Should Clarence Henry Have Gotten A Title Shot?

I guess the question would be when he was the outstanding contender, and which champion should have defended against him.

Perhaps his misfortune was to peak when the title was tied up with the Walcott Charles waltz!

 

Unless Im mistaken he never made it higher than 5th place in the NBA rankings which he won after beating Baker in late 1951. The title was tied up between Charles and Walcott until the middle of the following year by which time Henry had tumbled due to losses to Moore and Johnson. He was then inactive for nine months, took a gimme before beating Baker which helped his standing but then lost his next two fights and retired. Just bad timing more than anything but a strong case can be made that Walcott getting four tries at the title, three of those coming off of losses, was excessive and blocked young blood like Henry from being able to move up.

 

Pretty spot on do you have film of Henry?

 

I believe that after he knocked out bob baker in Madison Square Garden,he should have received a title shot Eliminator vs Marciano for the right to fight Jersey Joe Walcott in 1952

Henry’s management reached out to Al Weill in dec of 1951 and offered 40k guarantee for the winner to get the number 1 contender status. Since Marciano had already beaten Louis and Layne, Weill balked since Marcianos rating was secure. Instead, Weill took on semi retired steamboat captain Lee Savold. Did Weill duck Henry in 1952? You could say he did. However, Marciano didn’t need Henry. Henry needed Marciano


In late 1953, Henry once again became mentioned for a title shot after beating Baker in a rematch easily. However, by this point his eye sight was badly deteriorating from an injury and the following year in 1954 in a tuneup against Jimmy Slade, he lost. He was nearly blind by that point. He retired after his next fight. I believe that eye injury did cost him a title shot because marcianos camp was seriously considering him in 1954



I have film of Henry vs baker I and Satterfield. He was an explosive puncher, devastating left hook. He was very athletic, had fast hands, long arms, strong, he could really brawl. He was menacing on the inside. When he wanted too, he could box on the outside but he loved to go toe to toe because of his power. Dangerous fight for anyone.

 

Was he worthy of a title shot? Yes.

How did he do vs Common Marciano Opponents? 0-1, losing to Moore in 1952, which is the same year Marciano won the title.

Post 1952, Henry bounced back beating Baker in 1953, then lost twice in a row in 1954 and retired.

Had Henry beaten Moore, or had wins over say Walcott or Charles, he'd have a much better case. I'm going to say no based on his results while Marciano was champion.

 

Yeah, tough for Henry that he ran into Archie when Moore was pretty much at his peak. Then Henry ruined his eye sight shortly afterward. By 1954 he was legally blind

 

I dont blame any number one contender for not fighting guys below him once hes gotten his top spot. A contenders only responsibility is to fight the guys ahead of him to get to number 1. Once hes there his goal is the title and the obligation of the title holder is to fight the best available competition. Im not sure that was ever Henry although the picture at his time is artificially skewed because of the Walcott-Charles series.

 

Henry looked good going into January 1952 with a solid 1951 but lost to Harold Johnson (who Moore beat) in March of 1952, then Lost to Archie Moore (almost a shutout loss) in June of 1952 he then then lost 2X in 1954 He did beat Baker who Moore KO'd so from 1952 till 1954 Clerence lost 4 out of 8 fights

In 1951 Marciano fought 34-1 Rex Layne who was the favorite then KO'd Joe Louis in his pursuit of a title fight by the time he fought 81-3 Harry Matthews 7-28-52 Clerence Henry had picked up 2 losses. Marciano then fought Walcott for the title on 9/223/52 and gave him a rematch 5/15/53 he then gave rex LaStarza who was 53-3 and beat every man that beat him except for Marciano by then Henry was out of contention.

If anything looking at the career of Clerence Henry and Nino Valdez & Harold Johnson shows you how deserving Archie Moore was of a title shot and he was given one

 

Moores run at HW was definately impressive.

 

I am confused (not an uncommon experience, I'm afraid). Recently you gave Elmer Ray mucho props for defeating Lee Savold by 2nd round KO. Yet when Marciano fights him he is a "steamboat captain". Did Savold sail the Seven Seas before or after Lee KO'd him?