Marciano vs. Norton

Ron Stander kinda' reminded me of a 70s version of Scott Frank..... A big white boy with a chin, but not much skill..... "Frazier-Stander" fought in Stander's backyard in Nebraska... I too, own a copy.........

Myself, I never saw Frazier fight Terrence Daniels.... Wasn't Daniels a blown-up Middleweight?

MR.BILL

 

1960's-1970's Marciano's career would have been different, but imo, he would have been up there right alongside Ali, Liston, Frazier, Foreman and Norton. Even if you disagree, being #6 behind those five isn't bad at all.

1980's I think Marciano would have gotten the same 48-0-0 that Holmes did. The era was one of the worst in history, though imo, not as bad as the era today post Lewis. 1990's would have been the same as the 1960's and 1970's, with Marciano alongside Tyson, Holyfield, Bowe and Lewis. Again, being #5 isnt too bad behind those four.

 

How is this case closed? you have never named me a source that stated vingo was not a puncher. I have named 3 sources that claimed vingo was a very hard hitter.

 

Let me first say I do find it very interesting you seem to really harp on this Valdez issue, while you never bring up Bob Baker. Bob Baker vs Nino Valdez I I have on film, and Baker showed to me he was the better of two big men. Not suprisingly, baker beat valdez again by WIDE decision 2 years later. I would be more interested in hearing how Bob Baker would have given Rocky Marciano a tough fight in 1951-1952 rather than Rocky not fighting Nino Valdez, who did not pocess the qualities baker did to trouble rocky.

Lets Start: How exactley is Valdez going to pull off the upset vs Marciano? what he have outside of his jab that could give rocky major problems? I would say rocky has many assets that would give Valdez major issues. Valdez is going to be coming right into to Marciano and trade, not exactley a wise stradegy.

Did you read a fight report? Moore didn't box Valdez. he outslugged him. This was a war both trading blows, moore showed up out of shape at 196lb but still outfought Nino down the stretch and won the 13-15th rounds going away. Valdez got outworked by a 38 year old puffed up lightheavyweight down the stretch. Can you imagine what kind of mess Marciano would do to Valdez down the stretch? Don't forget Marciano absolutey hammred this same version of Moore months later.

Marciano stated on June 20th November of 1955 in Chicago Tribune "I want to fight Nino Valdez in June for my 50th fight". What is this about marciano not selecting Valdez?

1. Size- Rocky already fought 6'2 214lb Hall of Fame Joe Louis, you think he would be scared to fight someone of equal size who had nowhere near the reputation of Louis?

2. Style- Valdez lost to 5'10 Satterfield, 5'10 Johnson, 5'11 Moore, and was lucky to escape out a decision over 5'10 Mcbride. I would have to say that a 5'11 Marciano with his low crouch, Top Power in both hands, amazing workrate, Steel chin, great stamina would have the style advantage over Valdez who had a history of losing to short fighters. Don't forget, Marciano never lost.

* On a side note, John Garfield once told me about a sparring session between Marciano and Valdez he witnessed. According to him, when the bell rang to end the sparring session, Valdez walked out of the ring with a look on his face like he had just been through hell. This is exactley what he would have had to go through to beat Marciano, and Valdez just didn't have IT.

whats ur definition of an "easy" win? If one round gets changed on two of the judges scorecards, then the fight is a majority draw. I would hardly call that an easy victory, especially since charles swept the early rounds. When you take into account, Valdez was an unheralded journeyman at the time and charles showed up to the fight at a career high soft 192lb, then it would not be out of the world to say Charles took Valdez lightly. This was such a big upset, that NBA issued a rematch IMMEDIATELY for charles and valdez to fight again. Charles accepted, while Valdes declined. Lastly, what does you talk about styles, but what does ezzard charles stylistically have in similiar with Marciano? Probably nothing. Charles was a slick defensive counterpuncher, while Rocky was a puncher-Swarmer. A Valdez win over charles, shows nothing what a fight with Rocky would be like. Besides, Rocky beat up a 185lb Trimmer Ezzard Charles just as badly on the cards, and knocked out Ezzard Charles something Nino was unable to do.




Ezzard Charles said in retirement "I fought the worst fight of my career when I fought Valdez and he gave me a licking. I wanted a rematch but never got one."

Nino Valdez said in his interview on cyberboxing "Charles was really something special in the ring".

Well Valdez drew well in the Miami area, where there was a large latino crowd which is why a winter date in 1955 was scheduled between marciano and valdes. In fact, if you want to go earlier, Charlie Goldman went to Al Weill in Early 1954 and told Weill he wanted Rocky Marciano to fight Nino Valdez as a TUNEUP for his june date with Ezzard Charles, so he wouldnt go in the ring rusty for Ezz. Weill said "No". I got this source from Boxing Historian who's name wishs to be kept secret, he posts here under the name "Albinored".

So was Joe Louis in 1951. Louis actually knocked Nino Valdez out in 1 round.

Yet you think he has a chance against a ruthless skilled puncher-swarmer like Marciano who did nothing but take your heart and soul away in the championship rounds?

Marciano was alot better than Satterfield. I think Nino would be competitive early on with his jab and long reach, but a big slugger like valdez was made in order for the Rock because he would be standing there for the rock to be hitting him and rock has too much firepower in a slugout for Valdez. Valdez was given huge problems when satterfield would get low in a crouch and slip the jab and counter with a huge overhand right. This was Rockys forte, he might knock valdez out with one punch if this happens in the fight. Also what happens as the fight goes into the championship rounds, how is valdez going to deal with tha kind of workrate aggresion and stamina? Valdez was not strong mentally. he could be broken down in that regard.

You say hes slipping in these fights which may be true, but dont forget even the "slipping" marciano absolutley dominated a fighter(Archie Moore) who beat Valdez a couple months prior.

It wasn't fouls, it was just a bunch of legal punch after punch which would hit lastarza anywhere and everywhere breaking him down. Lastarza suffered broken blood vessels and chipped bones in his forearms. Lets remember, Lastarza was a defensive counterpuncher. he fought on the backfoot backing away from marciano. Valdez was a standup slugger who would come right into marciano. I dont see how Valdez can come into marciano and survive that assualt. Marciano is not a good matchup for Nino, especially as the fight goes to the latter rounds where Nino had a history of folding.

This is a very bold statement. Valdez only chance is an early knockout, and this is not happening because marciano was too strong and durable. Also if Valdez comes into marciano, he might find himself on the floor right away. This is playing into Rock'y strengths. If the fight goes into the championship rounds, no way can valdez keep up with the humanwindmill Marciano of round 15 vs Charles or round 6 vs Moore. Valdez would break mentally and physically. If Valdez fights smart and uses his awesome left jab, and picks his shots he will find success vs rocky early, but how long can this last? Rocky eventually will find his way in and start wearing Nino down. Rocky had a very good jab slipping rate, so Nino's jab is not going to be able to control rocky. I think Rocky can take Nino's best stuff(I doubt visa verca). It was the fast pinpoint shots that you didnt see coming rocky was more susceptible too. Even if we compare common opponents during 1954-1955 Rocky performed better against Charles and Moore than Valdez did. I dont see how anyone could make a case for a Valdez upset. But please I would love to hear how he would be able to upset rocky?

 

Agreed,

I was skeptical when I first went to go see it in the theatre in the fall of '07. But, I left pleasantly surprised. There were some brutal scenes in there that I could have done without, such as that kid getting beat to death with a stick. Overall though, I thought it was masterfully done and most entertaining. He basically summed up everything in one film, that John Carpenter took two films to do.

 

The Rock by kayo. Norton was good against boxers, not sluggers.

http://www.amazon.com/Joe-Gans-Biog...=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1241836336&sr=1-1

 

Stander/Frazier is one of my favorite fights tbh. While I think many truly believed he had no chance, Stander was game as hell and was one of the few men I seen who could stand toe to toe with Joe Frazier. Even busted up, the man still kept coming forward. I think if he was allowed to continue on, he would have fought until he couldn't no more. Stander was a true warrior. I hate that he is seldom brought up in heavyweight discussions.

As for Terry Daniels, I know little about him, and the only fight I ever seen him on film was him taking part in the 'Toronto Five' exhibition against George Foreman. Unfortunately for him, Foreman was a man lost but on a mission that night, I dont think anyone involved in the contest won a single round against Foreman.

BUT, no he wasnt a blown up middleweight, for most of his career he fought at around 195. Small for a heavyweight then, but, he certainly wasnt coming up from a smaller division to fight heavyweights.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RtlVM-ibIyY

Take a look at five minutes, four seconds...

Ron Stander said once, when asked if Frazier's knees buckled: "All I am saying is he got hit, yeah."

 

Marciano would have eventually, after battering the **** out of his arms, and breaking MILLIONS of blood vessels, ko'ed COLD Ken Norton. Norton, the guy who never dealt well with a puncher, a guy who he knew could hurt him...meet the guy who could REALLY hurt you.

 

very facual....Valdes lost 4 in a row in 53 Moore,Baker,Johnson,Gilliam...he went on to win a few and got a close nod of a less the in shape Charles...Charles went on to beat Gilliam and then KO Coley Wallace and Satterfeild who owned Valdes. So overcoming 4 stait losses in 53 then having a winning year in 54 ( although most felt he lost to Archie McBride) then Valdes lost badly to Archie Moore who jumped to # 1 for title shot.. then Valdes lost badly to Satterfeild...Rocky wanted to make him # 50 but fight would not have been marketable....Rocky would have KO'd Valdes and Norton as well....Marciano was all wrong for Ken

 

Stander landed some good ones on Frazier and Stander did ko an unknown Earnie Shavers in war slugfest when both were young...Shame Stander never really trained or had the teaching or training to be the best he could be...he never took boxing serious

 

Mendoza has still not commented on my above post. I just found an old Quote of Mendoza's

Now Mendoza you said this quote a year ago, but I trust you stand by it. Here is my response to one of your other qotes.....


"but surely Valdes was more worthy than the 2nd match with Charles,"


My response to this is

This content is protected

actually gave fighters who put up good fights vs him re-matches in title fights

 

YES! this was some talk in 1955 but there was more talk of a Archie Moore-Earl Walls fight in 1955. They couldnt come to an agreement, and walls claiming moore ducked him suddenly retired. Walls had not looked good in his recent fight. Now that he was out of the picture, Marciano-Valdez began negotiations for a title fight. Walls vs Marciano would have been a war until rock knocked him out. Walls was a 6'3 200lb boxerpuncher with a heavy violent right hand and he was a great finisher. Walls embarrasingly enough though, did lose to Marcianos sparring partner tommy harrison in 1953(avenged by devastating 1 round knockout)

 

I think people would give his career more respect. If he had fought 1965-1975 he probably would have knocked out an old liston in the late 1960s similiar to louis...then picked off a couple of the crop of good contenders Quarry, Bonavena, Ellis, Patterson, mac foster Terell, then probably would have had an exciting trilogy either ali and frazier maybe winning 2 out of 3 vs frazier ruining eachother and losing a very competitive fight with ali...I could see Rock retiring early by 1971 because with his style, his prime would not last too long.

If 44 year old Larry Holmes and 42 year old George Foreman can fight there way into the top of the rankings during this time, I am sure a Prime Rocky Marciano could do very well and be champion fighting wars with tyson, holyfield, bowe, lennox beating some of them and losing some. Also I would expect marciano would enter the ring during this era at a solid 205lb with modern nutrition/weight training/supplement benefits .


My point is, though ur taking away his undefeated record...your also giving him a greater win resume than the one he had in the 1950s...So i would think many modern critics would rank rock much higher.

 

The 'Stander' fight is NOTHING to get all excited about.......... Joe Frazier was just looking to stay busy........ Stander was game, but over matched.......... Even a limited brawler can sometimes land a good punch every now and then..... I have a clean copy of that fight, but I rarely look it over anymore....

MR.BILL