Ron Lyle vs. Harold Johnson

Lyle was a near super heavy with good skills, and good power. Harold Johnson is simply too small, and not agressive enough to win.

I do not think Johnson could counter Lyle enough to win rounds, and he's out gunned if he dared to stand and trade..

 

Nino Valdez 6'3 210lb with skills power and a jab. harold shut him out 10 rounds to zero. Reviewing lyles lack of sucess vs peralta, this is a winnable fight for johnson. johnson may have been stationary but he was clearly very hard to penetrate as big top ranked slugger like nino valdez was unable to WIN A ROUND against johnson.


I am a fan of both, I like johnson by split decision

 

nino valdez was was near as big as ron lyle in size, and he was a big puncher. harold shut out valdez 10 rounds to zero. light-H peralta who was past his prime drew with ron lyle

 

Lyle is actually the same size as Valdes whom Johnson handled easily.

Size aside, Johnson is simply a much better fighter than Lyle. The truth is, if quick handed guys like Moore, Henry, and Satterfield could not catch Johnson, why should we expect Lyle would.

Yes, Lyle was skilled for a super heavy, the same way John Ruiz was skilled for a super heavy, but the skill level of a top lightheavy is a great deal better, as Ruiz found out against Jones and Valdes found out against Johnson and Moore, or Bob Baker found out against Moore.

 

Your discription of Johnson makes no sense. Johnson supposedly has no chin, and is not elusive. That is not the Johnson I used to watch on TV. He moved around pretty good when he wanted to. If he were not elusive, he would have been easy pickings for Machen, Henry, Satterfield, and all the other big hitters who were far faster of hand and foot than Lyle.

 

I just don't see Lyle as being that great. He was an average heavy whose status is inflated by the company he kept. And even that company I will contend is over-rated.

 

Old Fogey,

How is my description of Johnson inaccurate? Was he not very adept at blocking/parrying punches like I stated? And where did I say in any of my posts on this thread that the man had no chin or wasn`t elusive? What I did say was that he didn`t have a great chin which is true, and that he wasn`t as elusive as a Peralta or Young which as far as I`m concerned is accurate.

As far as Lyle winning this fight, I already said that he wasn`t going to outbox Harold and that his best bet was to blitz him from the opening bell looking to score the early knockout. If he does this I think he can pull it off, yet you and some of the other posters couldn`t disagree more acting as if it were impossible that Lyle could pull this off. Lets just agree to disagree and move on shall we, obviously we won`t see eye to eye here so there is no use going back and forth on this topic.

 

Let us agree to disagree. Nothing is impossible, but if Lyle could not blitz Jerry Quarry, Jimmy Young twice, a 35 year old Jimmy Ellis, nor a 38 year old Gregorio Peralta twice, I don't think the odds favor him blitzing Johnson.

I just don't see Lyle as being as good as you do. He was a fair contender, beaten badly by Quarry. Now I don't think Quarry was as good as Machen, whom Johnson defeated in 1961, and I would favor Machen rather strongly over Lyle.

 

Valdes could be a ***** cat in the ring if the other guy was giving him a hard time. Lyle was a much more heart. I also feel that Lyle hit harder than Valdes. I don't think Lyle sits back and gives up rounds vs Johnson, as that was not his style.

 

Quarry is regarded by many as the best heavy never to win the belt. So i disagee that Machen was better even tho he beat an young up-coming Quarry. And i agree that Lyle's best best would to blast Johnson out quick. He defo at the power to finish this fight early.

 

Only by people ignorant of boxing history.

 

"blast Johnson out quick" "has the power to finish this fight early"

Possibly. But no one really deals with Lyle not finishing guys like Quarry, Ellis, Peralta, etc early or in fact at all, and why he will be able to finish the more accomplished Johnson early. I just don't find this convincing. Lyle was a good but not outstanding fighter. Johnson was an outstanding fighter, among the most esteemed of his time. Although a lightheavy, Johnson defeated more top heavyweights than Lyle. I think he was a much better boxer defensively than Quarry, for example.

 

And you know all about that as you're an expert at being ignorant.

 

I am certain some fans with good boxing knowledge hold the opinion that Quarry is the best heavy never to win the belt. I respectfully disagree. I don't think he is at the same level as Machen, and would point out that except for the Johansson fight, Machen did not lose badly to anyone until he was well into his thirties. Quarry was finished as a top heavyweight by his 30th birthday.

I also think Johnson is better than Machen or Quarry, and I don't think Quarry rates with Peter Jackson, Sam Langford, Harry Wills, Tommy Loughran, Archie Moore, or Elmer Ray. Just my opinion.

 

Where I basically disagree--I think Johnson is a top ten lightheavy and was a first rate fighter.

Lyle was a solid contender but certainly in the long run of boxing history nothing special at heavyweight.

So this is a match between a great lightheavy and a fair heavy. Lightheavy champions have tended to win those type of fights more often than not, while losing to the top big men. Gibbons beats Miske but loses to Dempsey. Conn beats Pastor but loses to Louis. Moore beats Valdes and Baker but loses to Marciano, Johnson beats Valdes and Henry and Machen, but loses to Walcott, etc.