I know, I should have reversed the cards I just took them as they were to show it was close on two cards, sorry to the other poster for misleading him.
Lastarza was a decent boxer but nothing special imo . Watch his fights and say he is a fine defensive fighter. Bucceroni split 2 fights with Lastarza and he was really a light heavyweight.Brion was moderate.Layne has two good victories that's it. A poor quality era.Lastarza did not deserve his title shot off his recent form. There are a lot of names conspicuously missing from his record.
Poor quality era? You just listed off 3 men Layne Lastarza brion who wouldn't even make the top 10 of the era. How can you call the era poor based on using those names? Take the top 10. Rocky Marciano Ezzard Charles Archie Moore Jersey Joe Walcott Harold Johnson Nino Valdes Bob Baker Clarence Henry Joe Louis Hurricane Jackson That is nowhere close to being a poor era. Some good names there. I would rank the quality in the 1910s and 20s lower.
I think Layne, Brion,Lastarza were poor quality ,the latter two more than Layne ,anytime that a Don C*ckell can be ranked as the number 2 contender it is a poor quality era imo.
That doesn't mean anything. ****ell got his number 2 ranking due to being well connected. He was never the 2nd best heavyweight in the world. Anyone can rise to number 2 in the world with the right management promoter luck etc I have seen you defend 20s fighters like Miske Brennen Fipro. In my opinion none of those 3 were better than Lastarza Layne and Bucceroni..they were all on the same level in my mind
Roland being undermined here, He beats Briggs (who I never was impressed with) I dont know if he had the kind of power to tip weak Carl's chin (Holmes couldn't tip it) so if he could not get to Carl with power, it would be a boxing match and Carl had the size and reach, still expect Roland to fight hard. Remember Roland was 53-3 and had beaten everyone that beat him up to that point except Marciano. Roland post Marciano was just in there for the payday
Considering how little tread was on the tires of most of those mentioned, that was a shi tty era. And Hurricane Jackson was just horrible. For shame. I rate it as one of the very worst for a division renowned for a shallow talent pool.
It was not worse than the early 00s, late 1910s, 20s, late 20s, early 30s, late 40s, Take out hurricane jack sons name, the rest of the 9 guys were solid heavyweights and the top 5 were great fighters
Ever seen me say the 20's was a great heavyweight era? The fact that a 37 years old Louis, a 38 years old Walcott, and a past prime Lightheavy Charles were the best of the bunch of challengers during the 50's says it all.
Williams had a weak chin and Rollies was sound? Was Williams ever knocked down by a man weighing 179lbs? Lastarza was steered away for all most all the iron of the division and anyone who has eyes can see it.
Some of those Lastarza somehow "missed" Charles Walcott Oma Bivins Satterfield Maxim Thompson Valdes Jackson Henry Louis Baker Savold Sys Nuehaus Agramonte Gardner Valentino Walls Baksi That's a pretty long list.:think
I've seen some footage and if we're watching the lastarza prior to when rocky totally wrecked him, then I liked what I saw.. Good defensive stance with some nice counters and fluid movement. He lacked size and power and wasn't terribly aggressive though which is why he never would have been a champion.. As already stated I can't see him beating too many 1980s heavyweight contenders either. But drop him at cruiser weight around that time and he'd fit right in with Deleon, ocasio, qawi, crous and might even beat most of them..
Yeah it generally took a pretty good hitter to finish off the truth or at least when he was prime.. Didn't take a colossal puncher to put him on the floor though.. Quick tillis, ferguson and jerry jones all had him down.. Carl was always getting surprised with left hands.. It's like he had no vision on the right side of his face. His legs were a little shaky too..