Tell me more about 50's heavyweights

I am in the process of making a 1950-1955 ranking + styles report on the era. Stay tuned.

 

Thanks for posting this.

Whatever else one says about Satterfield, he was about as exciting as a fighter gets.

 

Mendoza---

I agree with your granddad. Modern heavies would be too big, I think, for old-timers, but are not as interesting to watch for they are just not as active or skilled.

Good evaluations.

I would put Satterfield on the list somewhere because of his decisive victories over Baker and Valdes, as well as edging Johnson once.

I would move Layne up several notches because of his big wins over two champions. My take would be that wins over top men are more important than consistency against second tier men.

 

:good

 

I love watching the 50's fights! The fighters really gave the fans their monies worth. Its like college basketball vs pro basketball. College is a better game to watch, but the pros would clean up on the college guys if they ever meet.

 

The size of Heavyweights today with all the extra added muscle and fat makes the size difference great but The talent level and condition was much higher in the 50's and the ability to engage for 3 minutes of every rd also greater. Funny but there were big men in the 50's and the 40's but the smaller men happen to be the creme of the crop and mostly dominated the Big men...

 

Difference is the professionals were the fighters of the 50's the fighters of today would clearly be the BIG amateurs

 

This era is when the average size of a HW boxer was the second smallest .
Second only to the era that preceded Jack Johnson. And even this is only by a small margin.

 

What a left hook!!! A BOOOOOOOOMING LEFT!!!! Poor guy never even knew what hit him

 

Good fight!

I had it:

Eddie Machen - Johnny Summerlin

1. 9-10
2. 10-9
3. 9-10
4. 10-9
5. 10-9
6. 9-10
7. 9-10
8. 10-9
9. 10-9
10. 10-9

96-94 Machen

 

Yes, I start to understand why old timers praise those fights at HW, when being a good heavyweight meant to weight about 190 lbs and not 240 with 6'4'' height. Those man were more skilled, tougher and faster. But still I don't know if skilled fighter like Machen could handle a fighter like Ruddock, Peter, Arreola or Lyle. This is huge firepower. I'm studying Ketchel from some time and I found examples were brutal power overcomes skills like Ketchel vs. O'Brien.

I also wonder what would happen if we would throw to the 50's mix a fighter like Ruddock or Mercer. Would those fights still be entartaining brawls or they would end quick?

 

Weak era, very weak. Especially the first part of the decade.

 

Weak in terms of what?

 

The general size, all the talk of exciting fights and the top 8 names of the 50's make me want to throw Joe Frazier in there! Would he come out as no.1? Lets say he hits his physical prime in 1951