Should Valdes Have Got His Shot?

I'm struggling to see how anyone you mentioned outside of out of shape Charles was relevant

And no it wouldn't have been a bigger gate. I didn't think this was even debatable. Cockell was a bigger draw.

 

Sure thing McVey

Charles was well out of his prime weight and looked sluggish. Just look at boxrec the proof is there.

Cockell was a no hope but he was still infinitely more popular than Valdes, who, let's be honest, also would've been viewed as a no hope.

 

He was also out of shape for the Wallace fight. The reports were saying Ezzard Charles had finally regained his youth after a long grey period after the Satterfield win.

Valdes had no chance against Marciano. When Marciano retired the papers wrote "there are no worlds left to conquer of boxing's Caesar". "No challenger worth anything remains for Marciano."

 

I don't see it a s a big deal to be honest.

It is perfectly plausible that the timings just weren't right.

 

Literally 5 of Marciano's 6 title defenses were against the #1 challenger what are you on. Who cares. Valdes was inconsistent and had bad timing. Are you claiming Marciano dodged Valdes?

https://boxrec.com/media/index.php/Ezzard_Charles_vs._Bob_Satterfield

Read the goddamn report. Ezzard Charles was looking better than he had in a while.

This content is protected

"It's a new Ezzard going into the ring. A smooth tiger who isn't phased by the jinx."

You have both McVey's typing style and Dunning Kruger personality. Welcome back

 

The referee and sole judge gave Moore eight of the 15 rounds ... meaning it was a close fight.

The Associated Press had the fight even after 14 rounds.

It was also staged in Las Vegas - instead of a major fight town, where the eliminator for the heavyweight title could be televised.

Since it was held in a baseball park in the Vegas desert, it wasn't televised anywhere. So the only people who could complain about the verdict had to be someone who bought a ticket.

In a time when boxing was on every national network three or four times a week in prime time, the IBC stages a heavyweight eliminator in a desert where nobody can watch it on TV.

Valdes was so upset with the verdict, according to the NY Times, when the referee raised Moore's hand (no scoring was announced) at the end of the fight, Valdes stomped around and collapsed on the floor in disgust.

 

Let us look at the rankings of Marciano's title opponents on the day that he fought them.

Jersey Joe Walcott Champion

Jersey Joe Walcott #1

Roland LaStarza #1

Ezzard Charles #1

Ezzard Charles #1

Don Cockell #2

Archie Moor #1

That is as good as it gets for a champion who manages more than a couple of successful title defenses.

It is a shame that Valdez did not get a title shot at some point, but is it perhaps asking perfection of Marciano?

 

Great post, how many HW champions can say that they faced first contender in 5 of their 6 defenses? Very few, saying that Rocky ducked Valdes is like saying that Lewis ducked Byrd, it's completely unreasonable.

Just because you believe that at some point there was one contender better than the one Rocky fought doesn't mean he had to fight him. Again, it was the case only once in 6 defenses. You can argue that second Charles defense wasn't necessary, but then people would say that he ducked him because he couldn't KO him.

 

OK, then to return to your original question, should Marciano have defended against Valdez?

Give us the three w's.

When, where, and why?