Did Zora Folley and Eddie Machen deserve title shots against Floyd Patterson?

and let's see how well Folley did with Lavorante.

 

I have to go now, but I will be back to answer this. Sorry for hitting the quote button.

 

Folley was a level above Cooper imo ,and I'm British.

 

No Edward is saying in the window available for Floyd to defend his title that Harris had done as much or more than Folley had -at that time. And he is perfectly correct to say so.

It is a pity you cannot appreciate that people of the past did not yet know the future.

 

"Bob Baker was washed up in 1958."

But he fought Harris on April 30, 1957. I already posted his record. Baker would lose his next fight to the #1 Machen and then record three victories, including over Chavalo and Richardson during the rest of 1957. Nothing special, I admit, but look who Folley was beating. No one nearly as good as Chuvalo or even Richardson.

"Baker was coming off wide decision losses to Alonzo Johnson and Harold Carter."

Carter was the #3 contender in 1956. He beat Baker in early 1957. Alonzo Johnson never fought Baker. His wide points victory was over Nino Valdes.

Nino Valdes--name the guy Valdes defeated who defeated Harris. Harris beat Baker who defeated Valdes twice, and Harris beat Charlie Powell in 1959 when Powell was coming off a KO of Valdes.

Willie Pastrano--He was rated in the top five heavyweights in 1955, 1956, and 1957. When it comes to Folley, you imply the ratings can't be questioned. But you don't accept them for Pastrano. By the way, Pastrano's victory over Harold Johnson is better in my judgment than any victory Folley ever had. Johnson defeated Machen, Jones, Valdes, and Bethea, as well as Charles, Moore, Henry, etc. And yes, Pastrano did lose to London. But so did Folley.

Bob Cleroux--I would focus on him also if I had to defend Folley. He is the only non-champion to KO Harris. Five non-champions--Johnny Summerlin, Young Jack Johnson, Alejandro Lavorante, Doug Jones, and Mac Foster KO'd Folley. I give Folley a pass for Foster, but the others were while he was in his physical prime.

"It is amazing how many big wins from Folley's career you overlook."

We are talking about 1958. These wins weren't before 1958. The only big wins at that point from your list is Valdes, although you could add the two split decisions over Bethea. This hardly trumps Harris' wins over Pastrano, Baker, Besmanoff, and Norkus. That list isn't awesome or anything, but it is better than Folley's going into 1958.

But your post is all smoke to obscure dealing with the men Folley actually was beating in 1957 and 1958. of the 13 he beat between Bethea and Cooper, two hadn't won a fight, two others had losing records, and seven didn't have ten wins. None were even a decent gatekeeper type. This is the central issue for me. How did Folley hold onto such a high rating fighting such poor opposition? This group make Harris' opposition in 1957 look like a murderer's row.

 

Harris defeated 6 men who were at one point rated top 10 by Ring Magazine.

All in the 1950's.

Of the 18 you listed for Folley, only 5 were beaten in the 1950's. Less than Harris. Three of these were in 1959 after the title shot we are disputing.

Harris was 28-1 in the 1950's. His only loss was to Patterson who was the heavyweight champion. He lasted longer against Patterson than Moore or Jackson did in title fights, and scored a knockdown. He beat Pastrano, Baker, Besmanoff, Norkus, Bygraves, Powell, and Lavorante. He certainly wasn't the terror of the division, but this was a pretty good record.

And better than Folley's for me no matter how you cut it. Better winning percentage. Fewer losses. Only loss an honorable one to a champion. Better wins. More good wins. Fewer laughable walkovers for record padding.

 

You hit the nail on the head.

 

Maybe if he had been fighting better opposition right along he wouldn't have gone close enough to lose the decision to the then 16-7-1 Cooper.