Lastarza v Henry,Satterfield,Valdes,Baker?

They were probably all capable of beating the same guys just as well as each other. And this could include Roland too.

Perhaps Lastarza loses to all of them? Maybe he beats all of them? Or maybe he just beats half of them? Who knows for sure?

The thing is career timing and getting the right win at the right time and out of all of them Roland was the lucky guy wasn’t he?

Lastarza beat Layne when he had to. And this came right after Roland reversed results over two of just three guys that had wins over him. The only guy who beat him who Rollie had yet to rematch was Rocky Marciano (a split decision) so this made Lastarza a far more logical challenger than Satterfeild, Baker, Valdes and Henry.

If we look at the worst guys they lost to there isn’t much to chose from between any of them.

Satterfeild was sparked out by Layne. Roland beat Layne.

Baker was sparked out by Bob Satterfield who lost to Layne. Roland beat Layne.

Both those guys had to beat Layne to do better than Roland Lastarza surly?

Henry lost to FRank Buford and Jimmy Bivins. Maybe if Henry beat Somebody better than Lastarza he could be a favourite over Roland. Otherwise Im not so sure. The best guy Henry beat was probably Baker who was knocked flat by a guy Lastarza beat. So the jury is out on Henry beating Roland isn’t it?

Nino Valdes lost to Bob Satterfeild and Billy Gilliam. Who was Billy Gilliam? He lost a lot of fights. With hindsight Nino who beat Jackson and Charles looks a favourite over Lastarza but without that hindsight Nino is just the guy who lost to Billy Gilliam and Archie Mcbride and neither men would be regarded above Roland Lastarza.

 

Well that is one way of looking at it. As a challenger Nobody can argue with Rollie’s record of beating every man outside the current champion he ever fought though. as well as having never lost beyond dispute against Rocky in a non title fight. This far outshone the other contenders.

 

Lastarza loses to all of them


Henry was the bigger puncher, much more athletic, and had faster hands. He would break through Roland’s high guard and knock him out

Baker was just as skilled as lastara but bigger stronger and harder hitting. Baker outjabs lastarza for the unanimous decision

Lastara didn’t have enough power to hurt Valdes an keep him off...valdes would outjab Roland on the outside and maul lastarza on the inside. Valdes far superior size strength and punching power wears down Roland for a mid round knockout


Satterfield was much more explosive than lastarza and I think he gets to Roland early...lastarza was a good counterpuncher but he didn’t have the punch go seriously threaten bob. Lastarza had a good high guard but he didn’t move his head enough nor his feet enough...bobs gonna find his mark here. Lastarza can’t take bobs best stuff

 

Nice troll attempt. I won’t bite

 

What’s the evidence of trolling here you moron!

You seem to think you can attack people who make informed points that disagree with your opinion on a fantasy fight that nobody can prove one way or another. It’s laughable.

It’s like you think your self-esteem is the most important thing in the world and anyone who harms or criticises your view or says anything which makes you feel bad is a bad person.

Do you genuinely think you have the right to go through life without ever hearing a sore word about your beliefs or ideas, it’s just extraordinary.

You cannot be offended by an expression of an opinion. It’s not rational.

 

I won’t address chokejob here because he has an agenda, promoting Marciano victims in attempt to make Marciano appear better than he was...had Clarence Henry fought Marciano, choke would call Henry the mike Tyson of the 50s..that’s just the way he is..

I’ll educate the rest of the forum

Edward and I had lastarza coming in at number 49 on our best heavyweights 1930-1960. Take note Valdes, Henry, baker, satterfield all placed higher on the list. So Edward and I both agreed the foursome of Valdes, baker, satterfield, Henry were better fighters than lastarza..however, we differ in certain opinions of lastarza

I think he was greatly overrated

1. His number 1 rating was manufactured. He drew the color line against the top rated black heavyweights. He ducked them. They (satterfield, Moore, Louis, baker, Charles, Henry, Valdes) made lots of offers to Lastarzas camp for fights, but Fats Deangelo turned them down not wanting to risk his promised rematch title shot against Marciano. In a RING article years after retirement, lastarza admitted as much, that he ducked the top guys so he wouldn’t miss out on his Marciano payday.

2. Lastarza has an easy road to the title shot. He beat number 10 Brion in 1949 in a dreadful affair which stinked out the joint at Madison square garden...shopworn Layne in 53, who happened to be number 2 in the world because he was given a dubious hometown decision over Charles...Layne was over the hill at that point, losing in 52 to clubfighter Willie James and Kid Matthews...soon after he would get knocked out by Earl Walls. And of course, Charles destroyed him in the third fight on neutral territory. So chokes right about lastarza beating him at the right time, but wrong about a 53 layne being a quality opponent. It should be noted most papers had Layne winning the fight, which further shows you how weak lastarza was. When Layne first raged out of Utah in 50-51 he was a handful for anybody, but by 53 he was damaged goods.

Even with lastarzas promised title shot vs Marciano without having to defeat the divisions best fighters or best black fighters, lastarza nearly got in his own way. He lost to overstuffed light heavyweight un ranked Dan Bucceroni. He won the rematch with Bucceroni then lost to club fighter rocky jones. It’s debatable, but in my opinion based on testimony’s, Jones had to wear the cuffs in the rematch against lastarza in order for lastarza to win. Whether you believe that or not, should a world number 1 contender be struggling so badly with a 14-9 club fighter like Jones to the point where he needs 2 fights to beat him, and in the second fight jones knocked down and cut lastarza again and was close to a stoppage before suddenly in rounds 3-10 jones stopped punching. The filmed version shows lastarza looking dreadful here.

So lastarza goes 4-2 against Brion, Faded Layne, Bucceroni and Jones and that earns him a number 1 rankings and a title shot? Yes. He had that close affair with Marciano in 1950...Marciano was coming off off a tragic fight against Vingo in 49. Think his head was into it? Think he had that same killer instinct?

In contrast to that easy title run, Valdes had to go 11-0 beating the likes of top 5 rated fighters Ezzard Charles, hurricane Jackson, Heinz neuhas...and all that got him was an eliminator against hall of famer Archie Moore! Imagine if lastarza had to go through that kind of schedule to earn a title shot, does he make it? No way!



Lastarzas resume was incredibly weak. He padded it with non punchers, soft touches, and set ups. From 1949-1954 lastarza didn’t have to fight the divisons best fighters like Louis, satterfield, Walcott, Charles, Valdes, Henry, satterfield, baker, Holman, baker, Moore, and h Johnson. Look at all those big names he missed out. He ducked all the top black contenders. He ducked all the divisions big punchers except for Marciano


Lastarzas entire career was built on the first Marciano fight, but in reality, he was vastly unproven against the eras best fighters. We don’t know how good he actually was, and given his struggles with Brion, shopworn Layne, Bucceroni, Jones, and cockell..I suspect he would have been exposed and knocked out by the big names he missed.

On film, lastarza was a good counterpuncher but he didn’t have much else going for him..he was short, he was small. Had he been taller with a longer reach, his style would have played better. Lastarza didn’t move a lot with his feet, just kind of picked people off in the pocket. His handspeed was only average, he wasn’t athletic, and he wasn’t a big puncher. I question his ability to take a punch. His management steered him clear of the divisons big punchers for the most part. But other than Marciano, gosney put him down twice. Jones had him down twice. Norkus and mederos knocked him out.


Satterfield baker Henry Valdes. These men were much more battle tested than lastarza. They beat better fighters than lastarza. Some of these men enjoyed huge height reach and weight advantages on lastarza. All these men hit significantly harder than lastarza did.

Henry beat baker 2x, satterfield, Holman and wasn’t afraid to take on Moore and Johnson

Baker beat Valdes 2x, Layne 3x, Holman, destroyed Brion..and he wasn’t afraid to take on Moore

Valdes beat Charles, Jackson, Neuhas and wasn’t afraid to take on Moore in an eliminator

Satterfield beat baker Valdes Holman Johnson Oma and wasn’t afraid to take on Charles in an eliminator

 

you are going to educate who? Suszie your are a statistician. Your insight is based on hindsight and size advantage. How can you educate anyone when you base everything on this? You don’t see anything as it stood at that time.

yes, even I agree, with hindsight any of those guys could have beat Layne at the right time too. They didn’t. Satterfeild lost to Layne then beat Baker. So there goes your hard evidence.

well done. You think that. At least you say you think that.

Did he duck them or did he just take bigger fights that they would have took too?

sure. He beat relevant fighters to become legit contender though.

whoever beat Layne at that point gets at shot.

exactly. We don’t know.

you suspect. Exactly.

I agree. We are all wiser after the event.

 

Lastarza never deserved his number 1 rating in the world without beating Ezzard Charles, Archie Moore, Harold Johnson, or Clarence Henry

 

Clarence Henry had a lot of ability but his prime went quickly. In his prime, he was something. I pick him via later round TKO.

Satterfield a true seek and destroy type of puncher with a suspect chin who lost plenty of decisions. I'll go with LaStarza here on points.

Baker, a good puncher with skills, who also had a bit of a suspect chin. In this matchup, it's not a big issue. Leaning towards Baker on points based on his aggression.

Valdes, a bit of a soft-hearted big man who disappoints by playing it safe too often on the film I've seen of him. But he had the ability I'd pick him on points as his size and rage were too much here.

But in reality, these four fighters were not always consistent. Best guess 1-3 for LaStarza, but 2-2 would not surprise me.

LaStarza was pretty consistent, you know what you are getting with him. A pretty good boxer mover type with decent durability and good, but not great speed. LaStarza's biggest problem is he did not hit hard enough to keep this group of mostly aggressive fighters off him. He matches up best with boxer types his size or slower footed punchers.

 

Good post although I think you’re giving Lastarza a little too much credit. I don’t see the speed you’re talking about and you made no comment about his suspect chin vs punchers

 

Logical.

 

You wish choke. Anything to help Marciano.

 

He was only stopped twice. One by Marciano. The other time, he took Rocky the distance in a fight where he was in the lead for a while, and gassed a bit late, partly due to fouls in my opinion. There is some stuff LaStarza over trained for the re-match. A bit of an excuse, but there could be some truth in it.

Bottom line, If you go the distance with Marciano once, and get stopped in 11 rounds in the other fight, you can take a pretty good punch in my book.

So I'd say his chin was at least good. LaStarza was a good boxer with a jab, footwork, and decent speed. Not great speed but I think he had more hand speed than most. His main drawback was lack of power.

Style wise, I think he's at a disadvantage in these fights, but in terms of consistency he has the edge over all listed, I think.