Top 10 Middleweights of the 1950's

Don't get me wrong, Turpin’s unorthodox style would always disrupt Robinson rhythm and frustrate; however Ray proved in the rematch that, even if ever so slightly, he was a step ahead of his rival.

My point wasn’t that Turpin wasn’t a top class fighter or that he didn’t deserve credit for the Robinson win; it’s simply that much of his legacy is based on a single performance. Robinson’s name value adds more to the victory than warranted, IMO; he'll always be top three pound for pound (numero uno for me) but even the best are vulnerable. As I said, the Humez and Yarosz wins are excellent as well, but are they greater than Mims’s victories over Hank, Webb, and Benton? Or Giambra’s two decisions over both Giardello and Castellini as well as his years spent campaigning as a contender? Not in my book.

 

the key point here is that Turpin, based in England, never really got the opportunity to take on the wealth of contenders in the US as once he had that win over SRR, what would be the point in taking on the likes of Giambra and Webb. I do understand your stance, just dont necessarily agree with it. :good

 

No? Who exactly would you put over him?

 

Bobo Olson
1951Lloyd Marshall wko5
52Walter Cartier wko5
Robert Villemainw10
Gene Hairston wko7
53 GarthPanter w10
Paddy Young 15
Randy Turpin w15
54Kid GavilanW15
Rocky CastellaniW15
Garth Panterwko8
Pierre Langlois wko11
55Joey Maxim w10
Tiger JonesW10
Joey Giambra w10
57 Joey Maxim w 10
Joey Giambra w10
58 Paddy Young w ko 6
59 Rory Calhoun w 10

These are winning fights for Olson during the decade ,I think they put him over Fullmer ,during the 50,s,Fullmer for acheivment top 4 for ability , as you specified, in the lower half of the top 10

 

Head to head ,prime for prime I think Turpin beats Fullmer,I beleive he would be strong enough to battle inside with the Mormon and that his straight left would find the mark and pile up points ,whether Turpin ,s fragile mentality would enable him to keep it together for 15 rds ,I dont know, but I think he has the tools to do it,plus he had good power.

 

Gene Fullmer:

Ray Robinson x2
Carmen Basilio x2
Spider Webb x2
Tiger Jones x2
Charles Humez
Rocky Castellani
Paul Pender
Florentino Fernandez
Gil Turner x2
Del Flanagan
Kid Paret
Joe Miceli
Chico Vejar

I prefer Fullmer's list. And if Olson was knocked out by Robinson in four (the same Robinson Fullmer would then beat), then I can't see him drawing with Giardello or Tiger either.

 

Five of Fullmers scalps were over welter weights ,six if you count Basilio,Olson had two wins over maxim on his resume a top LH,Fulmers draw with Giardello was in his back garden ,both blamed the other for the buttfest that took place ,Fullmer refused to fight Giardello again,have you read the accounts of the Fullmer draw with Tiger? Fullmer tried to box ,Tiger wrote a piece in the BI,saying Fullmer tried to steal the title rather than win it.

 

Why pick apart Fullmer's career? I can do the same to Olson; like saying how his best middleweight scalp - Marshall - was effectively 'shot' by the time he fought Olson.

But anyway, I based my ratings on ability. Being knocked out in four by a past prime Robinson does not bode well for Bobo. Fullmer beat that same Robinson a few months later. Neither does his knockout loss to Pat McMurtry. As I said, I can't see Olson doing as well as Fullmer did - but I can see him doing as well as Olson did, and better.

 

Im not picking apart Fullmer Im comparing his resume to Olsons ,you gave me 13 namesthat Fullmer beat ,5 of them were welter weights 6 if you count the 32 and 33 year old Basilio,getting kod by Mcmutry isn a disgrace Mcmutry fought with success all the way up to heavy.Id say Olson best middle weight scalp would be Turpin,and 2 wins over Maxim match 5 over welters. Fullmer acheived a great deal,especially as he didnt do anything particularly well he wasnt much of a boxer ,or a big hitter ,but he was very very strong and durable,he rabbit puncher the **** out of Robinson,billy goated Giardello ,but he got the most out of what he had,I just think Olson should be above him during the 50s,you asked ,I replied finis.

 

Well I think you'll find you are quite alone with regards to your placement of Olson over Fullmer. It's understandable... After all, you're an old man. Probably going senile.

 

Being alone in my opinions doesnt worry me overmuch I rate Johnson no 2 at Heavyweight ,not exactly the consensus,compared to you I am an old man,and possibly going senile,but I still have the good manners to listen to your point of view without insulting you ,just because I disagree with it. You write some interesting posts on boxing ,a subject you obviously find absorbing,but its possible you arent quite the doyen of pugilism you appear to beleive you are,when I firstr read your efforts ,it was all Duran this and Duran that,that got superseded by Ike Williams,so I found myself in the unusual position of agreeing with you,the next "flavour of the month" was Carlos Ortiz,,who is it next ,I wonder? One advantage of being old is that I grew up watching these guys on the Saturday fight of the week,during the 50s and 60s,so I have had time to form a permanent opinion of them, as you will .Age doesnt have to bring wisdom,but it does make you less likely to get the hump when callow youth rears up because you disagree with it,dont dissapoint us on this forum you have a lot to offer, leave the insults to the numpties.

 

extremely crass

 

Oh, how I love winding people up :smooch

 

You havent wound anybody up ,but I think you have shown somebody up,take a guess who.