VIDEO: Bob Satterfield beats Nino Valdes

yes perhaps louis was at the stage where he could no longer knock out top men by 1951, unlike charles was when he fought marciano.

 

had charles got the rematch with nino we would have heard no more about him.

 

Layne was coming off a jaw-breaking KO loss to Marciano though and was never truly the same afterwards, not that he ever was truly great. But after the Marciano loss he could hardly buy himself a win.

I wouldn't say that Maxim or old Bivins were better. Gilliam beat Valdes (who was on a losing streak) by a split decision but I wouldn't say he was truly the better fighter of the two. Wallace was a disappointment of a pro, I certainly wouldn't favour him over Valdes but anything could happen.

Now Satterfield did beat Valdes but I believe that Valdes could have beaten the Satterfield who fought Charles. He was not fighting disciplined at all and was very wild and open while attacking. With Satterfield's brittle chin he could very well have been knocked out fighting like that.

All of these contenders were inconsistent and thus it's easy to find losses to inferior fighters on their records, but they could also beat anybody on any given night.

 

Entertaining but sloppy.
Its interesting that Jackson is described as being one of the biggest heavyweights of the time,he looks like a big Light heavy ,by today's standards.Jackson was mentally deficient,and had the mental age of a Lennie Small
Valdes got so close at times he smothered his own work,while Jackson's right hand was down to his waist, inviting the Cuban to land his right hand.
I wonder if part of the aura surrounding Valdes was his size?

 

Valdes looks sharper against Jackson, but he's still got some very awkward-looking "footwork". I mean, he makes Jackson's balance look on point in comparison, and Jackson's known for having the most "awkward" and incorrect style of them all !
Valdes just look off-balance most of the time, but I do believe he hit hard and he looks accurate with his punches when he has Jackson hurt. And Jackson was a big lanky guy.

Valdes has some good results on his record, and is spoken of highly by old-timers here in the UK at least. He came over to England and beat some of our best heavyweights, and terrified people who saw him sparring in the gym. I dont think the British heavyweights were great or anything. But Valdes was clearly a formidable contender and when he was right he was dangerous. Any suggestion that he was a real threat to Marciano seems off though. But I do think Al Weill was concerned and over-protective. He didn't really fancy taking on Valdes if he could take on someone smaller and more predictable (for example, an assumed "washed-up" Charles, or a Don Cockell).

 

Weill took the fight with Cockell as a tryout for Rocky's nose [split in the Charles fight].
Marciano ruined Cockell he was never the same after that fight.

 

I wouldn't say that there was any controversy about that stoppage.

 

My2Sense=Thanks for posting this.

I have seen this film in years. Valdes looks a lot better here, but I still think the last two knockdowns look more like pushes, although Valdes might have rabbit punched Jackson down the last one. Hard to tell. One thing, though, Jackson seemed to be recovering pretty well by the end. He did not look in real bad shape by any means and it also appeared Valdes was punching himself out. I wonder what would have happened if there had been no three knockdown rule. By far the best Valdes performance I have watched.

*Just as an aside, it is interesting to compare how the Gavilan-Bratton and Nardico-LaMotta fights from the same era were allowed to continue with a man helpless and not fighting back, but three knockdowns, a couple of which look like borderline pushes, ended this fight. I think they should have stopped the LaMotta fight earlier. This one could have been let go. Jackson could still defend himself.

 

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

 

I'd say it's entirely fair. Louis was certainly not better off against Marciano, he had only gotten older. You don't take into account that Louis had numerous exhibitions and many of those exhibitions were more like real fights. Prior to fighting Charles, Louis had massacred Pat Valentino (who gave Charles a fairly tough fight).

Film of the exhibition can be found here:

http://www.gettyimages.com/detail/mr_00025063/Archive-Films

Savold was equally as old as Louis was though. He was only rated number 2 because the British recognized him as the heavyweight champion due to an upset win over Bruce Woodcock. I can't see the Louis of 1951 beating Charles and he didn't either.

I've seen the Brion fight and Louis was easy to hit at that point and had also gotten very slow, far from what he had been at his peak. He was also backed up alarmingly easily and spent more time against the ropes than he should have. Brion was not an impressive fighter from what I saw.

Bivins was another equally as old fighter as Louis. He did not prove that he could deal with a young, rising prospect who could take the fight to him in the later rounds. He didn't have the power, he didn't have the speed and he didn't have the stamina.

 

Interestingly, Joe Louis knocked Nino Valdes out in the 1st round of an exhibition in 1950.

 

A decent win by Valdez, However Jackson was 16-2 and his 2 previous loses were to Archie Moore victims, Jimmy Slade and Bert Whitehurst

I would have loved to see Marciano/Valdez and I think Marciano wanted it but Nino was inconsistent, he lost 4 in 1953 and most felt he lost the Havana fight with Archie McBride, in the meantime Archie was on a 50 fight win streak ( marred with a DQ and a disputed decision that he avenged with a stop over Harold Johnson) 2 wins over Valdez a KO over Bob Baker a win over Clarence Henry and others.

Valdez lost an elimination to fight Marciano with his loss to Moore and then his final chance vs Satterfeild

Marciano fought his # 1 contender 5 times and his # 2 once (after a split nose)

Its funny but many of the all-time great gave shots to unranked fighters, including Ali, Holmes, Frazier after Ali 1 (Daniels and Stander)

Although Marciano only had 6 defenses, I think his record for fighting the best is up there at the top

Does anyone really think Marciano should have fought Nino over Archie and does anyone really think in retrospect that Nino was more of a threat than Moore.

I think Nino vs Marciano would have had some exciting moments but I do not see Nino (from these films and others) having the skill level, defense or the power of Archie Moore but It would have been a good notch on Marciano's record but because of Rocky being anxious to get away from Weil I think he made a better choice for his legacy in fighting Moore

 

"I'd say it's entirely fair. Louis was certainly not better off against Marciano, he had only gotten older. "

A year older and in much better shape. He had improved significantly in the second Brion fight and this is noted by the writers at the time. The differing circumstances regarding Charles/Valdez and Charles/Louis should be took into account and not held at face value. Are we to believe that Valdez remarkably improved after his losing streak against ranked fighters in a year's time or did he just benefit from catching Charles on a bad night? Hmmmmmm

"Savold was equally as old as Louis was though. He was only rated number 2 because the British recognized him as the heavyweight champion due to an upset win over Bruce Woodcock. I can't see the Louis of 1951 beating Charles and he didn't either."

-This is speculative and not really relevant to the point.

"I've seen the Brion fight and Louis was easy to hit at that point and had also gotten very slow, far from what he had been at his peak. He was also backed up alarmingly easily and spent more time against the ropes than he should have. Brion was not an impressive fighter from what I saw."

-Neither was Tommy Jackson. Jackson stopped the faded used and absused Layne but Brion was by all accounts robbed against a prime rising Rex Layne. Also Brion was a phyiscally powerful 6'3" who hovered in the 195-200+ lb range most of his career, only backing up Louis in the early rounds of the rematch before getting busted up.


Dawson wrote:
“Plunging and tossing like a rudderless ship, Rex Layne, Lewiston, Utah, heavyweight, somehow or other managed to gain a decision over Cesar Brion, from the Argentine, in ten dull rounds of fighting at Madison Square Garden last night. And if there is any consolation in a moral victory, Brion has it. A crowd of 5,768 booed the verdict and it was plain that many, if not the majority, thought Brion had won.”

"Bivins was another equally as old fighter as Louis. He did not prove that he could deal with a young, rising prospect who could take the fight to him in the later rounds. He didn't have the power, he didn't have the speed and he didn't have the stamina."

I guess the same could be said for Valdez than.

 

I wouldn't say in "much better shape". He beat Brion clearly in both fights and was not overly impressive in either fight against a man he would have easily stopped at his peak.

Valdes claimed it was his best ever fight, Ring Magazine named him the "progress of the year" and he didn't go onto lose in almost 3 years after that. It's possible that he did learn from his losses.

Not speculative when it's the truth. Savold was as old as Louis, he achieved his ranking due to upsetting Bruce Woodcock whom the British wanted to recognize as the champ and Louis did lose to Charles. I don't see what's speculative about that. A win over Charles is better than a win over Savold.

To Jackson's credit he had also beaten Clarence Henry who was one of the top contenders of the era. After losing to Valdes, he went onto beat Ezzard Charles, Bob Baker and gave Floyd Patterson a tough fight. He was once the number 1 ranked heavyweight contender in the world. Brion was a fringe contender. I'd say that Jackson was a level above Brion.

Valdes at the very least had stamina and strength and he was naturally bigger than Louis. Now I do not think Valdes would have done any better against Marciano than Louis, possibly troubling him early and being stopped late, but fighting old Louis is not the same as fighting Valdes. Is Marciano's only claim to having fought a world class big man fighting an old Joe Louis?