At 6 ft even and weighting about 194 LBs He held his own with some of the better punchers of the division. It must have been a shock at the time when he was KO'd by Ingo in 1 but besides that abolition and aberration he held himself together against most of the best of his time beating most of the best. A little reflextion on him and his losses to Harold Johnson and Patterson as well as his loss to Sonny Liston. How would he do today
I think he'd do about the same. Win a few, lose a few. The thing Eddie could do was hang in there. But he really doesn't get the ko's himself and you certainly wouldn't call him an opportunist in there. I think a Patterson fight would've been a competitive fight, win or lose. The thing with Ingo was that oddball right hand he threw. If it cathces a guy clean, they got hurt. Machen got caught. I also hold Harold Johnson in higher esteem than most. If Eddie was 210 or so, I think the results of that Johnson bout might be different, but he was not a whole lot bigger than the guy. One thing I could never understand was the Frazier management taking on such an old and experienced pro like Machen that early in his career. And respect to Eddie for taking on a young bull like that in his youth. We rarely see those type heavyweight matchups and I guess povetkin is the only guy in recent times taking big steps up a ladder and skipping over some rungs.
He was hot **** on the way up, with impressive and exciting wins over Joey Maxim, Nino Valdes, and others. Along with Zora Folley, he was considered one of the most in-demand challengers foe Patterson's title, but of course that ended when he was shockingly blasted out by Ingemar. After that fight, there seemed to be a change in him. He never fully regained his previous reputation, and for a while afterwards it seemed he lacked the fire of his early wins. He did well in going the distance with Liston (who was widely expected to blow him out like Ingemar had), but somehow that seemed to be typical of his later performances - fighting well enough to give the other guy a good fight, but not stepping out to do enough to actually win. He finally got his long-awaited match with Patterson (after Patterson had lost the title) and lost a lackluster fight; was also given a title shot he really didn't deserve at that time, and lost another dull fight to Terrell; also dropped decisions to Folley and Harold Johnson, and was held to a draw by Cleveland Williams. Interestingly, he did appear to regain some of his old fire very late in his career, when he pulled a surprising upset over an up-and-coming Quarry, and then fought a tough battle with Frazier before being stopped late. After his last hurrah against Frazier though, he was done. In all, he was an obviously talented and skilled boxer, but it just seemed the full package wasn't there.
Eddie Machen was one of the best heavyweight contenders never to win a title. He has excellent textbook boxing skills, with textbook like techique, and naturally quick hands with some pop in his punch. He has an extremley modern boxing stance and style on film. He also is very proven and fought extremley competitive opposition thoughout his career. Its a shame he did not get a world title shot sooner. Did you see the fight? Patterson beat the **** out of him. I dont think I gave machen more than 2 rounds from the footage I have seen. patterson also knocked him down 4 times I believe...some were incorrectly called slips...I thought one of floyds best performances.
Really nothing special outside of the horrible era in which he fought. Smallish, skilled, not overly quick, not powerful. I can see very few other eras he could have mattered in besides the one he did.
The single scariest refereeing job I have ever seen was in the Johanssen-Machen fight. He let Johanssen beat on Machen unmercifully in the corner. Johanssen should have stepped away, imo. Then, with Machen completely out and his handlers rushing in to check on him, the ref is still going through the counting to 10 process. Completely unnecessary.
One other thought....I thought putting Frazier in with Machen was an excellent move by Frazier's camp. Joe definitely figured to win, but got some schooling at the same time. Likewise, the Doug Jones fight.
Hindsight says it's excellent. Foresight says it's a very very risky bout putting a guy in with almost zero pro experience against a grizzled veteran that shows up in shape and hangs in there. A tightrope act. Same thing with a guy like Jones at that point in time. What do you think Cloverlay does if Joe loses one of those bouts because he's just so inexperienced in there?
Completely disagree. "almost zero pro experience"? Not true at all! By the time Frazier was put in against Machen followed by Doug Jones, he had already beaten Billy Daniels and Bonavena. He was less than 8 months away from destroying George Chuvalo! Cloverlay was not being dumb at all in these moves. In Machen and Jones you had veterans who figured to show Frazier some moves and provide some difficulty before ultimately being overwhelmed. Which is exactly what happened. In reality, the first Bonavena fight should have followed Machen and Jones, not preceded them. Futch had gotten involved with the Frazier camp in '66, was living in L.A. at the time and knew the California scene well. He was well aware of what Machen had left at that point. The timing was right.
Didn't really think the fities and sixties were so bad.Eight weight classes,one champion one belt.So much better than now.
