Who were the best punchers during Marciano's era?

Discussion in 'Classic Boxing Forum' started by SuzieQ49, Oct 14, 2011.


  1. TheGreatA

    TheGreatA Boxing Junkie Full Member

    14,241
    157
    Mar 4, 2009
    Out of the list Moore, Satterfield and Henry weighed 185 pounds and they have some of the best claims to being more dangerous punchers than Louis in the 1950s.
     
  2. SuzieQ49

    SuzieQ49 The Manager Full Member

    37,077
    3,733
    Sep 14, 2005
    Take a look at Ezzard Charles face after getting in the ring with Joe Louis. Take note that Louis won maybe 3-4 rounds at best, so he did not land many punches in the fight. Look at how much damage he did to Charles in the punches he did land...I mean Charles took a terrible beating. I doubt Satterfield, Henry, Moore could inflict damage like that.
    Marciano also sustained terrible facial damage. Beshore swelled up so badly the fight had to be stopped in 4. That 215lb of force behind Louis's punches, with solid technique, it had a ton of wear in tear on those 185lb fighters.


    [ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bHObXnwGXQ4[/ame]
     
  3. he grant

    he grant Historian/Film Maker

    25,429
    9,413
    Jul 15, 2008
    The damage Louis was able to do was with his jab which was still a decent weapon ... he lacked the speed to put power punches together and the legs to deliver the big right ... by the Charles fight it was only a memory ... Rocky himself said he was shocked at how Joe had nothing on his punches. He would not have made the same claim against the 1938 version ..
     
  4. Mendoza

    Mendoza Hrgovic = Next Heavyweight champion of the world. banned Full Member

    55,255
    10,354
    Jun 29, 2007
    Satterfield was very entertaining to watch. He really gave the fans their monies worth with his kill or be killed style. A true roll the dice type, Satterfield had power but lacked a solid chin. Charles waxed Satterfield in 2 rounds, but only after being shaken up by Satterfield in round one. I have that one on DVD.


    I never saw Henry vs. Satterfield, but Henry could hit some and Satterfield had trouble taking it. I think Henry hit a bit harder than Charles did, who laid Satterfield out in two.
     
  5. Mendoza

    Mendoza Hrgovic = Next Heavyweight champion of the world. banned Full Member

    55,255
    10,354
    Jun 29, 2007
    Louis lost his speed and snap on his punches in the 50's. I agree, Moore, Satterfield, and Henry hit harder than old Louis did in the 1950's.
     
  6. SuzieQ49

    SuzieQ49 The Manager Full Member

    37,077
    3,733
    Sep 14, 2005
    Your lucky day

    [ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z6sE9GSJT6c[/ame]
     
  7. SuzieQ49

    SuzieQ49 The Manager Full Member

    37,077
    3,733
    Sep 14, 2005

    Louis was a big guy at age 37, 6'2 215lb, he had about 35lb on all of those men. I can't fathom any of those men hitting harder in terms of raw force than Joe Louis.
     
  8. SuzieQ49

    SuzieQ49 The Manager Full Member

    37,077
    3,733
    Sep 14, 2005
    Well that jab better have been more than just decent if he was able to horribly bust up the faces of prime versions of ezzard charles and rocky marciano. I also doubt it was just the left jab that caused all that damage. Louis stunned Charles midway through the fight with a right hand(i think round 6?) and staggered Marciano with a left hook at the end of round 1. Bottom Line: When Louis landed, his punches left some severe physical damage.
     
  9. TheGreatA

    TheGreatA Boxing Junkie Full Member

    14,241
    157
    Mar 4, 2009
    I don't disagree that Louis could still hit hard if he landed right. But he wasn't that big of a punching threat by the 1950s. Doesn't deserve to make the top 5 if going by results and punching displays.
     
  10. Mendoza

    Mendoza Hrgovic = Next Heavyweight champion of the world. banned Full Member

    55,255
    10,354
    Jun 29, 2007
  11. he grant

    he grant Historian/Film Maker

    25,429
    9,413
    Jul 15, 2008
    Bottom line: The most effective weapon by far in the Charles and Marciano fight for Louis was his jab. Plain and simple.

    Bottom line: Rocky's own words. He was surprised how Joe had nothing on his punches.

    Revise history all you choose, those are the facts ...
     
  12. SuzieQ49

    SuzieQ49 The Manager Full Member

    37,077
    3,733
    Sep 14, 2005
    HEGrant so my question to you is why were Charles and Marciano's faces so badly busted up? I mean normal jabs don't do that kind of damage to peoples faces.
     
  13. he grant

    he grant Historian/Film Maker

    25,429
    9,413
    Jul 15, 2008
    Because Louis still had a good jab and Charles, while a great fighter was still just a blown up light heavyweight and Rocky , while a brute of a crusier , gave up nine inches in reach and hard to force his way in and took a ton of jabs .. again, just the facts .. imagine what a prime Louis would do to either ... as Mickey said to Rocky B., "Hurt em pirmenant !"
     
  14. Jear

    Jear Well-Known Member Full Member

    1,720
    12
    Jul 27, 2004
    Williams losses and lack of experience dont take away from the fact he was a top drawer puncher. He was virtually pulled from the crowd for the Satterfield fight and the Jones fight was coming off a ten round win over Simmons who was going the distance with Brion, Valdes and La Starza as well as 8 with Marciano.
    Big Cat may have been fighting 6 and 8 rounders but only the above mentioned Simmons, De Leon ( who went 8 before lasting a mere 2 in a rematch) and Agramonte (10 rounds, Also went 10 with Henry, Baker and Louis) lasted the distance
     
  15. SuzieQ49

    SuzieQ49 The Manager Full Member

    37,077
    3,733
    Sep 14, 2005
    GreatA,

    Marciano-Henry would have been a fantastic slugfest in 1951. Henry had a wicked left hook