Russ Anber on Marciano.

Who is this Russ Amber? His Moore comment is totally ignorant. Read someone like A J Liebling, for starters. Moore was considered the outstanding contender.

By the way, when did Al Weill confide his thinking to Russ Amber who speaks for Weill thoughout.

This is the Ring Magazine rating from August, 1955

Champion--Rocky Marciano
1. Archie Moore
2. Bob Baker
3. Don Cockell
4. Nino Valdes
5. Hurricane Jackson
6. Ezzard Charles
7. Earl Walls
8. John Holman
9. Rex Layne
10. Heinz Neuhaus

 

They guy is a moron...Charles had a impressive 2 RD KO over Bob Satterfield and a Ko over Big Coley Wallace....Valdez lost 4 in a row in 1953, then had a win streak with a win over Charles. Valdez was shut out by Harold Johnson, Archie Moore and Billy Gilliam who Charles beat in his next fight....Valdez win over Charles was as close as a round or 2 but Charles came back consistanly....Valdez also was sandwiched by 2 losses to Moore and the fight after Moore was dominated by Satterfeild and dropped for a nine count....Moore was the superior fighter and so was Charles





1955-08-17 215 Bob Satterfield 183 38-19-3
Chicago Stadium, Chicago, Illinois, United States L UD 10 10
Valdes went down for a nine-count in the tenth round. Scoring: 98-92, 97-93, 97-88.

1955-05-02 209½ Archie Moore 196½ 146-19-9
Cashman Field, Las Vegas, Nevada, United States L PTS 15 15
~ referee: James J. Braddock ~
Nevada World Heavyweight Title
Referee Braddock was the sole judge. Scoring 8-5-2.

1955-01-25 212 Battling Jack Flood 204 19-15-2
Radio Center Arena, Huntington, West Virginia, United States W KO 7 0
1954-12-11 208½ Jimmy Walls 187 18-28-2
Hamilton, Bermuda W KO 2 0
1954-07-14 204 Tommy Jackson 190½ 16-2-1
Madison Square Garden, New York City, New York, United States W TKO 2 10
Jackson was down three times in the 2nd, triggering an automatic stoppage.

1954-05-22 Karel Sys 117-14-10
Palais des Sports, Brussels, Bruxelles-Capitale, Belgium W RTD 4 10
1954-03-12 211½ James J Parker 210 27-4-2
Madison Square Garden, New York City, New York, United States W UD 10 10
~ referee: Barney Felix 7-3 | judge: Arthur Schwartz 7-2 | judge: Jack Gordon 6-3 ~

1954-02-20 214 Archie McBride 184 19-6-0
Palacio de los Deportes, Havana, Cuba W PTS 10 10
1953-11-15 Heinz Neuhaus 28-1-4
Dortmund, Nordrhein-Westfalen, Germany W KO 4 10
1953-09-29 203 Matt Daniels 192 6-13-0
Tampa, Florida, United States W KO 2 0
1953-09-15 214 Charley 'Doc' Williams 198½ 44-15-1
Auditorium, Miami Beach, Florida, United States W UD 10 10
Williams was down in the 7th

1953-08-11 209¾ Ezzard Charles 191½ 78-8-1
Auditorium, Miami Beach, Florida, United States W UD 10 10
~ referee: Cy Gottfried 7-2 | judge: Morris Feingold 5-3 | judge: Gus Jacobson 5-3 ~

1953-07-18 207½ Omelio Agramonte 190¼ 44-20-0
Havana, Cuba W KO 10 10
~ Cuban heavyweight title ~

1953-05-21 211 Bob Baker 227 29-2-1
Radio Center Arena, Huntington, West Virginia, United States L PTS 10 10
1953-04-20 208 Billy Gilliam 207 28-15-2
War Memorial Arena, Johnstown, Pennsylvania, United States L SD 10 10
1953-03-11 209½ Archie Moore 180 136-19-9
Arena, Saint Louis, Missouri, United States L UD 10 10
1952-11-24 210½ Harold Johnson 176 37-5-0
Eastern Parkway Arena, Brooklyn, New York, United States L UD 10 10
Scoring: 10-0, 10-0, 8-1-1

 

Nobody worth getting upset about, that's for sure, and he's certainly not somebody anyone should take seriously when it comes to historical facts and/or opinions on boxing, as he's constantly making factual errors on his television show ('In This Corner' up here in Canada) and the radio spots he does.

For example, the last time I heard him speaking of something in the historical sense on boxing was last week on the radio, and to paraphrase what he said on that occasion;

"If he can manage the feat, Chris Byrd will be making history as the first fighter to ever win the heavyweight title and subsequently win the light heavyweight title afterwards."

 

I think Rocky was a well-managed, well connected, and well trained fighter. He was held back early on until he developed, got some close calls from the judges that could have gone the other way, peaked around the Joe Louis fight, then had enough left on the decline to beat older name fighters in Walcott, Charles and Moore.

For the most part, I think Rocky ended the " color line " and fought the best out there. He deserves credit for this.

I do think picking Charles over Valdez was the wrong thing for a champion to do. Valdez had beaten recentely defeated Charles and had the#1 ring ranking. Valdez was hot. Why pick Charles here? The Cockell fight to me was a wasted opportunity. Bob Baker or Tommy Jackson would have been better choices, but they were also more dangerous choices.

 

Valdes had lost the #1 ranking in The Ring and Charles had taken his place in that position at the time Marciano signed with Charles (I believe it was signed Apr 6th, 1954), and a lot of why that decision was made by The Ring had to do with Valdes' recent uninspiring and unimpressive performance against an unranked, Archie McBride, in Valdes' homeland, where Valdes could only manage a "very close", "narrow", and "unpopular split" decision against inferior opposition.

The newspapers from Mar 2nd, 1954 explain Valdes being dropped and the reasons for it happening.

 

Because Charles was the # 1 contender by mid 1954, not Nino Valdez. Valdez lost his # 1 ranking when he refused to rematch charles and was given a gift home town decision over journeyman archie mcbride, plus charles knocked out two hard punching contenders coley wallace and bob satterfield.

You call a hot fighter a man who lost 4 times in 1953? two of those losses to light-heavyweights? or a man who was given a gift hometown decision against journeyman level archie mcbride?

Kind of like holmes vs frazier seemed like a wasted oppertunity instead of holmes vs page? or scott frank instead of pinklon thomas? or how bout jeffries againt jack munroe instead of jack johnson or denver martin? or how bout gene tunney against tom heeney instead of george godfrey or jack sharkey?


After 1954, Weill and Valdez manager Gleason negotiated and decide to stage a bout between marciano and valdez in the winter of 1955 in Miami after they tested marcianos nose vs cockell in san fransisco in may. So the cockell fight was a tuneup for a mega fight between marciano-valdez or marciano-moore.


You have to remember 5 out of 6 marciano title defenses were against the # 1 contender. How many HW champs have consistently defended their title vs # 1 contender?

 

John Garfield if your listening in, you want to chime in about hurricane jackson? and his chances vs the rock?

 

Hold on. Valdes beat Charles in 8-11-1953, and won 10 fights in a row ( including wins over Jackson and Parker ) until he lost on 5-2-1955 to Archie Moore.

Vlades was #1 ranked for a while. Marciano had no business picking Chalres for a title defense on 6-17-1954! Chalres had lost to Valdes and Johnson in 1953. Clearly the right man to choose for th 6-17-1954 fight was Nino Vlades the #1 rated guy on a hot streak, not Ezzard Charles.

I think most here will agree with me.

 

I don't. How many times does someone have to point out that Charles regained the #1 ranking when Valdes turned down a chance to fight him in an elimination to fight Marciano. Satterfield substituted and Charles knocked him out. After finishing with Charles, Marciano should then have fought Valdes.

Charles' loss to Johnson doesn't prove much as it was disputed while Johnson had actually shut out Valdes a few months before.

Valdes stayed undefeated, but only Neuhaus and a young Jackson were ranked and neither was at that point considered an elite heavyweight.
When Valdes did eventually fight top men in Moore and Satterfield, he lost.

I agree with you that it is a legitimate criticism of Marciano that he fought Cockell instead of Valdes. Valdes had earned the shot.

On Charles, it should be remembered that many thought he was robbed against Walcott in their 4th fight, and also against Layne and Johnson, and that he deserved his shot.

 

I agree with Old Fogey. I have a feeling most will as well. You can lead a horse to the water, but you can't make it drink. Ill just leave it at that for Mendoza.

 

If Marciano had defended against Valdez instead of Charles he would have been picking the #3 contender over the #1 contender on the date the contract was signed and this in turn could have exposed him to criticism.

 

Guys for the record, I don't view Marciano fighting Charles or Cockell as a negative thing...whether they were hand-picked or otherwise. I can't think of any fighter who didn't take the easier option from time to time. Not that Charles was an easy option, but Cockell probably was.

 

Old Fogey thinks Charles who was 2-2 in his last four fights, and lost one of those fights cleanly to Valdes the #1 ring rated guy deserved a title a shot over the #1 ( Valdes ) who beat Charles, and won ten fights in a row! I disagree. He says Charles might have been robbed vs H. Johnson.

Counter point. Some felt Valdes was robbed vs Archie Moore. The lone ref and judge in the Valdes vs Moore fight was Jimmy Braddock. Garbage thrown into the ring after the decision was announced.