VIDEO: Bob Satterfield beats Nino Valdes

You aren't really saying anything that I haven't already responded to several times during this thread.

You're using hindsight but we're talking about early 1955 and before that, when Valdes went unbeaten for 2 years with wins over notable opposition and was generally recognized as the number 1 contender. The big chance to fight Valdes was when Marciano's management chose Cockell, a blown up light heavyweight, over him, despite stating that Valdes was probably the better choice of the two.

Baker and Valdes were among the best. Valdes admitted that he had troubles with smaller, faster men but this is not definitive proof that Marciano would have had an easy time with him.

If we go by Marciano's two most significant fights against "big" opponents, against Johnny Shkor he was having some struggles with Shkor's strength early on, and keep in mind that this was a trialhorse who was coming off a one round KO loss to Walcott and retired after losing.

Against Louis, the fight was close to even after 6 rounds, with Louis doing good work solely with the left jab, until Louis gradually wore down. It's possible that Valdes would have given him some rough moments, especially at the time of the Cockell fight, Marciano's least impressive performance.

Marciano only fought one world class opponent who was over 200 pounds, and that was old Joe Louis. Thus there are legitimate questions about how he would have done against 6'3, 210+ lb, 80" reach opponents. Had he fought Valdes, Baker there would be less questions if we saw him on film beating them down.

 

1. Dempsey and the tournament--Well, Charles was willing and in fact fought Satterfield in an elimination. Valdes balked.

This excerpt from a column by Morris McLemore from the Miami News on 12-17-1953 (and remember this is Valdes' hometown paper and by a writer who we can assume saw from ringside the Valdes-Charles fight) the day after the Charles-Wallace fight.

"Today's question, however, does not concern Wallace. Specifically it concerns the chances Charles has of appearing against Marciano or---and he no doubt would prefer this---his chances of meeting the careening Cuban, Nino Valdes, in a return fight. Valdes was awarded a decision here last August chiefly because Charles couldn't lift his hands high enough to swat him.

Valdes won that one, however, and Bobby Gleason is too smart a potato to let the caramel fellow go against Charles again. So that leaves Marciano about the only possible opponent for Ezzard. Gleason will bellow about that but subside when promised a later opportunity, if getting one's tiger beaten to a pulp by Marciano can be termed an opportunity.
Wallace was no competition for Charles, unless the television was a complete liar. If Charles---a candid sort---was in fine fettle he claimed after the match, however, very likely he's the only living heavyweight capable, with a tailwind, of outspeeding Marciano long enough to vex him.

Valdes will be knocked stiff as a laundered shoelace by Marciano and I can't see any reason to expect Rocky will do less to Danny Nardico, the Tampa native with plenty of nerve, a good right hand, and local influence."

2. Gleason on fighting the #1 contender---Marciano did. The #1 contender in the summer of 1954 was Charles.

3. Weill's interview with the Miami paper---Well, it is no big surprise that Valdes would draw better in Miami. Would he draw better anywhere else? Note that Weill says he is willing to fight Valdes as well as Cockell.

4. NBA rates Valdes top contender---So. The NBA was a collection of State Athletic Commissions from the boondock states. The NBA was a subsidiary member of the World Boxing Committee, which was chaired by the head of the New York State Athletic Commission, and was certainly the top international organization. In November, two months after this, that organization rated Cockell and Valdes on equal footing.

5. Gleason's money demands--If you buy this smokescreen, you buy it. Tommy Loughran fought Jack Sharkey for free in 1933 to get his shot. Jersey Joe Walcott fought Lee Oma at a loss (yes, to meet the guarantee Walcott's manager had to turn over $4500 to Oma) to move into position to challenge Louis. Valdes wanted $40,000. Why not ask that they throw in the Hope diamond as a sweetener?

 

He fought the best, not the biggest but by Valdes record vs small men and Marciano being the best of them, I fear my guess would be that Valdes would not have down well. Coming up Marciano fought the 6"4 Vingo and Vingo was a good fighter at that level of their careers. Marciano fought the slick, fast pinpoint punchers and for that small period of time that Nino shared the number 1 spot he was always behind Moore for a title shot.

I guess Marciano wanted to fight the best and did not expect some guy named Big A to question that because he should have fought the biggest who lost to most of the small heavyweights he fought.

I wonder if you pick hairs with all of the ATG's or are you selective

 

1. Financial demands---well, Morris McElmore in Nov of 1953 predicted that Gleason would avoid Charles and wait. Whatever else is said, his prediction was right on. Gleason wanted $40,000, a huge amount for a fighter who drew 4500 fans for an elmination with Jackson. He wasn't going to get it and knew it. And what was his bargaining chip? If Charles doesn't give Valdes basically the entire purse and fight for nothing, Charles will get the shot at Marciano for the title while Valdes keeps fighting backwater fights for chickenfeed. I am certain that scared the crap out of Ezzard and his management.

2. The Charles fight was more impressive than any single Cockell win, but I would say the LaStarza win and the wins over Harry Matthews were probably next in line. Jackson was a newcomer and hadn't had 20 fights yet. He was the #5 contender, but LaStarza and Matthews had been rated higher. Seeing Jackson as the better fighter is mainly hindsight, based on what happened in 1955 and 1956.

3. Charles had lost to Valdes and Johnson--Johnson beat Valdes much more decisively. I don't see the Johnson loss as that much of an issue. Charles was an ex-champion with scads of big victories over the years. Valdes' only real claim is that he upset Charles. Avoiding a rematch took most of the wind out of his sails, though.

4. Turpin was a pretty formidable fighter prior to ruining his career with drugs. He defeated Robinson badly, and showed pretty strongly in the rematch until caught in the tenth. Although a third fight was considered a probable million dollar gate, Robinson wanted no part of it despite the public clamor. Cockell had won 10 in a row. He had won 20 out of his last 22 going back to 1950, ten by knockouts. In his last 22 fights, also going back to 1950, Valdes was 17-4-1 with 11 knockouts. Charles was a bigger win than any by Cockell, and Cockell was less durable, being stopped by Slade and Turpin. Both though were rated fighters. Valdes had fought a draw with nobody Joe McFadden in 1952 and had lost to the marginal Bill Gilliam. He had beaten Charles, Jackson, and Neuhaus, but Jackson was still pretty unproven. I would give Valdes a slight edge if judging from early 1955, but these two were closer than some would admit. Having seen highlights of Cockell against Turpin, he showed much more skill than Valdes. Cockell was a solid boxer. He had been a rated lightheavy in 1950 and 1951 when Valdes was a preliminary fighter, and had been the European and British Empire lightheavy champion. The London Times mentioned in their preview of the Marciano fight, that Cockell was in fact undefeated as a heavyweight. The Times did not think he would win, but thought him a worthy challenger.

5. As for Cockell being a former lightheavy, a common criticism, so was Satterfield, who beat Valdes. Moore and Johnson, who beat Valdes, were still lightheavies. Charles, Valdes' big win, was also a former lightheavy. Going back to 1892, Corbett, Fitz, Burns, Dempsey, Tunney, Schmeling, Braddock, and Charles among the champions, and Langford, Greb, Walker, Loughran, Conn, Johnson, Moore, etc, among the contenders were either former lightheavies or still lightheavies, or even former middles. The fact is the really big fellows lost more often than not to these former lightheavyweights. Observers in 1954 or 1955 would simply not have put a fighter down for being a former lightheavyweight.

 

:good:good:good

 

Indeed.

 

:goodexactly. this is a modern argument only.

 

I would have liked to see Marciano fight Valdez instead of the light touch Cockell. It's obvious his management felt they needed a light touch to see if his nose would hold up ... people forget just how serious a cut it was and the concern if it would ever fully heal ... of course Nino would have posed a far different challenge than any match up we saw and no one knew this better than Weil ... that being said, he fought Cockell, the light touch , instead of the much better Valdez whose stock was high at the time .. still, other than the Cockell fight, Rocky did fight the best out there .

 

1. WBC ratings--Thanks for finding this. I stand corrected. You guys are teaching this old dog a thing or two about googling. Keep up the good work.

2. This article you pointed out, while rating Valdes #1, did indicate that the IBC would recognize a title fight between the champion and any of the top three contenders.

3. "Turpin was only a great middleweight"--so was Harry Greb who had defeated Tunney badly, and so was Mickey Walker who fought a draw with Sharkey a year before Sharkey won the title.

4. Turpin ko'ing Cockell--Watching Cockell, his big weakness was durability. He looked like he had real skill and talent, but he sure seemed chinny, and he also cut frequently. Valdes' big edge was in being more durable.

5. I'm not certain how the Jackson fight was viewed. Valdes gets an edge for stopping him, but the KO, at least to my eyes, is a little flukey. Jackson was hurt, but he looked like he was pushed down a couple of times. As for LaStarza, he was #4 at the end of 1953. I don't know his exact rating on the day of the Cockell fight, but he had beaten every opponent he had fought up to that time except Marciano, and was one fight past being the #1 contender. Matthews was rated #8, I believe, when he fought Cockell the first time. He had an even more interesting record. His only loss since 1943 had been to Marciano. Beating him did make Cockell a contender off Nat Fleischer's report of the fight. As for Jackson, Bucceroni was a very impressive win, although LaStarza had proven himself better in their one-sided rematch. Layne was losing fight after fight by this time, including total blowouts to Walls, and Henry was coming off a loss to Slade and immediately retired with an eye injury. Norkus was a journeyman, not as highly considered as Cockell victim Johnny Williams. Jackson was a legitimate #5 contender, but I think there were still plenty of questions about his true stature.

6. My bottom line would be that Cockell was certainly a hard sell, with the bad losses in 1951 to Slade and 1952 to Turpin, but Valdes was not much better. I don't think the Jackson fight really proved he was top level. His reputation rested heavily on the Charles fight, which was somewhat undercut by Valdes skirting a rematch. A draw in 1952 with Joe McFadden, a loss to Bill Gilliam in 1953, a disputed decision against the journeyman Archie McBride in 1954, plus losses to Moore, Johnson, and Baker in 1953, and none reversed. I would hate to be the promoter trying to sell Valdes to a skeptical public.

7. Moore was beyond debate the real #1 contender, with Harold Johnson close behind.

 

The relentless regurgitation of "Weill was afraid of Valdes because he was so big" has not been backed up in my opinion with any facts.

1. The articles printed have Weill saying he was willing to fight Valdes as well as Cockell.

2. The Budd Shulberg article from 1955 indicates Weill was actually pushing for a fight with the equally big Baker who had beaten Valdes and would again.

While posters have been stating Weill's intentions as if they were his closest confidants, no one has offered evidence, let alone proof, of claims that Weill feared Valdes.

3. I think there is more evidence Weill feared Moore (for good reason) than that he feared Valdes or Baker.

 

Well if we are really splitting hairs I guess we would have to go back to the period in time where Valdes could have really been considered a title threat and lets focus on that time frame and the decision to fight Charles instead.

Lets start at the end of 1952, and compare the 2 leading up to the decision to fight Charles

From 11-2-1952 to 2-20-1954 ( the 2nd Archie McBride fight) Valdes fought 10 times with a record of 6-4 and because of the disputed victory over McBride ( remember Mcbride had already beaten Valdes when McBride was 9-1)

arguably Nino lost his luster in a fight that was perceived as a hometown decision but his last 10 or lets go back a victory to his last 12 fights and Valdes was 7-4-1 (with the disputed win over Mcbride) his total record at that time was 26-9-3 but Nino up till the disputed win over McBride was 7-4-1 and the critcal point of time was the begining of 1954 because thats when the decision was made for the 6-17-54 title fight Marciano/Charles

Now lets look at Charles record at that point in time from 10-8-1952 Ezzard Charles had only 2 losses in 13 fights for a record of 11-2-0 but Charles overall record was 83-10-1

Now I am trying to focus on that time period

NOW Nino's big win over Tommy Jackson did not take place until 7-14-1954 and that was after Marciano and Charles fought for the 1st time

Nino had lost to Gilliam, Baker,Moore,Johnson but he had a close victory over Charles, beat Omelio Agramonte and Hein Neuhas

Charles lost a close decision to Nino and a disputed decision to Harold Johnson but beat Bernie Reynalds,Jimmy Bivins,Ceasar Brion,Rex Layne,Billy Gilliam,and two explosive KO's one at the end of 1953 12-16-1953 over Coley Wallace and a blistering KO over Bob Satterfeild

So at the beginning of 1954 when the decision was made to fight Charles over Valdes, Charles record from in his last fight of 1952 to February of 1954 was 11-2

lets even go one fight further for Valdes and take the end of 1952 until 3-12-1954 and give the win over James Parker, Valdes was 7-4

Now this point in time was critical because that was where the decision was made to fight Charles over Valdes

Marciano went on to fight Charles, Marciano won clear but combative decision and Charles, a former World Heavyweight Champ put up a gallant effort in a war
a rematch was a natural and we all know bout the split nose

so Ninos big win over Tommy Jackson was 7-14-1954 and the rematch with Marciano/Charles was set for 9-17-1954 so we have to assume the rematch was set at that point. Marciano had the split nose accident and Moore and Valdes had to fight to decide who would challenge Marciano

Moore was light heavy Champ but had already beaten Valdes and 3 of the men that had beaten him. Valdes was a top Heavyweight contender but at that point in time was on a 50 fight win streak (marred by a DQ and disputed decision over Johnson who he stopped in a return. Everyone one KNEW MOORE should be 1st in line for a title shot but its not like Marciano was sitting back he was busy fighting a tough rematch

Because of Marciano's busy schedule and injury and the fact that Moore vs Valdes 2 was set for 5-2-1955, Marciano fought his # 2 contender Cockell

even if Nino was available and Marciano fought him before Moore there would have been a clammer and Ninos big victory over Jackson was not until 7-14-1954 but he still did not surpass Archie for deserving a title shot.

Marciano was due a tune-up fight because of the nose and Moore/Valdes fighting for elimination

The point I am trying to bring out is even if in that short window in time that Valdes beat Jackson and made himself worthy, Archie was still 1st in line
The elimination fight between Moore and Valdes was 10 months after Valdes big victory over Jackson

So your argument could be that Marciano could have fought Valdez instead of Cockell, and then bypassed Moore

When Moore beat Valdes the 2nd time in 5-2-1955, Marciano was ready to fight the winner 9-21-1955

There was a small window from Valdes 7-14-1954 victory over Jackson and the elimination between Moore and Valdes. Marciano was ready 4 month later and beat Moore.

Marciano wanted to fight Nino and they gave Nino a fight with Satterfeild 8-17-1955 and in that fight he was dropped and lost badly so that killed any Big $ market for Marciano Valdes and with no one left to fight Marciano walked away from victory # 50

Times of events are important here

Great A

Do you see where you are really picking hairs

Do you see where your argument is weak

 

Again, Moore vs Valdes 2 was set only after the Marciano-Cockell fight was made because both of them were left out despite being more deserving than Cockell.

 

"he seems to have been in much higher regard than Matthews"

A very debatable view. Ring Magazine actually rated Matthews as the "best all around fighter" p4p for 1951, replacing Sugar Ray Robinson. He had been ranked the #1 lightheavy contender over Moore for a while. Matthews had lost only to the reigning heavyweight champion, Marciano, since 1943, and in his whole 20 year career lost only to five men, one an experienced journeyman when he was 17, the other four were Marciano, and top five contenders Jack Chase, Eddie Booker, and Cockell. Matthews never lost to any but top men except for the loss to Burke at 17.

As for Jackson, you might view him as great fighter or prospect, but there were plenty who thought he was a joke. Here is A J Liebling in THE SWEET SCIENCE. I substituted Jackson's name for a description of Jackson which would offend a modern reader:

". . . if (Jackson) could beat even a fair fighter, it meant that two hundred and fifty years of painfully acquired experience had been lost to the human race; science was a washout and art a vanity, and Freddie and Whitey had queered thier own game."

Ouch. Hardly a description of a respected fighter. A few years later, Jackson's inept performances in 1957 against Patterson and Machen led to his being banned in major American boxing venues.