In Defense of Earnie Shavers

It seems to have become fashionable in this forum to belittle Earnie Shavers, write him off as nothing but a guy with an inflated record. I disagree. In fact, if you go over his record, there's quite a lot to like. I in fact see Shavers has having been a formidable contender and near-champion. Hear me out:

Earnie turned pro without any great amateur background or Olympic pedigree. He literally had to hit the road to start making money. And he didn't make much in the beginning. True, he lost his third pro fight to one Stan Johnson, who would go on to have a respectable record. It was a four-round decision loss. As we know, it is quite easy to drop a four-round decision early in your career, especially if you're a guy without top management picking your every opponent carefully. In other words, I feel this loss is meaningless.

In 1970 Earnie fought TWELVE times, something we don't see much of anymore...or even saw that much of at the time. During this period he was knocked out by the then undefeated Ron Stander, a loss Earnie has been derided for for years. But let's be reasonable....back in the old days when guys fought this often, dropping a decision, losing a fight here and there, was not uncommon. Yeah, it doesn't look great on his record, but if you're fighting once a month, it is easy to at some point have a mental or physical let down and blow a fight. We've seen a million guys do that. Do you think Stander would've beaten Shavers again? I highly doubt it.

In 1971, Earnie fought SEVENTEEN times, going undefeated. That's every three weeks. And though some of the guys were worthless, it is not easy to go undefeated in seventeen fights in one year. Think about it.

The streak continued in '72, though Earnie slowed down the pace.

1973 was in some ways a microcosm of Shaver's career. He knocked out future star Jimmy Young in the third round. He remains the only man to ever knock Young down and stop him (except for losses on cuts). He then flatttened Jimmy Ellis in one round. Yes, I know Ellis was past it, but it is still a decent win.

I'm not going to try and defend the knockout loss to Jerry Quarry. It looks bad, I know. Quarry was good, and the only thing I can suggest is that Earnie was used to mowing guys down and simply wasn't cautious enough. Jerry was still dangerous and Earnie learned it the hard way.

Then came the rematch with Jimmy Young, which ended in a draw. Though I've yet to encounter anyone who actually saw the fight, the urban legend is that Young deserved the decision. This seems to come from one obscure newspaper article which was, from what I've heard, from Philadelphia, Young's hometown. Who knows what happened in that fight. If any of you actually saw it....the whole thing....then tell us about it. But let's stop this **** of awarding the victory to Young without any real evidence.

Earnie had another loss I can't fully defend, the decision to Bob Stallings, a journeyman known to be on the slick side. Yes, it looks bad. But again, in historical context, think about other contenders and even champs who have surprise losses. Think of Ross Purrity and what he's done. Think of Marion Wilson drawing (and probably getting robbed) against Ray Mercer. Think of Michael Bentt taking out Tommy Morrison. Think of Garcia and Norton. How about Marty Marshall? These things happen. They don't necessarily negate everything a fighter has accomplished.

Then there was the war with Ron Lyle, one of the best heavyweight fights of the seventies. Take a look at Earnie's knockdown of Lyle in the second round; it was brutal. It basically took three tries, using the ropes, for Lyle to get up. Was this punch any less than the one McCall won the title from Lewis with? No. This fight probably would've been stopped had it been anywhere else besides Lyle's hometown. Ron recovered well, but he was lucky to be allowed to even continue.

After beating guys like Howard Smith, Henry Clark, and Roy Williams, Earnie got his title shot with Ali. I'm not going to struggle mightily to convince all of you that he won, because I know all about Ali fans. But in my opinion, Shavers clearly landed the better punches, won the fight, and should have been champion. People will say that the decision wasn't controversial at the time, and it wasn't. And here's why: because the TV network was using open scoring. If the announcers are praising Ali's movements and flicking, harmless jabs, and then are telling everyone that Ali won the round, the average American watching the fights on a weeknight, will just accept what they're being told. Sure, Earnie could've stepped it up more. And sure, out of reverence for Ali, Shavers later said he didn't win, but at the time he surely said he won, and in the opinions of many fans he deserved at least a draw. Give Earnie this victory and his legacy completely changes. If you don't think he won, then fine. I personally think he did. But you have to admit that he did pummel Ali's head pretty seriously in this fight.

Earnie was a good fighter, Larry Holmes a great fighter. And Larry beat the hell out of Shavers six months later. I can't defend it, but Larry was beating the hell out of everyone then. I'm not saying Shavers was the greatest of all time. He lost pretty badly.

I wrote Earnie off after that and thought the WBC was crazy to have him ranked number 2, but Earnie made it pay off by flattening Ken Norton in the first round. Shavers had the right kind of style for penetrating Norton's cross-armed defense, and proved to be a capable finisher. He did what Ali, Holmes, Young, and a bunch of other guys couldn't do.

By the time he got his second title shot, Earnie was in his mid-thirties. He almost took Holmes out, but instead gallantly took a beating that essentially ended his career.

People excuse Ali for his later losses, and for Holyfield's many later losses, and Earnie was now heading down that road. Beating Joe Bugner or Jeff Sims looked good on paper, but these victories were mixed in with losses to lesser guys like Mercado, Cobb, and Tillis. Earnie could still club a guy out from time to time, but he was old, had eye problems, and was but a stepping-stone in the end.

If you look at his whole career though, Shavers has some important wins, some bad breaks, and came within a hair of being champ. He put together some huge winning streaks and proved a force to be reckoned with.

I know some of you will attack. Go for it. You can have your boring ol' Alis any day. I like Earnie better.

 

Thanks, guys. I did indent the paragraphs but they were re-formatted I guess when I posted it. Janitor, you said it best: the Ali-Spinks fights perverted the lineage. I agree completely: if Norton had become the lineal champ as deserved, then Shavers might well have knocked him out and won it for himself.

Earnie might not have deserved his title shot based on his wins over Smith and Williams, but Ali wanted someone besides Foreman, Norton, or Young, whom he wanted nothing to do with. Earnie was formidable enough to make up for the joke of the Evangelista fight. Too bad Ali got his ass kicked.