Ruslan Chagaev vs the 1950s

I think these head to head matches are largely shite, especially in the HW division, because anything can happen with the big boys (see Marty Marshall, Don Cockell, etc...). That said, I think people are under-rating a decorated amateur champ who has defeated two heavyweight champs, never lost a fight, and if memory serves (which maybe it does not) has not even been off his feet as a pro. Granted, these are not the barnstorming days of Jersey Joe, but Jersey Joe also lost a lot of f'ing fights. I know he was cute and possesed fancy footwork, but as far as results (which I care more for than style) he had some major deficiencies. Also, I would pick Lastarza, Baker, Valdez, Machen, Folley, Henry and Williams as underdogs. I have seen most of these guys extensively on film and they are as full of holes as today's lambasted heavies. They tend to bask in the already over-amplified glow of their better contemporaries. The sure thing here is Liston, the best version of a 50's Louis and that's about it. Again, too much erractic results in this division. I mean, just perchance, the Chagaev of three years ago catches the Marciano that fought Cockell or Moore and I put money heavily on Chag.

And yes, he should be destroyed on Saturday. I don't think his health is very good and he's already on his way down.

 

I have been watching the films of Chagaev on you tube and switching off to films of Baker, Satterfield, Layne, Liston, Chuvalo from the fifties.

1. Well, Chagaev does not seem that impressive physically. His height is given as 6' 1" and he really doesn't appear all that muscular, just thick through the waist.

2. What stands out when I switch back in the forth is the extreme lack of lateral movement from Chagaev and his opponents, Ruiz and Valuev. They look almost as if their shoes are nailed to the floor. They stand in front of each other with high gaurds and exchange tentative jabs. Compared to the fifties films, Chagaev and his opponents almost seem to be fighting in slow motion.

3. So, I wonder how Chagaev responds to the faster pace, the higher volume of punches being thrown at him and also the much higher volume of punches he would have to throw. I don't know if he could expect to ever get a decision going at the lethargic modern pace if sent back to earlier eras.

4. All in all, he seems like a well-schooled but fairly ordinary fighter. I think he most likely loses to most of the top men in the fifties. He does not have the sort of size advantage the Klitschkos would have.

 

Good points, though I slightly disagree wiht number 1. Frazier and Marciano had very unimpressive physiques for heavyweights. I just don't believe the eye test, seen too many gym-specimens who can't fight a lick. I think Chag is just one of those guys who instinctively knows how to fight. He delivers his punches tight and many times they even seem to track his opponent mid punch. It would be interesting to see what kind of pace he could maintain in lively scrap against a smaller, active heavy. I still have him with a good chance of beating half the list presented. But to further hamper his case, the fight scheduling and matchmaking of the 2000's has not let us enough of any of the top heavies.

 

I expect this and so do you but what if he wasnt?

There have been a fair few surprises over the past 12 months.

 

Chagaev in his prime (and i believe he's past it, since that injury) was a VERY skilled southpaw with a lot of upper body movement. The 50's fighters never dealt with southpaws so he'll reap a lot of success there. However, to be effective over 15 rounds instead of 12 he'll need to lose 10-20 lbs. On the flipside, he does have a strength advantage over most of them, and an iron chin.

 

I apologize for quoting such a small portion of your post as although i dont share your view you had some justifiable arguments regarding your position in backing Chagaev against the fighters mentioned.

I feel however this particular statement you have made is ridiculous!
Henry Tillman twice beat Mike Tyson, im interested in your thoughts on him. Im sure Tyson was more dangerous than Dwain Bonds or Cedric Parsons too yet they beat Tillman before Mike exacted revenge

 

He does seem to be a tough fighter though and able to take a punch, I could never see him defeating any of the top guys from the fifties though and I can't see him defeating Wlad but he has his chance and unlike others is taking it so good luck to and I hope he does well and comes to fight.

 

Yeah, but Chagaev is fat and Marciano and Frazier were not. That is evident.

 

A fair criticism of Chageav being limited, but this still doesn't account for your BLANKET statement that " being a southpaw is useless against Wlad. "

 

Marciano was short, stubby and had two left feet, per Charlie Goldman.

Joe had the worst heavyweight body in the hisory of the division, per Eddie Futch.

 

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected