How good of a fighter was Eddie Machen?

Wasn't Ingo the only guy to ever knock Machen out cold?

Definitely a good win for Ingo.

 

Yes, absolutely. Machen hung with Liston for 12 tough rounds and, while well past his prime, was stopped on his feet after lasting 10 rounds with a young Joe Frazier. Johansson was the only one to stop him in the first 13 years of his career.

 

Gives a bit of insight to Ingo and his power then, faulted as he is by some.

 

I suppose you are right, i just think the "he would've been champion in an other era" i such a standard line. And indeed Janitor didn't use the word "would". I guess it's a kneejerk reaction. Tony Tucker, Tommy Morrison, David Tua, Samuel Peter and Gerrie Coetzee would have been champion too, in a weak era... if they fought Neon Leon for the title. Big deal.


If you were to be randomly assigned to fight one champion of all there have been, weighed by the length of their reign (i.e. Marciano reigned twice as long as Liston, so you're twice more likely to get Marciano than Liston), then you'd be happy to get Patterson.

I do consider him to be one of the weaker champions. He won the title by knocking out someone who had just suffered a very one-sided defeat (outside of the knockdown) by the real champ. Then instead of proving he's the best, he doesn't fight highly ranked Machen or Foley. The Harris fight was a good one though. Then the next worthy opponent knocks him into oblivion. He does get revenge and wins the rubber match after some trouble. In the mean while Liston eradicates everyone Patterson fought as well as Machen and Folley whom he didn't fight. Then Liston wipes the floor with him in a single round, not once but twice.

Yes, Liston is great, but you'd be hard pressed to find a decent fighter who gave a worse account of himself than Patterson, and he got two tries. Glass chinned Foley made it into the third, Machen went the distance, Williams went 2&3, old Valdez went 3, Besmanof went 7, DeJohn went 6; only Harris is on par with going out in the first. I know that style makes fights, but when 5 our of 6 did better in one try, you gotta wonder.

Then his fight with Ali is anything but competitive, too. His win over a fading Machen is good, but he didn't beat Quarry and Ellis. Bonavena is also a good win, but i read that Bonavena was getting the better of it untill he broke his hand. Got any info on that?


If you add to that that he was a tiny 180lbs heavyweight with a glass chin, who has never beaten a significant fighter over 210lbs, then yes, i would say you have a pretty weak champion on your hands. He was a solid contender for a long period and i give him credit for that, but his results with top men are pretty mixed, like, say, Norton.

 

Yes, I do think that's a bit of a stock line which tends to get overused- Janitor's particular use was qualified with the "could have been with a bit of luck," but that does take away some of the significance of the idea. When one says, for example, that Sam Langford could/would have been a world champion in another era, I think they're saying that in all legitimacy, while with Machen, it would be a bit of a fluke and most would regard him as one of the lesser champions.

Let's see here... Out of all the linear champions, I rank Patterson behind:
Ali (reigned for a total of 9 years)
Louis (12 years)
Foreman (total of 3 years)
Marciano(4 years)
Frazier (4 years)
Holmes (7 years)
Dempsey (7 years)
Jeffries (5 years)
Johnson (6 years)
Holyfield (4 years)
Liston (2 years)
Tyson (2 years)
Lewis (total of 6 years)
Walcott (1 year)
Charles (2 years)

That accounts for 74 years out of about 120 in the gloved era of professional boxing, but since, for example, two of Foreman's years were while he was in his mid-40s and nowhere near his peak, and several of the other champions' years were far outside their primes when they were still clinging to the title, the total would ultimately fall at around 60 years in which the champion was someone who I consider better than Patterson. Hence, you'd bump into someone better than Patterson abot half the time, I'd say.

He hadn't "just" suffered it- it had been over a year, and Moore had racked up 11 consecutive wins in that time. He was the generally-ranked #1 heavyweight in the world going into the Patterson fight, and for good reason, as he had been soundly outclassing staple top 10 and even top five heavyweights of the last several years in the likes of Valdes, Henry, Baker, etc. Moore was consistently among the very best heavyweights in the world all the way from the early '50s up until 1962-1963, when he smeared the heck out of highly-regarded young contender Alejandro Lavorante (Lavorante had recently knocked out Folley and was regarded by many as a rising star in the division, the RING's #4 contender going into the Moore fight) and ruined him as a fighter before being finally beaten down by a young Ali. An empatic fifth-round knockout over a 1956 Moore would be a highlight on any champion's ledger.

Johansson had wiped out Machen in one round going into the Patterson fights. And Patterson did eventually defeat Machen, although at that time Cus D'Amato was extremely overprotective in managing him (note that Patterson deserves credit for actively shaking off D'Amato's control purely for the purpose of fighting a man who most people already believed he almost certainly couldn't beat in Liston).

Patterson was fighting with a pretty serious back injury the first time (you can see his cornerman actually trying to give him a chiropractic adjustment in his corner between rounds!), and he was plenty competitive with Ali in their rematch.

Many observers thought Patterson did deserve wins over Quarry and/or Ellis, in spite of his advanced age at that stage of his career.

I saw a few rounds of that fight once, and have seen a few newspaper accounts; the general consensus is that Patterson secured the decision by outworking Bonavena in the later rounds. I didn't notice any specific references to Bonavena injuring his hand on the film or in the accounts, but it seems possible. Either way, Patterson was 37 years old and a grizzled veteran at this point; the fact that he beat Bonavena at all is very impressive.

This is a pessimist's view of things, as is most of your discussion on him here. More or less, I think you're focusing heavily on the negative aspects and ignoring the positives. A Patterson supporter would put it more like this (and would have merit in doing so):
Add to that that he was the youngest linear heavyweight champion of all time and the first ever to regain the title, with possibly the fastest hands in heavyweight history, who was defeating legitimate top-tier heavyweights all the way from the age of 20 years old in 1955 through 37 in 1972, and I think you've got a pretty strong champion on your hands.

 

Well, i guess this is the bottomline. You think very highly of him, i don't really do so.

I do rank him at a similar position as you do: your list of champions you rank higher than him would be about equal to mine, though if we're talking about actual fighters, not champions, then i'd rank Wills and Langford higher as well.

 

Could Eddie Machen be a Ring Magazine top ten fighter today? Maybe he was good enough to be a Ring Magazine ranked #7-#10 fighter. Maybe...

Machen is a bit like Eddie Chambers. Not as fast, and maybe not as hard of a hitter either, but both guys covered up well, could coutner well, had solid chins, and skills. I don't think Machen could fight well at 210+. The extra weight would rob him of speed and stamina.

Below is the Ring magazine's current top ten, which should change next issue. Would Machen make the cut today? Maybe not. Fighters who could hit made Machen gun shy and defensive.

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

 

For starters, what would make you think Eddie Chambers even hits harder than Machen??? Chambers has shown very little punching power in the fights I've seen of him, and he certainly hasn't displayed much of any pop in any of his step-up fights, from Rossy to Guinn to Brock to Povetkin. Machen floored and stopped several legitimate ranked contenders- so far as I can tell, he was easily a harder hitter than an Eddie Chambers.
Chambers is lazy and lackidaisical in the ring, which could hardly be said of Machen. I do not believe Machen would have been caught in there getting outthrown three-to-one and losing almost entirely based on workrate against a green Povetkin.

Why not??? Chris Byrd can do it. Even James Toney did it. Why is it that only past-era fighters are incapable of fighting successfully with an extra 15 pounds provided proper training?

Taking those guys as they are currently, I think I would make Machen even-odds or better against Peter, Maskaev, Valuev, Liakhovich, Virchis, Thompson and Povetkin. A prime Chris Byrd, who is a much more apt comparison to Machen, except with a lighter punch, would probably beat all those guys in their current form. Machen is top five.

 

While neither hits hard, I do think Chambers hit a tad harder. Did Machen ever knock out a top ten ring magazine opponent when that opponent was ranked? I don't think he did. Machen career KO% is a low 45.31%. He took people with suspect chins such as Cleveland Williams, Floyd Patterson, and Zora Folley the distance in his fights, and failed to score one knock down. I think Chambers looks a little faster and has more pop in his punches on film.

Povetkin is an experienced fighter vs name veterans when he defeated Chambers. He was not green. Besides, Machen was a defensive person who did not do well vs punchers or pressure fighters. Povetkin would beat Machen the same way he beat Chambers.

Byrd was better than Machen. He had a southpaw style, and better escape ability. Byrd proved he could beat big punchers such as Tua. He proved he can beat solid puncher with size such as McCline or Williamson. Machen was out gunned vs punchers. Machen did poorly vs Ingo, Frazier, and merely hung in there with Liston. James Toney did little at heavyweight, and what he accomplished has been tarnished by positive tests for steroids.

I doubt Machen beats Peter. I don't think he beats Povetkin either. Maybe Machen could beat an old Maskev on points. Maybe not. Oleg is a good technican. I think Virchis would intimidate Machen and beat him. Valuev seems 50/50 vs Machen. I’ll take Liakhovich at his best over Machen at his best. Thompson is the worst person in the top ten, but if Ernie Terell, Folley Harrold Johnson, Mildernberger, and Ramos could defeat Machen, then people on Thompson's level could too.

The bottom line is Machen is a small heavyweight without a punch, and those types are very rare in this decades top ten. I suppose you can add 15 pounds on Machen, moving him up from ideal weight of 195-200 to 210-215, but the extra weight will limit his speed, quickness on defense and stamina making him worse, not better.

 

Here's the perfect short summation Monsieur Magoo

There are some men who seemed to be doomed from the moment of birth. They are given too little talent to make it to the top, but just enough talent to keep on dreaming. Such was the life of Eddie Machen.


Irrelevant tidbits

At 30 Eddie was found by a policeman sitting in a car, holding a gun to his own head, a suicide note on the front seat. He was committed.

Machen fought Liston with basically just his left hand due to hurting his arm shortly before the fight.

Eddie was a common media target and they often criticised him heavily.

Walter Minskoff signed up Eddie at a time no-one wanted him and looked after him lie one would not believe, paying all his bills, guaranteeing him $12k a year whether he fought or not, set Eddie his wife and three children up in a San Francisco home and openly stated if Eddie didn't make it he would foot the loss himself.

Liston nor Folley wanted to give him a rematch.

5 years after retirement was found dead below his second story apartment. Reports say he fell but the true story could be anything.

Eddie is a genuine sad hard luck story of someone whom fortune just refused to shine on.

 

Glad you liked it mate. Kudo's for a great thread.

 

No, I don't think so, Machen was in decline as Ali was rising.

Machen's last fight was a sad defeat by the very average Boone Kirkman who dropped him 3 times, the last time the ref didn't even bother to count.

Whilst this thread is about Machen I always associate him with the other perrenial contender of similair style, Zora Folley. It should be remembered that Folley drew & outpointed Machen. Apart from the Ali fight, I only saw Folley fight once on TV, when he was comprehensively beaten by Brian London. Both fighters were past their best but Folley seemed to have no idea & it was hard to believe he had been a top contender for so long.I heard in his last fight he was floored six times in
the first round by Mac Foster.

Never seen any reports of his loss to Liston. Was it a clean KO or stoppage ?

Anyone out there have any memories of Folley who also died in tragic circumstances

 

I beleive Machen had mental health problems a couple of times in his career,I would say he was a very good ,but not great fighter ,a solid contender ,who somehow allways came up short in the big ones.Rather like his contemporary,Zora Folley.