Elmer Ray vs...

I think Ray was much better at his best than Mauriello. I can't see Tami beating the 1946-1948 versions of Walcott and Charles on his best day.

Tami apparently looked like about the best prospect ever in 1941 and 1942. He lost by a split decision to Lesnevich in a title match at 17 and drew with Pastor at 18. These were certainly great efforts. He would never live up to this promise. I agree with you that the lack of top black opponents other than Bivins is striking.

Also, he lost to Baksi and they never had a return. Baksi ended up getting derailed by Walcott. The irony of the situation is that white fighters who got into the ring with the dangerous black fighters, such as Baksi, ended up getting sidetracked, while the play it safer guys like Mauriello (and later LaStarza) did manage to work their way to #1 ratings and championship fights.

However, that in no way should be used to criticize Louis or Marciano or any other champion who defends against a number one contender.

My own opinion of the best heavyweight contenders in 1946 and 1947, given the gift of hindsight, would be in order Walcott, Ray, and Baksi.

By the way, I think Lesnevich stopped Mauriello in 1947 in their 4th meeting.

In fairness to Gus, he defended his title that year against Billy Fox, but Fox was actually rated above Charles and Moore. And his KO of Bettina that year was impressive.

On our McVey, reading through these posts, he seems to be defending Sam McVea more than Mauriello.

 

I wish I could access Box Rec its infuriating trying to glean scraps for CBZ and Wikipaedia.I didnt know Lesnevich stopped Tami.Good info!

 

Why can’t you access boxrec

I’ve already conceded that McVea could go the distance with Ray. I still pick ray to win.

I strongly feel Ray was much better than Mauriello at his best

 

I've forgotten my original pass word and user name, and all my attempts to contact them have been ignored, its really frustrating.

 

I made a mistake in my previous post. Thanks for pointing that out.

- Chuck Johnston

 

In comparison to Charley Burley, it seems that Elmer Ray was much more in demand among matchmakers. Tommy O'Loughlin managed both Burley and Ray at one point in time.

- Chuck Johnston

 

Yes unfortunately other posters don’t seem to realize that these white contenders who got title shots, were not better fighters than the black fighters who didn’t.

And if you read Mcveys posts in the other thread, he is vehemently defending Mauriello against Ray, so it seems he doesn’t share the same opinion you and I have about Ray.

 

Sometimes they were and sometimes they weren't.

We are getting into a bit of a culture, where any black contender who didn't get a title shot, is built up into a Sam Langford or Harry Wills.

Ray is one that I can come down fairly heavily in favor of.

He could have doen a lot better with a manged career.

I think that like Walcott, he got his chance late in his career, and unlike Walcott, he didn't have a style suited for longevity.

This guy should have been more.

Even so, we have to go with what he accomplished on paper.

 

Ray was the only man to beat a fully prime Ezzard Charles. I’d say he showed how good his peak was.

He never got to face Louis for the title, but Louis management was not keen on facing him that’s for sure

 

It was a controversial decision that could have gone to Charles. Walcott beat Charles more emphatically.

 

I suppose with his bang em style he was more fan friendly than the rather cerebral Burley.

 

I'm just not seeing it as, [pardon the pun ,] black and white.Ray may have been better than Mauriello though he was never ranked above him,but I doubt there was much in it.

 

No I would say most of the time, the black heavyweight contenders were better than the white heavyweight contenders. Definitely during Johnson’s era, Dempsey’s era, and in the 40s and 50s. The 30s you could argue the white heavyweight contenders were better

 

Ray was ranked above Mauriello. Ray was number 1 rated in the world at one point. So you are wrong there.

And ratings back then aren’t the end all when they are manipulated by racist white men to favor white fighters who hid behind the color line.

But it is funny to me how you like to cling on to mauriellos high ring rating, while ignore wills being the number 1 man for 7 straight years

 

Ray wasn't rated above Mauriello when Mauriello was ranked.Ray was number 1 for how long a couple of months till Walcott got him in the rubber match and took him out.
Mauriello fell apart after losing to Schkor ,he punched an official and was suspended I cling on to Mauriello's rating because it proves those that made the ratings thought him the superior fighter at the point in time and they did so for the five consecutive years Mauriello was ranked! The other reason is of course I am white and vehemently racist and prejudiced against blacks. I don't ignore Wills ranking, I just question he was the number 1 challenger for seven years.If he had been White of course I would have mentioned it at every opportunity!