Folley vs Machen - who was best ?

Right, neither man was aggressive. Machen liked to counter punch some. It was a strength of his game.

In hindsight, the fans should have expected a timid affair.

Who was better? I say Machen by a shade because he was more durable.

 

Ha you people are delusional if you think Harris London radamacher mcneeley deserved title shots over the higher rated more accomplished Folley and Machen

 

They didn't. Patterson's choice of title opponents wasn't always good.

 

According to your logic

Machen and Folley didn't deserve a shot over Jackson because he was rated lower than both?

Yet

Roy Harris deserved the title shot against Patterson despite being lower rated than Folley and Machen?

 

Oh and Brian London tom mcneeley and Roy Harris were much more crowd pleasers?

short, slow, weak, didn't hit hard, mediocre ability ...what did those men bring to the Table?

 

Machen and Folley could punch. Ever seen Machen-Valdes II Klompton? It was a devastating knockout. Nothing like Roy Harris ever produced.

Folley knocked out henry Cooper with one devastating right hand


These men could punch

 

No.

When it counted, when the title was vacant or when a champion was able to defend against them they either drew or lost to Europeans or were completely overshadowed by Archie Moore, Tommy Jackson, Ingo Johansson and Sonny Liston.

At what point of the ingo Patterson serries should it gave been interrupted for either Folley or Machen to get a crack at the title ahead of Liston?

Rematch clauses were water tight back then. Nobody wanted a defence against Folley or Machen during the time a rematch was in place with a former champion.

 

The point is Machen should have got a title shot in 1958 over anyone else

No excuses

 

:good

 

he

Do you agree with me Floyd ducked certain fighters and took on weaker fighters ?

 

Why do you keep saying Pattersons challengers were short and weak? None of them were any shorter than Machen and Folley who both stood 6' and exactly how do you quantify weakness? You keep making judgement calls on fighters that youve barely even seen and clearly dont know much about. The single common denominator is that they were white and the guys you favor over them were black. Unfortunately the issue isnt black and white whether you agree with it or not. You can make a case that either Machen or Folley deserved a shot at one time or another but this sport is a fluid beast and whether you like it or not Cus D'Amato was waging war on the IBC and the mob almost single handedly. Both Machen and Folley fought for the IBC and not for nothing both of their mydterious deaths were rumoured to be mob related. When pressure ran high for Patterson to defend against one or the other Cus agreed and the elimination bout was set. Cus didnt control or dictate that bout and certainly cant be blamed for its outcome. I say again, go back and read just how eager everyone was to see machen or folley ever again afterwards. Imagine may-pac x2. You guys keep belaboring a point that you dont even seem to have a clear understanding of. The fact is that Folley and Machen ****ed themselves out of that fight by being timid when they should have been fighting for a chance at the title. Henry Cooper ****ed himself out of a title shot by renegging on an agreed price. Williams doesnt even have a claim to being ducked or avoided as his lumbering ass never even got to #1. The highest Ive seen him rated at any time was #4.

 

How do you know? How much footage have you seen to say Harris never produced a knockout like that? Ive got every s**** of footage on both machen and folley and anyone who wants to paint them as Tyson doesnt know jack ****. Folley had a good sneak right hand but the guy fought like he had all night to land it so he rarely produced great KOs and Machen was a natural counterpuncher as well. Lots of guys have a good KO to their name without being punchers. Maxim couldnt punch for **** but blew the rugged Freddie Mills out of the water like he was Sam Langford. Doesnt mean he was a great puncher or a dangerous guy.

 

No.

Machen did not win a fight during the entire year of 1958. Why should Eddie Machen get a title shot that year? Please explain.:huh

Machen had some good wins in 1957 but that was the year Jackson was rated above him. Machen had to beat Jackson in November to climb above him ...and he did this AFTER Patterson had already knocked Jackson out. He was then in line for an eliminator rather than an outright shot.

Then comes the disastrous 1958 where you think he deserves a title shot flunking two elliminators.atsch

1959, 1960 and 1961 the title was frozen during the Ingo serries. But no matter because Sonny Liston established himself by then. Eddie lost to Folley, Harold Johnson and Liston during this time.

1962 machen drew ANOTHER cautiously fought eliminator ruining his chance to meet the winner of Liston v Patterson.

Machen was a top contender for a long time. Good fighter. But his record in world title elliminators and vacant WBA title fights is 0-2-2. He had four chances but blew all of them.

 

Who deserved he title shot number 3 rated Harris or Number 1 rated Machen?

Let's hear it chokelab

 

Just for the hell of it I went back and read all of my Ring magazines from 1957, 1958, 1959 and whats readily apparent is that while Machen and Folley were #1 and #2 they certainly hadnt captured the public imagination or wide support and their eliminator killed any support they may have had. Right after that eliminator, when it was apparent that Machen and Folley were dull and colorless Ring magazine had a cover feature on Roy Harris in which Nat Fleischer discusses the relative merits of the top guys with Jack Dempsey. Dempsey dismissed Folley and Machen as not being ready. Fleischer consistently through this period made it clear that he thought Patterson was head and shoulders above Machen and Folley and time and time again reported on their poor performances in fights. He criticised Machen as not being ready in 1957 when he beat Jackson and stated that Jackson put up such a poor effort and was so out of shape that it proved nothing for Machen. The article focused on Jackson's poor performance, not Machen's showing and made note that Jackson was no longer allowed to box in California. The Folley debacle has been discussed ad naseum, he was knocked out in his next fight in one round and his next televised fight after Johannson against Ruben Vargas was so dull and so controversial (the letters section featured readers blasting Machen and saying Vargas won) that an immediate rematch had to be fought. So essentially the four performances that would have been before the public (3 national TV appearances and a big international fight) In the span of a year and a half were all very harmful to Eddie. The one thing that keeps coming through with guys like Folley and Machen was that neither was very popular with the public. Another thing that is in almost every issue of both Ring and Boxing Illustrated is Cus' war with the IBC. Fleischer stated numerous times that this was why a fight with Machen and Folley (who had ties to the IBC) wouldnt get a shot. Although Fleischer made mention that Machen had been offered a shot in 1957 or 1958 and turned it down (which angered Cus and made him less willing to work with Machen). Whereas Roy Harris was popular. Another thing is that the Ring went out of their way more than once to state that he had moved down the ratings twice and would have been rated higher but for the fact that he was being kept inactive by his military service. There was a great deal of interest in him and he was painted as a sort of red neck crocodile wrestling lil abner type. Dempsey and Fleischer decided in their article that Harris was the type of fighter the division needed to add some color. I found another article comparing Harris and his stablemate Cleveland Williams which stated Harris was a better boxer, faster, and had a better jab. This is later though. As for Williams, as Ive stated before, he wasnt even a factor in the division at this point and I have yet to find him ever being close to #1 in the division. So like Ive said before: A lot of people are trying to boil this down into a black and white issue without having even half of the facts and while taking everything completely out of the context of the times in order to suit their argument or agenda. The issue was a lot more grey than that and there was a lot more happening on the ground at the time than one guy simply being scared of another.