Ive been suscribing to the Ring since the early 60's Ive over 150 books on boxing, I've a loft full of Boxing News,suscribed to Boxing Illustrated,Ko, World Boxing and bought others when they were available.I still buy them on E Bay and purchase on average 2 boxing books a month,and I've an extensive film library which I began in1966. NB The arrogance is entirely on your part as is the presumption. YOU employed the following statements. "I've never understood why some people (few as they are), won't or can't except the Recorded Facts, the Rankings or Ratings, the Fight Reports, the Title Status of said fighters and of course the commentary with respect to the THEN Consensus of said fighters - champion and contenders alike ." "Read the RECORDED Ratings and the Fights that warranted them as Chokab (and others), have pointed out. can't understand denial or marginalising fiction that is absolutely contrary to what was recorded." Those are your presumptuous and arrogant statements,initiated from the cover and security of an oblique response that did not directly address me. I merely responded to them Now I've smoked you out we can commence! And please don't run away, as you have in the past!
How old are you man, why are you always itching for a fight, confrontation or a showdown??? so this is now a pissing contest collection vs collection? you implied you were so well versed and no one else could be, therefore they have no bases for their 'understanding'... I pointed out to you I do have a bases a 3000 plus bases, and you come back with a showdown. you are a bit strange to want to challenge, have a stand off or 'own' someone every other thread... it's simple I TOO and So DO Hundreds of Other Posters & Fans... SO TOO DO THEY/Me have Material to Back what we Know/Understand about Boxing... you have a great collection by the sounds of it, Well Start Reading, it's ALL there in the Ratings, Reports and Commentaries, how much clearer can PUBLIC Info be clear to you. P.S MOST Posters are FANS and love to discuss boxing, fighting with loudmouth trouble makes doesn't even enter their heads in the first place, never mind prey on it while totally denying that other people and/or these reports exist. Find the Grace of GOD and learn to respect & support your fellowman.
Yeah, Cokkell was legitimate because he beats LaStarza after Rocky did. He legitimately climbed the ladder because he beats Mathews and LaStarza. Don was not gifted a rank in the way modern fighters are. The practice of compiling a 20-0 record against professional losers to somehow gain a rank did not exist for him. In reality a contender only replaces a guy in the ranks by beating him. when contenders fight each other The magazine rankings have supported this practice. Ring magazine August 14, 1953 Champion-----Rocky Marciano 1-----Roland LaStarza 2-----Ezzard Charles 3-----Dan Bucceroni 4-----Nino Valdes 5-----Tommy Harrison 6-----Bob Satterfield 7-----Heinz Neuhaus 8-----Don Co-kell 9-----Earl Walls 10----Harry Matthews
You could not be more further from the truth. I would like to invite you to at least observe this work before saying things like this. Boilermakers linear rankings are the most accurate rankings of them all. He has painstakingly compiled the results of each year and listing contenders only in order of who they replace in the ranks by actually beating them. It has never been done before and is an outstanding resource to assess things in the correct way. Until contenders stopped fighting each other quite often some years are surprisingly similar to Ring Magazine rankings. You would be surprised how interesting it is and how very difficult it is to argue with any of it. The rules are so simple that it is inarguably the fairest system of all to rank. A lot of the linear champions resumes still stand up because of this and the true status of contenders beside alphabet champions can be more clearly analysed in a more rational historical sense.
I’m just in complete shock that their is a color version of a Marciano fight and all everyone is arguing about is Cockells proper ranking in history....people we have a color Marciano fight! Lol am I the only one excited about that? All I know is I want more...less arguing about Marciano taking one fight off when the champions for seems like forever, now a days avoid each other like the plague.
It’s odd no one has commented that it’s in color...like super odd. People should be praising this kind of work. Took a lot of time and it’s amazing to be able to get more detail into these films. Maybe fighters who fought in the b n w tv era would get a little more respect if the film was put into better context and detail. I’m loving it and hope more to come...there are already ten threads on Don Cockell go argue his rankings there!
You started the ball rolling as you always do, with insinuations that my posts were fiction and ill researched.Then when I responded ,resorted to informing me how many Boxing News and scraps of news cuttings you have! Let me be plain I will debate civilly with anyone who opens the innings in similar fashion,but when a poster who knows a very limited amount [and Im being kind here] tries to patronise and snipe at me I am happy to put him in his place. I've no wish to own you,. you are valueless, Ive seen your posts telling all and sundry that domestic level fighters were not only world class but greats. Its utter bollocks! You've been emphatically corrected by others on your stance on some of these fighters, then disappeared and licked your wounds only to re-appear later. Your conspiracy theory on why your relative was prevented from his rightful place in the pantheon of boxing is ludicrously absurd as are you subsequent posts. How old am I ?Old enough to spot a fake, phoney, wannabbee !
Here are some examples of the love and respect you have here. "One of his relatives(i think) posted on the British boxrec board when i used to check it out a few years back. His relentless campaigning for Bert and obvious bias\constant put downs of any British fighter post 1960, plus general lack of boxing knowledge displayed was enough to put me off checking out the book on Bert, who may well have been a good fighter. The best comment i remember was dismissing Ken BUchanan as a scottish great and in comparison to Gilroy and Lynch, because Ken supposedly lost a streetfight in coatbridge." [url]Mantequilla[/url], [url]Oct 25, 2009[/url] [url]Report[/url] "Yeah, not knocking Gilroy at all.Just found the guys bias and constant running down of other British fighters annoying." "Similarly, the charge that Bert Gilroy was frozen out of British title contention does not hold water, witness his nomination for a British title eliminator for Jock McAvoys British crown that only did not happen because of Berts unfortunate Army back injury" [url]Mantequilla[/url], [url]Oct 25, 2009[/url] [url]Report[/url] "I made the mistake of asking about Gilroy once, and the guy immediately responding with 20,000 quotes/clippings about him:" Actual quotes! Bert Gilroy on Jock McAvoy: "I was a strong favorite to beat him and I chased him from 1938 to 1945, with the crucial years being 1938 to 1943. McAvoy's rush-in style was tailor-made for my own boxing style and ability." Jock McAvoy on Bert Gilroy: "They (BBB of C), won't let me defend my title and the bigger men won't have any part of me. I've been following the progress of the middleweight contenders, and I feel the Scottish champion " "Again, claims made in some quarters that Bert Gilroy never received a world title shot during World War Two because of some London based plot to freeze him out are fantasy." My 2 Sense. "Gilroy is way overrated by said relative. A solid fighter but a guy who was losing in every era of his career, even when he was supposedly unbeatable (attributed to his relative). " [url]klompton[/url], [url]Oct 25, 2009[/url] [url]Report[/url] "mcavoy would have eaten him " [url]turpinr[/url], [url]Oct 26, 2009[/url] [url]Report[/url] Remember making this statement? "the greatest British middleweight never to "hold" a British or World title! Denied his shot, "and for 10 years!!! Greater than Michael Watson? Martin Murray? Ted Moore? I don't see much love or respect of your knowledge of boxing there,and that's only a small sample of posters opinions of you!
Where is the proof either of those guys can beat a current rated contender? It’s horses for courses. These guys have to qualify to make comparable considerations. And Stiverne and Breazeal just don’t. Sorry. Cokkell overshadows the pair of them. He has more in common with Andy Ruiz.
