Tony Zale's reputation as a cherry picker

"Bivins fell off dramatically after the war" As if Louis didnt. Bivins had a hell of a lot more in the tank in 51 than Louis did and still stank out the joint. Say what you want but in defending against Conn (who by the way had been waiting on a rematch with Louis since before the war) and Mauriello but both guys were more deserving of a shot than Graziano and Louis did eventually defend against the guy who beat Bivins. Your comparison holds absolutely no water.

Zale calculatingly took the low road in dodging the fights he did. Thats an indisputable fact and you can pretend that its no less damning because there was money behind his decision but the fact is that in fighting guys like Robinson and LaMotta he still would have made more money by far than he did prior to the war and he still could have done it AFTER defeating Graziano. And yes, the mob was involved in the decision making in those Zale-Graziano fights, I hope your book on Zale isnt going to ignore that fact Clay. In fact Mr. Gray's favorite hook for getting his fighters a shot was "you win the first one, he wins the second, and a the rubber match is on the level." Ive always wondered how convenient, and how exactly like Carbo's favorite script it was that Graziano gives Zale such a dramatic fight in the first only to lose, gets hammered in the second only to win in similar come from behind dramatic fashion, and then suddenly is an easy KO victim in the third.

Ive said it before and I'll say it again. Leon Thompson who served as Zale's chief sparring partner during this era and remained his friend for the rest of Zale's life lived 20 minutes from me and was a friend of mine. He told me himself that while he loved Zale and had all the respect in the world for him as a fighter he would have never beaten Sugar Ray or LaMotta at his best. He had seen both of those guys live and in person and knew them both, especially Robinson whose manager tried to sign Thompson. Thats coming from what most would consider a source biased in favor of Zale and speaks volumes, as does Zales own actions in continually looking the other way. The guy had nearly 20 fights after the war and only four of those fights were marquee matches. If he or his people were so confident of his ability they could have made a shitload of money in addition to what they made against Graziano by facing stiffer competition like a LaMotta or a Robinson.

 

I just don't have that much time right now for engaging in any debate on this subject in this forum, and really not that much interest. But, your comments have me curious. You're not really suggesting that one or more of the three fights between Zale and Graziano were fixed are you?

As for Leon's opinion, who knows he may be right. There's no arguing that Zale fought a whole bunch of no-name fighters after the war. But, then again, wasn't it Eddie "Bossman" Jones who served as a sparring partner for both Foreman and Ali and voiced the opinion just prior to their match that he didn't see how Ali had a chance of winning that contest? I'm not about to say that I believe Tony would have defeated Robinson but he obviously felt very strongly that he could have defeated him and was the source of the quote from Robinson about the latter having no desire to fight him. Everything I've come to learn about Zale's character leads me to believe Robinson really said that to him and Robinson was such an egotistical guy he doesn't strike me as the type that would have said that just to be nice. But, as I said, I have no wish to spend hours going back and forth on this thread. I believe the research we've done for this book is solid and am willing to let the folks who decide to read it judge for themselves.

 

Im not stating they were fixed because I have no proof they were fixed. I just find it suspicious that Graziano had mob ties who effectively leap frogged him into an undeserved title shot and that his performances in those three title fights exactly mirrors the deal Carbo always presented to maximize interest and get three fights for the price of one with the finale being on the level. Look at Graziano's record and you will see that outside of Robinson and Zale the guy's best MW win was over Sonny Horne. Every other big win came against a WW. At the championship level Graziano had four fights and lost three of them by KO. He was in fact one of the weaker MW champions and challengers despite his legendary status which was built more on style than substance. So yeah, I think those fights are bit suspicious coming how they did, when they did, and knowing that they were taking place right at the beginning of arguably the most corrupt period in the sports history with those exact people working behind the scenes on those fights.

I hear what you are saying about Zale, based on his reputation from friends of mine who knew him he was supposed to be a very nice guy and solid gold but thats hard to reconcile for me after reading some many of his quotes, several of which are pure bull**** so I take anything he says that builds his own image up while tearing someone else down with a grain of salt.

 

Well, then I think this would make for an especially interesting read for you and anybody else who similar questions and/or suspicions, and I'd be interested to learn your reaction afterward.

 

***

 

what book

 

Tony Zale, The Man of Steel. My co-author (Thad Zale) and I will be requesting proofs from the printer shortly. It will be available before year-end, hopefully as early as sometime in November.

 

Can't wait for the book Clay...Growing up as a youngster, reading and
speaking to oldtimers, Tony Zale was held in such high regard prior to serving 4 years in the Navy, that hopefully your book puts Zale in a truer
light as a great middleweight...

 

I dont recall ever mentioning Greb once on this thread. Thats you.

I did reply to your post originally and you got it pulled down. Dont blame me for your mistakes. When you answer every one of the questions I fired back at you I will respond.

But thanks for contributing absolutely nothing to the argument.

 

On another thread, I defended Sugar Ray Robinson for not fighting Charley Burley because of the latter was not much of a drawing card. But both Jake LaMotta and Sugar Ray Robinson were proven drawing cards during the 1940s, so Tony Zale certainly didn't have a valid excuse for not fighting them with his world middleweight title as stake. Moreover, it is hard to justify the fact that LaMotta and Robinson didn't get shots at the world middleweight title until 1949 and 1951 respectively.

- Chuck Johnston

 

I messed up posting the first time. Sorry. Why don"t you answer him and shut him up?

 

Me either. I was born in the 30s so did not see him, but have read a lot about him. I liked your book on Langford. It was one of the best biographies I have read the past 25 years or so. I wish someone would do a book on Bazooka Limon. He, along with Pipino Cuevas were the favorites of mine to go watch. Always exciting. They always had great fights and undercards in the LA arenas and I enjoyed a great boxing education watching them.

 

Another great duck job by you Klompton. Answer me where I and everyone can see the answer and don"t have yr cronies get rid of it. What are you afraid of if you believe what you say. You're a ducker. Quite hypocritical when you consider you malign the good names of two great fighters in Dempsey and Tunney (who somehow gets considered no good even though he fought Greb five times. Of course, only while conspring w? the rest of boxing {and history I might add}, to discredit the great Greb). You'll never answer because people will then see you are what this forum calls a nuthugger and are unrealisticly lifting up a man who needs no help. Just answer and as they say, "Shut me up".

 

I already did and when he couldnt come up with a rebuttal he got his own thread pulled down and pretended that i somehow did it (as if I have any pull on here with Mods at all). I couldnt care less what a troll has to say. If he has a legitimate complaint with anything Ive said then he can do what I always do and back it up with cold hard documented facts. He said my book had lies and fabrications. I asked him to show me one instance where I put a lie or a fabrication in my book and he couldnt. My book is as heavily researched and cited as ANY book written on any boxer EVER. Im not bragging it just is, if he can find something Ive stated incorrectly let him post it. Until then his opinion means about as much to me as flushed toilet paper.