Why is LaStarza a high rated name in Marciano's resume?

Tonto you seem very emotionally invested in tearing down Roland (and by extension - and by design of, I suspect, what ultimately is your agenda here - Rocky) and you're lampshading your bias quite a bit... so, know that probably most people are going to ignore your contributions here rather than be persuaded by them. Nobody said LaStarza was some underrated gem of a contender transferable into any era, nor that his record was all that spiffy - just that he was a decent fighter, who beat a lot of middling New Yorkers plus a few names that historians or fans of this HW era will have likely heard of without needing a specific concentration on the who's-who among C-range pugs of the day in this region. That's all. You whipping out the Rigorous Standard of Examination™ fine tooth comb to illustrate why LaStarza wasn't some mythical beast is unnecessary strawman - nobody said he was.

 

I've seen loads of fights from ringside and seen different fights when I've watched them on the tv screen. NB ,The fact that Lastarza wasn't anything special does in no way detract from his two time conqueror.

 

I've seen a few LaStarza fights and it's clear that he's a good technical boxer with good speed and power. He has an attractive looking style and he meets the eye test well. He made Rocky look quite bad for a while. He was definitely an upper drawer fighter and I think he'd do well in most eras.

 

Your questions are valid.

Because boxers from that era and their records aren't dissected like they are now.

Critics don't count the number of times someone back then was 'wobbled.' They didn't say "well, I scored it this way, so I don't give so-and-so credit for that win."

Most fans never saw a guy fight. They'd just read reports about him. If the reporter said he was good, he was good. If he lost to someone like Rocky Jones, then won the rematch, well, he looked good in the rematch. He's still good.

Now, if guy challenging for a world title lost to 14-9-2 Rocky Jones, the champ would be bashed. The org rating the guy would be bashed. The challenger would be ridiculed. Someone on social media would take clips from the Rocky Jones loss to put together an embarrassing video, and everyone would mock Roland endlessly for months. The other contenders would be screaming why did this guy who lost to Rocky Jones get a title shot? Every scrub who ever beat Rocky Jones would say, "I beat him easier than Roland." The champion would get no credit for defending against him.

If LaStarza didn't have a close fight with Marciano - which most people never saw either - when Rocky was on the way up, he wouldn't have received a title shot. There was nothing about him that was otherwise notable.

 

In fairness he was the #1 contender.

 

In fairness, no one today who lost to a 14-9-2 journeyman 10 or 11 months before a title shot would ever be rated #1.

The Ring ratings get bashed TODAY ... but even that would never fly now.

No one in the Ring top 10 - from 1 to 10 - today has ever lost to a journeyman, let alone the #1 contender. If they did, they'd be gone.

Hell, Oscar Rivas WON a close decision over a 13-0 fighter last time out and was removed from the current ratings.

 

That in no way shape or form is what happened there. You ...don't understand the context of that, do you?

 

Theoretically that shouldn't make a difference.

 

Yes, it is. Ring doesn't rate BRIDGERWEIGHTS. They didn't move Rivas to cruiser.

And the point is, nobody who lost to a 14-9-2 journeyman 10 months earlier would be ranked #1 by Ring now.

 

They happen to not have bridger rankings because the division is brand new, correct. It remains to be seen whether the division survives long enough to where they do.

Framing it as "he was removed from their rankings at cruiser as punishment for Rozicki having a 13-0 record" is disingenuous as hell and you know full well that isn't what transpired.

He isn't ranked at cruiser or heavy because he's the incumbent champ in a brand new division.

 

No.

Nobody recognizes the "brand new division" except the WBC.

Rivas was a top 10 rated heavyweight. His opponent was a novice cruiserweight. They fought at heavyweight. Rivas barely won. He got dropped out of the top 10 heavyweight ratings.

When there is a new division that RING DOESN'T RECOGNIZE, Ring continues to rate fighters in the divisions they recognize.

Before the Ring recognized cruiserweight, the cruiserweight champs were included in their heavyweight ratings.

Rivas was moved out of the top 10 because he barely won a fight against a 13-fight cruiserweight and he got bounced.

 

No.

Cite an official source with someone authorized to speak on behalf of Ring Magazine stating that as the specific reason why he is no longer in their HW or CW rankings, or quit spreading misinformation.

 

Doug Fischer Ring Ratings Transcript:

The Ring Ratings Panel had three weeks’ worth of debate on what to do with Oscar Rivas and Sandor Martin following their October victories, but there was no argument among the panelists on what to make of Shakur Stevenson’s 10th-round stoppage of respected beltholder Jamel Herring or Jaron “Boots” Ennis’ first-round blowout of experienced gatekeeper Thomas Dulorme.

Earlier in the month of October, Panelist Adam Abramowitz brought up Rivas, then the No. 9 rated heavyweight (ahead of No. 10 Joe Joyce), during the debate on whether to add Tyson Fury to the pound-for-pound rankings following the Ring champ’s dramatic stoppage of Deontay Wilder.

“I’m trying to figure out how we have Oscar Rivas above Joy Joyce at heavyweight, but that’s for another day,” Abramowitz quipped.

Gray, having heard similar opinions among fans on Twitter, put the question to the panel following Rivas’ 12-round decision over unbeaten (13-0) but inexperienced and unheralded Ryan Rozicki for the WBC’s new bridgerweight title.

“Question: Isn’t Oscar Rivas still considered a heavyweight by the other sanctioning bodies? Wouldn’t he be free to fight any of the other heavyweights if the opportunity came up? I don’t think we should disqualify him from the heavyweight rankings.

“Also, along the same lines as our drug testing policy, just because the WBC recognizes bridgerweight doesn’t mean we have to, at least for now.

Added Montero:

“Whatever we consider Oscar Rivas to be, I don’t think he’s a top-10 heavyweight at the moment. I agree with Anson that we could take Rivas out, move Joyce up, and add Hrgovic at No.10.

“Also, I’m not sure (No. 8-rated Michael) Hunter warrants a top-10 heavyweight rating at the moment either. In the last two years he beat Shawn Laughery and Mike Wilson. Meanwhile, Robert Helenius stopped Adam Kownacki twice.

“It’s worth considering pulling Hunter and adding Helenius.”

Added Gray:

“For a weight division designed to reduce unfair weight advantages, we ended up with a 20-pound weight disparity. You couldn’t write it. I agree with Anson and Michael on taking Rivas out at heavyweight, moving Joyce up and adding Hrgovic. “Rivas has had nothing significant at heavyweight in almost three years. I’d leave Hunter in for now.”

 

Nowhere does it say their decision was based on a lack of regard for Rozicki himself. Despite his inexperience he proved himself to be a pretty decent fighter at 13-0. Just as Lastarza proved against Marciano despite having not fought anyone memorable beforehand.

 

You asked for someone authorized to speak for the Ring Ratings ... and I quoted the EDITOR of Ring and the Ring Ratings Panel. And you say no. Not good enough.


LaStarza would never be rated #1 today after losing to a 14-9-2 journeyman months earlier.

RING RATINGS PANEL MEETING TRANSCRIPT:

“I’m trying to figure out how we have Oscar Rivas above Joy Joyce at heavyweight,” Abramowitz quipped.

Gray, having heard similar opinions among fans on Twitter, put the question to the panel following Rivas’ 12-round decision over unbeaten (13-0) but inexperienced and unheralded Ryan Rozicki for the WBC’s new bridgerweight title.

"Whatever we consider Oscar Rivas to be, I don’t think he’s a top-10 heavyweight at the moment."