Layne did nothing well but eat shots. He had no twitch. He wasn't strong at all. His punch was meh. His footwork was basic ***** stuff. And he was small. A guy like this would even be known by the most serious fans of the sport were he around today. Stop comparing these guys from this abysmal era of the late 40's and early 50's to today's warriors. Even the mediocre ones today would rule the division back in that day. Not even the same species.
So much delusion in one post when men like John Ruiz (both of them) Hasim Rahman, and Wilder are winning titles in recent decades. We can list a lot more but I don’t even want to insult those men who are warriors and get in there. But you have no concept of the actual sport but are obsessed with men on steroids. A little science lesson. Human evolution has not occurred in the last 70 years. PEDs on the other hand have. That’s not a skill…anyone can use them.
When he had 17 fights under his belt. He beat him in their first fight and beat him in their third and fourth fights. that was in 1950, where he fought 14 times in that year alone. He fought those two as the 12th and 13th respectively, all within the same month. He than went on to defeat jersey Joe in his next fight. a young prospect having an off night or two while on the second year of his career and fighting at a ridiculous schedule is hardly damning. Now I’m not saying Layne has a perfect record, he wasn’t very well managed and his lows are certainly lower than Chris Arreola’s lows. What I am saying is that if we’re comparing them at their best, Rex was more impressive Chris. a washed up McCline is still Arreola’s best win.
Yes, it’s part of the reason undefeated prospects weren’t as common back then. What makes Rex different is the wins on his resume.
Layne was certainly better for his era, but he was like 190lbs, and with no defence at that. He was unorthodox in his attacks, he used an offensive jab and pressured with straight punches leading with his chin in the air, like a poor man’s Carl Froch, but with less ability, but was rough, strong and could grind out wins at his best against quality opposition. However, that style against a guy around 245lbs or so who can punch and did have decent combinations, he’d struggle here. Arreola had issues when guys would give him movement or used their reach, but if you stood infront of him, he could hurt you, especially if you’re standing infront of him at 190lbs.
A prime Areola was beaten pretty badly by Vitali Klitschko and then beaten by Tomasz Adamek (who was light heavyweight for the most of his career but had some successful wins at heavyweight) Areola was a rough and tumble fighter, but he had a slim resume prior to Vitali but was taken to school by Vitali and stopped - outclassed. He lost 2X to Bermane Stiverne and then stopped by D. Wilder who was in top form. Layne had some excellent wins - Turkey Thompson, Jersey Joe Walcott, Cesar Brion, stopped Bob Satterfield (Bob was fresh off a KO over Elkins Brothers) and stopped the only man to beat him, Dave Whitlock. At the time of the Marciano fight he had a record of 34-1-2 and was the favorite and toted as the next Jack Dempsey - the KO loss was a brutal one punch KO that severed Laynes's front teeth - it was a tough fight to come back from and Layne was never the same but he still managed a several good wins and a few bad losses. Both men had heart and managed to come back from being hurt - Layne fight vs Satterfield was a great example and Areola showed heart and tried vs Vitali but stopped in 10 and outclassed. If we ask who Areolas best win was, I will have to say Jamell McCline (who only won 1 out of his last 5 fights and stopped in 2 of the 5_ I think it would be a rugged fight with both men hurt and staggered but Rex Layne would outwork Chris and get a close but UD over 10 rounds.