Joe Louis opponents over 200 in comparison Marciano

Marciano >>>>> louis

Either way you try and slice or dice it.

 

What does that make the 60s then if those 50s guys were beating them in the 50s?

 

Which ones in particular?

 

Baker over Chuvalo
Satterfield over Williams
Harold Johnson over Machen and Doug jones
Moore over Lavorante
Patterson over Bonavena and others
Nino over London and Dejohn
Machen over Quarry
We can keep going

 

Baker over Chuvalo... a 13 fight Chuvalo against a 60 fight Baker in 1957?
Satterfield over Williams... again in 1954, not the 60's, and Williams being a last minute replacement.
Harold Johnson over Machen and Doug jones... Johnson edges Machen in a tight one but no mention of Machen beating Baker, Jackson, Maxim, Summerlin, Valdes...
Moore over Lavorante... Lavorante was a factor in the 60's heavyweight scene? I know that Cassius Clay made his mark... on the decade and on Moore.
Patterson over Bonavena and others.. Patterson was more a 1960's fighter than he was a 1950's fighter. His best work was in the latter decade and only strengthens my argument.
Nino over London and Dejohn... over who exactly, a couple no hopers? What happened when Nino faced Liston or Machen or even Alonso Johnson?

A lot of these are like saying Choynski's era was better than Johnson's because Joe clipped a green Jack. That game can be played among any consecutive eras. The fact remains that coming out of the war into the mid-50's, the division was depleted. It started regrouping with the likes of Patterson, Williams, Liston. It got back youth, size and athleticism in combination that it had lacked for quite some time. That is inarguable.

 

Patterson, Machen, Williams, Liston, etc fought a large part of their careers in the 50s. They stretched both eras. By you admitting that it only strengthens my argument that the 50s were just as strong as most eras. Baker was ancient btw when he won.
Moore getting a ranking at 45 plus was the point.
The war had no affect on the state of boxing come 1948 or so. Troops were back and if anything it strengthened it due to many troops trying out boxing for the first time

 

Boxing in general imo, goes 40s > 50s > 30s, but at heavyweight it's 30s > 40s > 50s (first half, anyway).

 

Finally someone else who understands the social reasons behind how the division shaped up. With time the fuller inclusion of black fighters and the increasing money generated by closed circuit drew greater talent. By the early sixties you had much better talent.

 

Respectfully disagree. 50s was a time where the best fought the best at the highest rate of the divisions history. People target the Cockell of the division but that’s unfair. Every decade is loaded with men who shouldn’t have been there. The top men of the time were excellent fighters in comparisons to any decade. They were smaller with no weight lifting or PEDs which gained traction in the coming decades but skill wise they stand up to any decade. Early 50s had men like Moore, Walcott, Marciano, Charles, Nino, Baker, Harold Johnson, Clarence Henry, Joe Louis, Rex Layne, etc. Good to great fighters. The late 30s were terrible in comparison.

 

It’s not 60s vs 50s it’s late 40s thru mid 50s against the talent boom of the late 50s into the 60s. Liston Patterson Machen Folley cleared out the old fifties guys. Yeah there were a few wins esp when the newer guys were young but there was more of a still young Patterson destroying Moore Liston KOing Valdez early etc.

 

Yep that’s really about all there is to it.

 

Yes they both beat every big man they faced, with Louis beating MORE of them and BETTER ones at that. Hence the answer to your thread question “ why is it said that Louis was far more proven?”…. That’s why…

 

Yeah I did a poor job at the topic at hand which was really just a comparison at the amount of men over 200 at the time and how often they faced them. It’s been said Marciano’s management avoided bigger men but realty is they just didn’t weigh that much without PEDs and weight lifting.
Louis big men were better overall for sure.

 

I assume Sonny Liston’s rise in the late ’50s heralded the emergence of the larger more mobile kind of heavyweights we saw in the ’60s.

It would’ve been interesting to see how Rocky Marciano would have done if he’d fought out the remainder of the decade instead of retiring young.

 

Easy Rocky would have won some lost some but would have definitely not remained undefeated and would have lost at least one very badly. Rocky Liston would have been the Fifties version of Frazier Foreman.