Great fight! Charlie Powell vs Norkus

on Folley versus Williams

From 1956 to 1965

Folley had more depth, and of course had extra time as Williams was shot in 1964, helping him have a lot more fights.

During this time Folley went 52-5-2 with 26 KO's and 3 KO defeats.

Williams went 30-3-1 with 22 KO's and 2 KO defeats.

Against men who appeared in The Ring's yearly rankings--

Williams
KO's-----John Holman, Alex Miteff, Ernie Terrell, Alonzo Johnson, Young Jack Johnson, Roger Rischer
Wins-----Wayne Bethea, Billy Daniels (2), D-ck Richardson(DQ)
Draws-----Eddie Machen

Folley
KO's-----Henry Cooper, Mike DeJohn, Paul Andrews, Bob Foster
Wins-----Nino Valdes, Roger Rischer, Wayne Bethea (2), Alex Miteff, Willi Besmanoff (2), Alonzo Johnson, Eddie Machen, Doug Jones, Bob Cleroux (2), Billy Daniels, Oscar Bonavena, George Chuvalo
Draws-----Eddie Machen, Karl Mildenberger

Downsides
Williams
KO defeats-----Sonny Liston (2)
Losses-----close split decision to Ernie Terrell
Draws-----Eddie Machen

Downsides
Folley
KO defeats-----Sonny Liston, Alejandro Lavorante, Doug Jones
Losses-----close decision loss to Henry Cooper, wide UD loss to Ernie Terrell
Draws-----Eddie Machen & Karl Mildenberger

Folley fought 15 men during this period who had losing records or hadn't yet won 10 fights. Williams had 7 of those, but 4 of these were bunched in 1956 immediately after Williams returned from the army. Overall, Williams didn't have as many fights, but his level of competition was equal in my judgment to Folley's.

Folley beat no one who beat Williams in this era prior to his shooting. Williams KO'd Terrell who defeated Folley decisively. Common opponents favor Williams except for perhaps Machen as Folley got a second fight and won it. Both Folley and Williams drew with Machen in their first fights.

Overall, Williams has a winning percentage of 88%. Folley of 87%. Williams has a KO percentage of 65%. Folley of 43%.

Williams lost only to men who earned championship recognition during this period. Folley lost to Cooper, in fairness a close decision, but also by KO to the in his 14th fight Lavorante, and by KO to Jones.

I go with Williams because of a better best win (KOing Terrell) and far less damaging losses.

And I love my nasty side. It will be fun seeing you now having to trash Williams.

 

"Folley beat Eddie Machen in his prime at Eddies own game, by outboxing him."

That was Folley's game. The record shows he wasn't that big of a puncher. Machen was the more dangerous puncher.

"Not impressed with that?"

It is the highlight of Folley's record. But Ernie Terrell badly outboxed Folley. And also Machen. Perhaps a younger Machen would have done better, but the version who fought Terrell was way out of his depth. This might have always been true for a short guy like Machen against a tall jab and move type. Machen was also outboxed by Harold Johnson.

 

Highlight? No doubt his best victory, but what about his senesational 2 round knockout over a red hot henry Cooper?

And he didn’t just beat bonavena, he shut him out 10 rounds to 0. It was a master clinic.


Machen barely barely lost to Harold Johnson, it was a great fight. I myself scored it 5 round to 4 with 1 even for Harold Johnson. If you scored it for Machen I wouldn’t be opposed

Folley vs H Johnson would have been a very close fight.

Terrell was a heavyweight champion. He was 6’6 with a very good jab..who ever outboxed him in his prime other than Ali?

The fact Folley fought Machen twice, and got the better of Machen shows you the class Folley belonged in as a boxer. Folley would have outpointed many heavyweight contenders throughout history because of his skills. yes, his chin made him vulnerable to getting caught and stopped once in a while, but he was capable of outpointing many good fighters

 

I’m not gonna trash Williams. Out of the big three (Williams, Folley, Machen). I rate Williams number 1. Williams nearly cracked my top 50 heavyweights of all time. He definitely would be in my top 60 list. Folley and Machen are right behind, pretty much neck and neck although due to his head to head win I usually put Zora in front of Machen

Williams has been underrated for years. I personally believe he went 2-0 vs Terrell. He was the only man to stop Terrell until 1973. Terrell decisively defeated a near prime version of Folley.

As for Machen, the press had both Williams and Folley edging out Machen in both draws. AP scores Williams Machen 96-93 for Williams. A ringside poll showed 4 to 1 scored machen-Folley I for Folley. So Machen seems the odd man out here.

I do think Folley beat better completion than Williams did, however I factor in head to head in my rankings. Obviously, Brian London Tom mcneeley Pete radamacher and Roy Harris don’t rate very highly in that regard.

Couple things,

Folley fought 18 men in yearly ratings. Williams 10. So while the quality may have been the same, I would say Folley fought the larger quantity of different styles as his depth was more impressive.

You could argue Williams was avoided by most contenders due to his size speed and power, a lot more dangerous than Folley...which is true. Damato wanted no part of Williams after Floyd regained the title.


Folleys bad losses do hurt him, he had a weak chin. But no mentioned he brutally avenged the Cooper loss in empathetic fashion? And he did even up the score against Doug Jones defeating him on points. So his only bad loss, unavenged, was Lavorante, a tall big puncher who caught him clean.

 

Johansson sandbagged Patterson and Machen.

I have countless articles.

Machen took him very lightly and got caught cold.

Patterson and damato took him lightly they saw him in training getting “outboxed” while he sneakily hid his right hand and refused to throw it in training sessions. The press also convinced damato that Johansson knockout over Machen was a fluke and he was just another overrated euro.

Very Impressive early knockout victories, but the Patterson dominant rematches clearly show ingo caught him napping the first fight. I always wonder what would have happened if he gave Eddie a rematch. I could see Eddie making adjustments and winning

I rate Johanneson in my top 35 because he did win the linear title with an impressive knockout victory over a prime hall of famer and his win over Machen was impressive, but everything else about his career was unimpressive.


I think Johansson’s management steered him clear from the big heavyweights in the division who could punch. Valdes, Holman, Williams, Liston, dejohn...Johansson took on none of these men. I think it had something to do with Ed sanders. His management hid him in Europe feasting on B level competition. He knocked out Cooper when cooper still had his training wheels on in 57...hoff was washed up. Neuhaus way over the hill. That leaves Erskine, cavvichi, McBride, bygraves, London...all B level guys.

London knocked him out cold in his final fight. Lucky for him the bell went off. Johansson never really could take a punch.

He was a playboy, acted like one, rubbed Marciano the wrong way. Rocky wanted to come out of retirement.

After losing his trilogy with Patterson, Johansson let himself get out of shape. Made no effort to fight any dangerous contenders. Never tested himself again. So it leaves his resume very thin, he was untested vs a lot of good men of the era

 

"Machen took him very lightly and got caught cold."

Is this supposed to matter? Not properly scouting or respecting an opponent doesn't earn anyone credit from me. You go into the ring, or any sporting arena, you better be ready to perform.

"The press convinced D'Amato that the Johansson knockout over Machen was a fluke"

This is even more stretched. D'Amato listens to American reporters who have never seen Ingo fight? The film of the Johansson KO of Machen was on TV and readily available. Actually, this is a laughable excuse.

"He was a playboy, acted like one."

I don't know about that. I think he might have been into one woman. But he saw the chance to cash in on the title and took it. Like Dempsey, he went "Hollywood." All over TV. Made a movie with Alan Ladd and Sidney Poitier. Cut recordings. I don't think he was focused on boxing like he had been when he had his eyes on the prize.

"Valdes, Holman, Williams, Liston, DeJohn . . . Johansson took on none of those men."

He was European. Europeans tend to fight Europeans, especially back then when travel was a lot slower. So to an extent you are criticizing him merely for being European. And when he began going after the world title he fought Machen who had already or would later KO Valdes, Holman, and DeJohn. Seems a weak criticism.

And you tend to lay on the put downs a bit thick. Neuhaus for example had gone 6-1-1 in his last eight fights before Ingo, drawing with Cooper, and beating Gerhard Hecht, Brian London, Joe Bygraves, and Joey Maxim. The guy wasn't just the nothing you are painting him as. Maxim was at the end of the trail, but Hecht, London, and Cooper were rated fighters during this time span.

Overall your evaluation of Johansson is fair. A thin resume, but two impressive blow-outs of top men.

I think Ingo will always be a hard guy to rate.

 

"he did even up the score against Doug Jones"

? He outpointed Jones in their first match when Jones was a light-heavy. When Jones later moved into the heavyweight division, he KO'd Folley. I don't see this as Folley avenging anything.

I think your point about Folley having the quantity edge, but not the quality edge, on Williams is fair.

 

"Machen barely lost to Harold Johnson."

I had Johnson the close winner.

Johnson was 21-1 from 1956 to 1965. Many of his fights were at light-heavy, but he did defeat Bob Satterfield, Wayne Bethea, and Machen at heavy, and outpointed Doug Jones decisively for the light-heavy title. Bottom line for me is that Folley beat no one who beat Johnson, but Johnson beat Jones who KO'd Folley, so I rate Johnson above Folley.

Folley also didn't beat anyone who beat Moore, while Moore KO'd Lavorante who KO'd Folley. But Moore was thin at heavy after 1956, so I won't press him above Folley during this era.

So--Ali, Liston, Patterson, Johansson, Terrell, Williams, and Johnson rate above Folley. That is seven. I rate Folley at #8 for his peak decade.

 

This point makes no sense. In the first fight, Jones weighed in at 181lb vs Folley. In the rematch, Jones weighed 185lb. Both fights took place 4 months apart from each other.

Seems like the same “heavyweight” to me. Folley should be given full credit for the victory.

How can a guy be a light heavyweight if he weighed in at 181?


Like I said, Lavorante is Folleys only “bad loss” unavenged.

 

Doug Jones weighed above 180 for both fights against Zora Folley.

Doug Jones weighed in below 175 for his fight with Harold Johnson. In fact he came in just under 172 for Johnson. When he beat Folley, he was a whopping 13lb heavier at 185!

Jones is a lot stronger as a heavy than as a light heavy." - Alex Koskowitz, Jones' manager in 1962

I don’t see how you can give credit to Johnson for beating Jones as a “heavyweight win”. Johnson’s win over Jones purely belongs in the light heavyweight category.

 

Okay, I agree Jones was basically the same man. Folley deserves full credit for outpointing Jones.

But it does remove the fact that in the rematch Folley got KO'd.

I would note that the first Folley fight was less than three months after Jones challenged Johnson and weighed in at 171 1/2, not only making the light-heavyweight limit, but well below it.

But 181 is indeed at heavyweight,

"Jones is a lot stronger as a heavy than as a light-heavy."

Well, a nice spin. But come on, now. What is his manager supposed to say? "My guy proved not to be in Johnson's class and has no future at light-heavy, so I'm going to fatten him up to a heavy and roll the dice against the bigger but slower guys."

I looked up the scores in Jones title fight with Johnson, and the first fight with Folley--

Johnson fight, all for Johnson
74-61
73-64
71-63

Folley fight, all for Folley
47-45
47-45
47-46

Jones was considerably more competitive in the scoring against Folley. I am not surprised. I think Johnson's speed gives him a strong edge as a boxer over Folley.

As for being stronger at heavy, is Jones' manager saying that Johnson was too strong for Jones but Doug has a better chance against the 195 plus lb. Folley? It seems more likely it was speed, and skill, that hurt him against Johnson.

 

There is no doubt that Johnson handled Jones better than Folley. But does that really mean anything? Johnson handled Jones far more easily than Ali did. Would you have favored Johnson over Ali?

I scored Johnson Jones 14 rounds to 1 for Harold. It was a boxing clinic.

“Scoring” It should be noted Folley was well ahead in the rematch when he got knocked out. And he nearly put Jones away in the first round. Jones was very lucky to make it out of the round. I had Folley up 5 rounds to 1 after 6.

“Johnson speed edge”

Yes, Johnson was the faster man, but so was Machen. Folley made up for his lack of speed with incredible timing and precision in his counterpunching. He was very intelligent, he could sting you with that right hand. His jab was elite.

I think you look at the Eddie Machen fights. Zora outpointed Machen more decisively than Johnson did.

Zora Folley jabbed out a clear-cut victory over Eddie Machen in a lacklustre battle. Monday night's fight at the Cow Palace brought repeated boos from the crowd of 5,447 and frequent warnings from referee Vern Bybee to step up the action. Folley's jab kept Machen off balance throughout. Occasionally he followed with crisp right hand shots to the head and left hooks to the body. Machen tried to bob in under the jab but even when he did get a combination started he usually missed with his big right or Zora tied him up. In the 9th Machen suffered a slight cut near his right eye. Eddie also had a small bruise under his left eye and Folley was bruised over his right eye. There was nothing close to a knockdown." -Associated Press

• Unofficial AP scorecard - 119-114 Folley

Stylistically, Harold Johnson is a good matchup for Folley. He is small, and doesn’t hurt that hard to threaten Folleys weak chin. Folley actually has a premium jab not to allow Harold to control the fight with his all time great jab. Great jabbers have a lot of problems facing very good jabbers (Ali Norton, Holmes Williams) ...I think this would be a very close fight on the scorecards. Johnson would throw more, but Folleys excellent counterpunching skills would see him land sharp blows in the return. Machen had more trouble with Folleys jab than Harold’s.


I favor Johnson over 15, 8 rounds to 7

 

“ Unquestionably”


Liston was the best heavyweight in the world in 1959. He was in his prime and would have smashed ingo to bits and pieces