Clarence Henry, Bob Baker, Nino Valdez

the trouble with one title, one top ten was that with no other route to big cash the only way into the rankings was to beat a guy already there. with out a rich backer who could secure beter match making and big write ups a fighter would have to continue fighting within the rankings to maintain a ranking. so many guys of the 40s and 50s records did not read so well since they were matched in 50-50 wars all the time. most top 5 guys then were worthy of a b-list belt, but thats all.

 

It was better in those days. I want to see 50-50 wars. I want to see contenders fighting contenders, not pointless mismatches.
Every contender has to defend their ranking against guys who are climbing behind them. And the top 4 or 5 contenders should be fighting to eliminate each other to challenge the champion.
It didn't always pan out like that, but it was much better than we have now.

 

Good post!

 

:good

 

Johnson was probably second to Moore, who incidently cost him his title shot when he was being considered for a bout with Marciano. During his peak run from 52-54, he collected wins over Satterfield, Valdes, Hall, Slade, and Charles.

 

I thought Satterfield boxed a very smart fight against Harold Johnson the first time and seemingly had him intimidated with his power. That's about the only time I've seen him box not slug.

Bob Baker was a good fighter but had a history of hand troubles:

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oCU7_gUrGos[/ame]


[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gvvs8Y4xaqs[/ame]


Flattened by Satterfield:

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WG8kmOgjSPY[/ame]

 

AGREED:happy

 

WOW! these guys were good enough to compete in any era. i have a copy of valdes v brian london in his last fight, he was still good but quite easy to hit.
getting back to unforgivens point about the top rated fighters fighting each other all the time i supose the downside is that a champ could get shiopworn contenders as a chalengers. By the time they get a shot there wouldnt be much left of them.. having said that since the champ goes through the same process its still fairer than now.

 

Valdes was sloppy but he had a punishing left jab. I'm not surprised that he lost to Archie Moore as he was mechanical and slow while Moore was crafty and slick but he could have potentially been a difficult fight for Marciano, especially if he can cause a cut early on and bother Marciano with his size & strength.

 

I wish marciano had fought valdes. rock was the kind of guy who made hard work of some opponents, he was certainly guilty of lowering to the level of his opponents at times. However I dont think he would have made hard work of valdes, he was too large a target, a sitting duck compared to the slippery stylists like lowery, moore, walcott and charles. valdes was a b-list louis clone only minus the talent, slower and not as quick a thinker.
No doubt it would have been a great fight like all title fights involving rocky but i dont see valdes backing up rocky or bothering him any more than a faded louis did.

 

Louis vs Marciano was a pretty good fight still, atleast for 6 rounds. I think Valdes was physically stronger than Louis was at that point of his career and wouldn't be "bullied" as easily. However he wasn't exactly in Louis's class as a boxer, even an old Louis, and would be an easier target to hit for Rocky.

 

However faded I think joe louis was still a very solid looking, strong man physicaly when he fought marciano. However eroded his timing was the extra weight he carried so well on that powerful 6'1'' frame meant that by rights joe should have been stronger than marciano- but wasnt. rocky was exceptionaly strong and imposible for louis to push back. Louis who later wrestled would still have strength in a clinch.
We cant say for sure that valdes was stronger because it cant be proved. brian london climbed all over valdes and pushed him around the ring like a bull, sure valdes was old like louis was then but physicaly the strength should still be there when timing is not.

 

He may have looked solid but he was not strong. Louis was never one to push you around but in his recent fights he had spent a lot of time being backed up against the ropes.

Valdes on the other was known to manhandle opponents.

 

As for Louis's wrestling career, he usually played a boxer and did very few actual wrestling moves or holds.

Of course none of this translates to Marciano not being able to handle Valdes, he very well could because he was extremely strong and had stamina for days, but he was bothered somewhat by Johnny Shkor who was similar in stature compared to Valdes. Surely Valdes could have presented some problems as well.

This content is protected

 

valdes was not a rough power house in the george foreman sence. he was brave and heavy handed but a gentle giant by comparison. maybe it would be an untidy fight who knows? i think we both agree its rocky by a big KO.