If Marciano Had Fought Valdes,Baker,& Henry?

I think only Baker was rated at heavyweight when Henry fought him. Satterfield was rated at light-heavy, as he was for Layne.

I was not certain about Bivins, but he was not rated in the summer of 1951 by the NBA.

 

What's wrong with a Coopman?

 

None were, but Nardico was ranked at LHW, and Layne would get a ranking back a couple of months after Matthews beat him. If you want to split hairs go ahead.I am not saying Henry wasn't a good fighter...and here is certainly a good use of the Ring rankings to show it, but in '52 when Marciano fought Mathews, Henry was #4 contender, and Henry #3...most fans will like Matthews here for his good work in two divisions.

You've completely missed the point- Henry was 2-3 during Marciano's reign. Very few people are going to think that this would have been a huge win in context.

 

**Not for me. I'd still rate Rocky Marciano as one of the top heavyweights
of all time. For instance, Archie Moore beat Nino Valdes badly, and
that earned Archie Moore the title fight with Marciano.

Marciano proceeded to destroy Moore. Hammered Moore like
he'd never been hit before. No one, previous to the fight with Marciano,
had beaten Moore like that. Moore was never the same fighter after
he got dropped by Marciano, and Moore, make no mistake, was one
of the toughest, smartest, cleverest and most ingenious boxers who
ever stepped into a ring.

The thing about Marciano that is hard for a lot of people to
appreciate is that he had to fight the way he fought, close-in,
brawling, constantly throwing punches, and almost always throwing
power punch combinations. Why? Because on paper, he never should
have been ranked in the top 20 in his own era, much less the actual
heavyweight champion. His reach was the worst of any heavyweight
champion, ever--68" reach. There are welterweights with far greater
reach than Marciano, then and now. So, Marciano had to train
more, run more, hit the 300 pound tailor-made heavy bag,
and force his opponents to constantly be blocking his punches.
As Archie Moore said, "It was like fighting a bull with buzzsaws
on each horn, and every punch felt like getting hit with a blackjack."

Marciano's natural fighting weight was 205-207. But he
trained like a maniac to get down to 182, and never fought heavier
than 192. Why? Because if you never stop your roadwork, like
he never stopped his roadwork---always running 6-9 miles a day
in custom-made combat boots with thick foam midsoles, rain
or shine, snow or searing heat---you get insanely strong.
Marciano stood in a ditch and grabbed rocks, some as many
as 50-70 pounds, and tossed the rocks out of the ditch, using
the same motion as an uppercut, to his left and then to his right.
When you train like Marciano---and that's the thing, nobody
ever trained like Marciano---you're ready to fight full out for at least 20 rounds.
That's why Marciano's work rate never diminished in the later rounds. He got stronger the longer the fight went on. That is a very, very difficult thing for the other
fighter to combat. Especially when Marciano was throwing with real
power, incredible one-punch KO power with either hand. At any time,
in any fight, he could pull the trigger and end it.

 

Hi Buddy.
Firstly welcome aboard, nice to have new members, hope we get many more insightful and articulate post from you in the near future, as for Marciano, as you will soon find out, there is a lot of posters who don't like Rocky, and also to keep the balance posters who rate him, as you obvs do, so stay tuned, sure you will receive some replies,to your interesting and for my eyes accurate appraisal of Marciano.
stay safe , and chat soon.

 

The answer is no

I think being able to check off another box “young prime big heavyweight” would have looked more aesthetically pleasing on his resume. However, none of these men could get the better of a 40 year old light heavyweight (whom Marciano utterly destroyed) so what does this say about their quality?

Valdes should have gotten the shot instead of Cockell, no doubt.

The one name who would have helped Marciano’s historical standing tremendously is a victory over Floyd Patterson in 1956. A win over a young prime blazing fast future heavyweight hall of fame champion would have really aged well

 

I agree with everything you say except Valdes should have gotten the shot over Cockell. A champion does not have to fight the #1 contender every fight, and Valdez was only #1 for about 8 months, starting n October of '54 according to the quarterly ratings-- not long enough to force the issue. Cockell was perfectly acceptable fight, and very understandable taking into account the horrific injury Rock had suffered against Charles.

The Valdes fight is entirely an ex post facto thing. At the time, writers were more concerned that Weil would use Cockell AND Valdez to avoid Moore.

Marciano fighting Valdez would be like Usyk fighting Parker now...adds in the sense that it is a good fight, but it is in now way necessary to the core of what the champion accomplished.

 

I think he’d still be undefeated and no better or worse in people’s eyes 70 years later. Valdes for sure deserved the shot, I think people are always on about that out of a sense of fair play that the champion should defend against the best, but I see zilch in his resume that shows me he had anything for Marciano.

 

Perhaps if Rocky fought Valdez, people would now accuse him of ducking Archie Moore.

 

I believe the LaStarza rematch was necessary for Marciano's legacy as LaStarza had come the closest of anyone to beating him & Marciano would forever be accused of ducking him if he'd failed to give him a rematch when he was his top contender.

The Cockell fight is the one that really does nothing for Marciano's legacy. Cockell got his high ranking largely off of a close, ugly decision on his home turf over LaStarza, who was probably already on the decline. Nobody would ever accuse Marciano of ducking him, & beating Baker or (preferably) Valdes in his place would at least diffuse the criticism that Marciano failed to prove he could beat one of the elite big men of his era.

 

He could have all three and be 52-0.

 

Valdes was a victim of boxing politics & bad timing IMO. He was The Ring's top rated contender by the end of 1953 (following wins over rated contenders Charles & Neuhaus), but still wasn't a household name in the US. The powers that be were dead-set on making a Marciano-Charles fight, which was a guaranteed ticket seller, so the Charles-Satterfield fight was designated as an "eliminator" for a title shot despite the fact that Charles had lost 2 out of his previous 3 (including his loss to Valdes). During this time frame, Valdes came to NY for a showcase fight w/ James J. Parker, & although he won clearly, it was considered a "boring" fight & used to further justify excluding him from a title shot. A few months later, Valdes bombed out Hurricane Jackson in another designated eliminator, but (by popular demand) Charles was given a rematch w/ Marciano based off his performance in their epic 1st fight. Then in early '55, Marciano's team (who was likely looking for a "breather" for their man following 2 back-to-back battles w/ Charles) signed for a defense vs. Cockell, bypassing the higher rated Valdes. Meanwhile, Moore was engaging in an aggressive ad campaign accusing Marciano of ducking him, & was able to win popular support for another eliminator between himself & Valdes, which he then won on a close decision.

IDK that Marciano or his team ever intentionally "ducked" Valdes, but I do think he deserved a title shot either in either early '54 (before Charles got one) or late '54/early '55 (in lieu of Cockell), & was screwed over by the NBA & the NY Commission's influence.