Great fight! Charlie Powell vs Norkus

"USA clear superiority over Europe."

Not in 1958 and 1959 though. And that is what is being debated. Ali wasn't a pro. Liston wasn't at the top of the ratings yet. Patterson, Machen, Folley, and Pastrano all lost to Europeans.

 

"Third tier contenders at best."

Fair enough.

"Norkus, he was no world beater"

No. But obviously, neither was Powell.

"Powell at his best was better than Norkus for sure."

Both men had brief runs which got them very briefly into the top ten. Norkus in 1954 during which he KO'd Powell. Powell in 1958 to 1959 when he outpointed Norkus and KO'd Valdes.

Powell was green when Norkus took him. Norkus was at the end of the road and probably just going through the motions for a few last paydays when Powell beat him.

I honestly don't think there is much of a gap between them. Norkus seems the better boxer and showed he was able to take a licking and bounce back. I don't know if Powell ever did. As for chins, I think Norkus edges Powell there.

"for sure."

Not for me. At about the same level.

 

Hey some could claim Marciano was a Euro the mans parents were born and raised in Italy which makes him,by blood anyway, 100% Italian.

 

Valdes fought London with a detached retina. Are you really gonna criticize Valdes for fighting with such a life threatening injury?

He was forced to retire because of this condition

The fact london not only quit on his stool but was unable to defeat this 35 year old medically unfit version of Valdes goes To show you how weak of a fighter London was.

I’m actually shocked your criticizing Valdes and not London. Especially since London quit then had sour grapes in the interview!

Any doubt Valdes of 4 years earlier clobbers London early?

 

You once said Valdes would have been a great opponent for Patterson

You wrote

“Valdes was not in the ratings by the time Patterson fought London, having lost badly to Powell and also to Alonzo Johnson, but he was the #2 contender when D'Amato began looking for an opponent. I think Cus really blew it by not picking Valdes as the opponent (Cooper was the original pick but suffered a cut eye which caused the shift to London). Valdes was highly rated but waiting to be picked off, the perfect opponent. It is intriguing to consider how Patterson's career might have gone if he had taken on Valdes in the spring of 1959 and Williams rather than McNeeley in 1961 and learned how to use his speed and mobility against big guys before going against Liston.”

 

I don’t understand what the point of this thread was. Far from a great fight. Powell was green as the grass we walk on, and he was only a step above a tomato can. Norkus is one of the least gifted fighters I’ve seen on film, and belonged in the club circuit


I suspect choke had an agenda. Anyone know what it is?

 

"Valdes was highly rated but waiting to be picked off, the perfect opponent."

"learned how to use his speed and mobility against big guys before going against Liston."

I see nothing to retract.

I honestly don't think Patterson would have improved enough by fighting these big fellows to beat Liston, but he might have done a lot better against Sonny with results far less embarrassing.

Truthfully, the 1961 Williams would have had a much better shot at upsetting Patterson than the 1959 Valdes in
my judgment.

 

Agreed.

Just so we’re clear, Valdes fought London at the age of 35 with a detached retina. Valdes should not be under any criticism. The criticism should go to a prime version of London unable to win the fight, and quitting on his stool according to AP reports.

The sour grapes London showed in the interview meant nothing.

 

"Valdes fought London with a detached retina."

No. Valdes was forced to retire in June of 1960 because a cataract was discovered in his left eye while he was undergoing his physical for a fight with George Chuvalo.

Box rec

"It was discovered that Valdes had a cataract in his left eye. An eye specialist said that he could only see hazy light through the eye and could not see punches coming from his left."

I have read that about the cataract before, including I think back in 1960. I have had cataracts in both eyes. They can treat them now. They replace your natural lens with an artificial lens. In my case, the cataracts caused me to lose sight but not blindness. More like 20/20 goes to 20/40 and then 20/50. I find it hard to believe he had a cataract so bad he could only see a haze and passed eye exams. Possibly this condition was just coming on and the deterioration was rapid. It had been over half a year since his last fight.

One thing, though, if he was blind in an eye for London, why wasn't he blind in an eye for Liston? Does this remove him as a worthwhile scalp for Liston?

Personally, I don't think we know what his sight was like in 1959. The result of a June 1960 exam doesn't necessarily reflect back to 1959.

*What I mean when I say I find it hard to believe he could have had a cataract that bad and passed eye exams, a cataract that bad would show white on the lens. Even a layman would notice it.

"life threatening injury"

Eye threatening injury.

 

Ok thanks for the clear up. So he failed a physical in his next fight because he couldn’t see punches coming from his left eye. I don’t know where it started, but it doesn’t look good for any claims made that London fought a healthy Valdes.

Here’s what Valdes said about his fight with Liston. “When I fought Liston, I was over the hill. I could still hit very hard, but my reflexes were not there anymore.”

Looking at the Valdes London fight, London quit on his stool and failed to beat a clearly older, slower, medically challenged Valdes. A bad loss for London.

 

You are assuming he was medically challenged. Really, I don't know. No one had diagnosed a cataract previously. The condition might have developed later, or grossly worsened over the last few months.

Valdes won because he resorted to butting. The referee did nothing. That's boxing, but why should I really credit Valdes because for some reason he could get away with blatant fouling.

London didn't look great, but he looked the better man off the film clips shown.

You say London quit, but he said he didn't. I don't know.