prime James Toney vs prime Rocky Marciano (12 rounds)

atsch Joe Louis was Shot. If he is rated high in that era and winning, what does that say about that era?

I could only imagine what a Prime Louis would do to that era. They would all be on his tour.

He was Shot.

Both matter. Hopkins still won past 35 but he wasn't the same anymore.

How many of those fighters were really that great overall?

How many could compete in other HW eras?

I'll post some fights up down below.

atsch He retired before that and was forced to come back.

Louis was SHOT. Stop disrespecting the Man by thinking otherwise.

The last sign of Joe Louis retired after he knocked out Walcott. I never saw him again.

you know modern fighters strip 10+ pounds off then rehydrate because they have a long window to do it.

That said, some just don't like to do it because their body does react well. Floyd Mayweather jr. is a person who prefers not to do this.
He has taken off 8+ pounds before but it isn't what he tend to prefer to do.

Joe Louis was Shot.

Earl Walls: never seen him fight actually. I would have to do some research on him.

He wasn't a 200+ pounder, was he?

HW by the standards of the day however...yes.

atsch Stop mentioning Shot Louis.

How good were they?

Compare them to someone of another era. More than one would be good.

From Liston on.

However, I'll give you anyone that continually made 195+ as their matured weight.

185+ was the HW division however.

Guys like LaStarza was a HW of the day. Standards were lower back then.

 

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xucbDkwcH5A[/ame]


[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gvvs8Y4xaqs[/ame]

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fi66CQ_ivDg&feature=related[/ame]

Just part 1

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JuMxhz67e7E&feature=related[/ame]

 

"Compare them to someone of another era. More than one would be good."

50s fringe guy Satterfield KOed 60s leading contender Cleveland Williams in one round.

50s contender Harold Johnson actually beat several of the 60s top fighters like Machen, and tough Ali opponent Doug Jones.

A slowed down bad back Patterson was still a top 5 regular beating guys like Bonenva in the golden age.

Well on the decline with bad hands Bob Baker was good enough to beat 60s top 5 regular Chuvalo.

Valdes has a better resume than so called great modern contenders like Tua. Don Cockell, John Holman, Ezzard Charles, Pat McMurty, Harold Carter, all top 5 contenders, while Mike DeJohn, Bethea, Tommy Jackson, Brian London, Holman and Heinz Neuhaus were top 10. Many of these wins in the same era that Liston dominated, many the same names,....apparently Valdez was keeping up with the modern juggernauts despite now being inconsistent and past his best.

The 50s is not as weak as some want to believe.

 

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VR9zg7B-4p8[/ame]

This is Joe Louis of 1951. I would venture to say he is just as big, except better than Bob Baker and Nino Valdes whom you listed above. Even at age 37, I would pick Louis over Baker and Valdes.

 

Question for Caelum:

Outside of Charles and Marciano, whom would you pick to beat Joe Louis from 1950-1951 in the heavyweight division?

What could Baker and Valdes do on film that a 1951 Joe Louis couldn't do?

 

During that era or just in general overall in any era?

Maybe that says something about Baker and Valdes which is what I'm pointing out.

If Louis was rated high and winning during that time that says something more about the era/division at that time.

 

He looks good fighting an even more shot trial horse ... The Battling Bartender was 36 and had one win in the three years leading up to this fight with Louis ... he was painfully slow, a major bleeder and had absolutely zero defense ...can you get real please ...! :kenny

 

It means you are vastly underrating Louis, even at 37 years old. Louis in 1951 was far past his prime. That is not in dispute. But their have been many cases where even far past their prime fighters were still very capable, good fighters. Louis is not an exception.

Watch Louis on film from 1950-1951..He still was very solid fundamentally, He had a remarkable elegant left jab, he was very ring savvy from years of experience, he had cagey skills, and he still had nice power in his left hook. He was also 6'2 214lb, making him one of the bigger heavyweights in the division. With his jab, size, skills, experience..he is a tough task for a smaller young heavyweight contender to deal with.

 

I have, and it causes my estrogen to go up

 

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ny6l9VPbhRg[/ame]

Here is film of Louis against 25 year old 6'2 197lb Ranked contender Cesar Brion. Louis handles him with ease. Wins 9 out of 10 rounds. As you can see, Louis even at 37 was a good fighter.

 

I will tell you what causes my estrogen to go up...watch fat obese James Toney get in the ring. What a disgrace to go in the ring with jelly rolls of fat. Disgusting.

Would Toney beat a 1951 Joe Louis? How is 5'9 toney going to escape Louis's jab?

 

If a declined post-Satterfield beating Valdes can beat many of the same ranked fighters Liston did and grab a number one contender spot in his era....

And a physically broken Baker can beat a 60s top 5 fighter that gave Ali hell...

That's right...Ali sucks and is overrated. Era arguments are so weak...I don't care what he did..that era was weak? Really?

Most of the 50s was incredibly competitive and loaded, ranked fighters frequently fighting and beating other ranked fighters to cling to their top 10 spots. You really don't see that in the weaker eras.

 

1. If Savold was so shot, then why was he coming off a dominating stoppage victory over # 3 ranked 26 year old Bruce Woodcock? Throws your theory out of the water. Savold was heavyweight champion of the world recognized by BBBC when Louis fought him.

2. That one win in 3 years was a huge stoppage victory over a young top rated heavyweight contender for the BBC heavyweight championship of the world.

3. Savold zero defense? Savold was quite cagey and crafty. He blocked his chin with his right hand with his left hand held low, used to feint, in a Toney like stance, and did nice little shoulder rolls to avoid punches. He was no world beater, but a very solid, consistent fighter for a long time. He was also a good puncher, and good jabber. His best asset was his durability. Savold could take a good punch. In 10 years, only 2 stopped him up until 1951(Both very big punchers Harry Bobo and Elmer Ray). Louis flattened Savold with 1 punch.



Would you prefer for me to post the film of Louis absolutely destroying Pat Valentino in lethal fashion in 1950 with rabid combinations?

 

Even this Louis was a good fighter relatively speaking ... however, he was no barometer to gage Marciano as an all time great by .. who is Cesar Brion ? A light puncher that basically defeated no one ..

 

Well, inside of Charles and Marciano it would probably be too dark to fight.