The Quality of Marciano's Opponents

"Demonstrates how quickly a fighter's abilities can tail off"

Which does not apply to either Baker or Valdes.

Baker lost to Moore,

and then went a twelve bout winning streak which took him to the #1 rating, with ratings in 1954, 55, and 56.

Valdes lost his next fight to Zora Folley, and then went on to win 11 of his next 12, rising to the #2 rating with ratings in 1957 and 1958.

Both had some of their biggest wins after dropping temporarily from the rankings.

 

And how often was Marciano hit w punches? Total connect percentage by his opponents was 24.5%…the next question is how good has one got to be to be considered good defensively? Because that’s a lower percentage than Louis, Liston, Holmes, Ali, Lewis, Holyfield, Tyson, Frazier and plenty more. Was unable to find Toney’s numbers if anyone has them please post for comparison
The overall average for HWs for this stat is 33.8% Marciano is welllll better then average defensively. Top tier according to the numbers

• Still haven’t recieved an answer to this

 

Because Charles KO'd Satterfield in 2 Explosively and was severely KO'd by Marciano

 

That is absolutely incorrect. And a lie. According to the only official rankings Savold had beaten the number 4 ranked contender Bruce Woodcock in June 1950. The December 1950 ratings listed Savold as number 2 “outstanding contender” on the strength of that win in Europe.

In December 1950 Savold was legitimately listed as the world number 2. That was his status going into a fight with Comeback Louis. It is of no consequence what became of Savold after the event.

 

It matters when it reflects the performances a fighter was giving at the time. It wasn't a fluke that Baker was unranked when he fought Moore - he was unranked because after being flattened by Satterfield he put up a desperately poor performance in losing to Clarence Henry (it was Henry's only significant win during his comeback from a year out of the ring with an eye injury).

It's still a decent win for Moore, but it shouldn't be talked about like Baker was at the pinnacle of his career when it happened.

 

But Valdes beat Charles the no 1 contender in August 1953 and did not lose to Moore until May 1955 and he stopped 3 ranked fighters during that run.

 

Savold was ONE FIGHT AWAY from having his licence withdrawn for his own protection.

I don't lie.Woodcock was not Ring ranked and the Rings ratings were as good as any and not biased or affiliated to anyone.
Nor was Savold's win over Woodcock anywhere his best win.
.It is a lamentable reflection of the standards of the day that Woodcock was able to box (Lee)Savold at all: he was virtually blind in his left eye, the result of an earlier drubbing at the hands of the Pennsylvanian former miner Joe Baksi, and yet passed all medical examinations...

Woodcock was never more than a Euro level fighter.
Here are his 2 wins over class heavies.

"Bruce Woodcock, British heavyweight champion, beat Lee Savold of Paterson, N.J., on a 4th round foul Monday night but the verdict caused an immediate storm of protest. Savold brought blood to Woodcock's nose in the 1st round but the Englishman was credited with an edge in the round after harassing the American with stabbing left hands. The 2nd round was about even with any margin to Savold, who started meting out punishment with vicious left hooks. In the 3rd, Savold caught the Briton with a left hook to the chin and sent him spinning to the floor for an eight-count. In the 4th, the American landed a solid right to the stomach and Woodcock winced. Savold pressed the attack but the Englishman waltzed out of reach. Suddenly Woodcock rolled to the canvas after being struck by a right hand. He clutched his groin, writhing and grimacing, while Savold stood by, frowning in bewilderment. Referee Sam Russell stepped in quickly and ruled that Savold had struck a low blow. The American was disqualified." -Associated Press

Post-fight comments

• "It wasn't a low punch. It landed on the solar-plexus. In any case it was just a light tap." -Lee Savold

• "Woodcock's a faker. He knew Lee had him going and that was the only way he could win the fight." -Bill Daly, Savold's manager

• "There was no other decision I could make. If Woodcock had got up unhurt I would probably have warned Savold but with Woodcock lying in agony on the canvas I had no alternative but to stop the fight." -Referee Sam Russell

"The fourth round had hardly got under way when Woodcock sent a right to Oma's head and he swayed with the punch, but a short time afterward he went down..(and then did)..roll from side to side and then lay flat on his back with arms outstretched...The crowd at ringside threw pennies into the ring.." The Ring, December 1948, page 56.
Oma went into the tank and he admitted it .

 

That was Charles opinion.He fought them you didn't.
Charles was in the act of rising when he was counted out against Marciano.

 

What has Valdes being ko'd by Machen in 1956 to do with his standing in1953 and 1954?

 

What do you think prime Ali, Holmes, Tyson, Usyk, or Frazier's opponents connect % would be if they faced Rocky's "murderer's row" of 190 pound, 35-40 year old men with tons of mileage...?

 

Putting them in the Layne category of power is absurd. All common opponents ranked Williams power over Liston for one, an were in a completely different category to Moore and Walcott who absolutely were not bangers, no matter how hard you try to make them out to be.

Moore and Walcott may've been better at putting their power at world-class but were nowhere near as powerful as Williams, Valdes, or Dejohn. Either would've been far away the most power opponent Marciano faced.

 

That "bum" was the number 2 contender when he was shot, and again hit far far harder than anyone Marciano faced.

 

Can I ask where you got these stats from?

Since half of Marciano's fights were not filmed,I'd be interested in where the information was taken from.
Assuming for a moment that the stats are correct,would the quality of the opposition not have a bearing on the figure?

 

you said Woodcock was “unranked” and not rated when Savold beat him. Yet Woodcock was officially rated by the NBA. You can’t be unranked if the only legitimate governing body lists you in the current ratings and you take part in the European version of a vacant “world” title.

what does it matter in 1950 If it wasn’t until 1952 Savold got his licence withdrawn after losing to Marciano? Before being stopped by Rocky savold had been kayoed by Joe Louis when he was rated #2 in the world. Nobody considered Savolds “protection” when he was at the point in question, meeting Joe Louis.

Yes woodcock would have been ranked even by Ring Magazine in 1950. The trouble is you are looking at “year ended” annual ratings again. The fact Jack Gardner, the next guy to beat Bruce after Savold, was rated in place of Woodcock at the end of the year pretty much proves Woodcock had a high rating at the start of the year.

 

Talk about missing the point.

The issue for me is Machen.

Valdes was rated from 1953 to 1955, and also in 1957 and 1958. But he was not rated when Eddie Machen KO'd him in 1956.

My issue is should we downgrade Machen's KO because Valdes was out of the ratings the day Machen KO'd him. I say no. Nino Valdes was Nino Valdes and didn't stop being Valdes because he wasn't rated.

This is also true for Moore's KO of Baker, or Satterfield's KO's of Holman.