous punchers and he weighed 174

 

Bob Satterfield is perhaps the greatest obscure puncher at his weight, with over a dozen 1st-round kayoes to his credit. Unfortunately, he was lacking in just about every other department, but his power alone made a name for him.

 

Wags like quoting Satterfield's power because they think it makes them sound informed. But just about any lesser fighter can go in there and swing for the fences, get his ass KO'd more times than not and lose scores of fights but win some in the first few rounds. Sorry, he was an inadequate fighter who had decent spark in his punches but no better.

 

Like I said Satterfields chin betrayed him and he took chances but he did KO 31-1 Cleveland"BIG CAT Williams in 3 Ko'd 6"2 215 lb Bob Baker IN 1 rd (and Baker was only stopped once B4 by big puncher Clarance Henry) and Dropped Big Nino Valdez for a 9count in the 10th and final rd.in a winning fight. He also KO'd usually durable Julio Mederos, Oakland Billy Smith and Elkins Brothers and had Harold Johnson and Rex Layne on the floor in losing efforts also had Ezzard Charles seriously hurt in the 1st before getting stopped in the 2nd. You dont KO and dropp those kind of guys NOT being a serious puncher and he weighed from 170-184

 

Actually, he beat some guys in the 160's when he himself weighed in the 160's. He also ko'd some big heavyweights for the time. Against heavies over 200 lbs he was 6-1 with five knockouts and beat them all--Bob Baker, John Holman, Cleveland Williams, Nino Valdes, and Dale Hall. Hall was a solid trial horse. The others were all highly rated contenders ranked in the top five at one time or another by Ring Magazine.

 

Good points, although he actually defeated Harold Johnson in the fight in which he had him down. He also had Clarence Henry down.

Baker in his entire career was otherwise stopped only by top contender Henry in 8 and Archie Moore in 9.

 

How do we place Satterfield for power? How does he compare with Shavers? Shavers was certainly statistically much more impressive with a record of 74-14-1 with 68 knockouts to Satterfield's 50-25-4 with 35 knockouts. Both were considered flawed fighters with tremendous punches. Superficially, Shavers looks to be much better, but putting his record and Satterfield's record under scrutiny brings Shavers down to earth.

Shavers fought 41 men who did not have winning records. Another 8 did not have 10 victories. Of his entire 89 fights, only 17 were against men good and experienced enough to have maintained a winning record and accumulated at least 20 victories going into the fight with Shavers.
Shavers fought many fighters with losing records early in his career, throughout his peak, and going down. In total, Shavers scored 8 victories over fighters who were rated at one time or another by Ring Magazine. In the 17 fights against men with winning records and at least 20 victories, Shavers went 10-7.

Satterfield fought 7 men who did not have winning records, five in his first 10 fights, another in his first year of boxing against a journeyman opponent who was 38-55. By 1946, his second year in boxing he was going against top men such as Holman Williams and Jake LaMotta. He continued to fight top men until he retired 12 years later. Only ko victim Murray Bennett in 1953 had a losing record. Satterfield fought 43 men good and experienced enough to have a winning record and to have accumulated 20 victories. He went 24-17-2 against them. He had 16 victories over fighters ranked at one time or another by Ring Magazine.

Both men by reputation were fearsome punchers. Both stopped top men--Shavers stopped Ken Norton, Jimmy Young, Jimmy Ellis, Henry Clark, Howard Smith, Joe Bugner, and Roy Williams. Satterfield stopped Boardwalk Billy Smith, Sylvester Perkins, Lee Oma, Bob Baker, Cleveland Williams, John Holman, and Paul Andrews. One difference is that Satterfield was the better boxer and defeated Harold Johnson and other top men on points. Satterfield was also spectacularly erratic, defeating top men one fight, losing to journeymen the next. Shavers was more consistent, but his average level of opposition was far lower and he also had perplexing losses to men like Bob Stallings. Satterfield was a star fighter appearing in major venues from early in his career. Shavers fought for years in jerkwater towns like Bryant, Indiana and had fights in high school gyms against nobodies before finally hitting the big time.

Both men had plenty of opponents who stood up to their best shots and went on to defeat them, including Ron Stander, Ron Lyle, Bernardo Mercado, and Tex Cobb with Shavers, and a slew of men like LaMotta, Layne, Henry, Moore, etc, with Satterfield. Neither in my opinion ranks with the best as an overall puncher, but both were commonly praised by opponents as among the hardest punchers. I see them as pretty close, myself.

 

Pound for pound he was off the scale as a puncher.

Here you have a guy who was never really much more than a light heavyweight who was putting durable 210 lb heavyweights on ***** street with a single punch.

I would go as far as to say that he was possibly the hardest puncher at heavyweight of his day including Marciano.

 

Satterfield hit hard. I got a bunch of his fights recently, the mans power for his size was incredible. Dropping, hurting, or finishing guys like Valdes, Big Cat Williams, Bob Baker, Ezzard Charles the list goes on and on.

 

Satterfield had a rather busy schedule for most his career, and was constantly in the ring with quality fighters, some of whom were larger in size than himself. Addmitedly, I haven't seen much of him on film, but his record combined with numerous testimonies, reflects that his power was something to be reconed with.

 

You just hit the nail on the head there.

Satterfield had more than 30 fights against opponents currently ranked in the top 10.

About as many as Joe Louis or Muhamad Ali.

While a talent like Louis or Ali might be consistent against that kind of volume of quality opposition, a world class but lesser talent like Satterfield is going to have the scars on his record to show for it.

His win loss ratio and KO% are going to take a beating.

 

You are way off the mark my friend.