Zale gave Jake a miss and opted for Graziano

All good points.

One thing I do wonder is how badly Zale would've been beaten if he HAD fought Burley or Lamotta at that time?

 

No we can't, because the rankings don't say what the fighter's actual form was at the time of them. As you yourself noted, Zale was clearly past his prime in the years following the war, despite the fact that he was rated either the champion or #1 contender in that time. The rankings also don't tell us that many people thought Belloise was robbed in his first title shot at Ken Overlin in 1940, the Ring's #1 ranked fighter at the time.

Besides, all you did was pull one random ranking from each year anyway. What was his ranking in October '40 for example, after probably his biggest career win over Ceferino Garcia? (who had been rated #1 by the Ring only a few months earlier)

He'd already been KO'd in 1 round by the newly reigning champion only the year before.

He'd already been beaten soundly by both the fighters rated over him, and also the one rated just under him, over the past couple years.

The #1 contender was already overdue for a title shot by that time, and had beaten Machen the year before on top of that.

There was no time in that frame when Machen could seriously be considered a deserving title challenger.

Why shouldn't I? Those people saw them fight first-hand, and saw when their prime was. Who is more qualified to say when a fighter is/isn't at his best than that?

Nothing. Again, he actually SAW him fight at that time and SAW what his form was; you only looked at something else and made a guess as to what his form might've been.

You could make a fuss about the Ring's history of corruption as well if you wanted.

But he WAS fighting his #1 contender.

The Ring is not the one with the authority to sanction title fights or mandate challengers; that's the sanctioning body. On top of which, the NBA (not the Ring) is the one that was given credence in most newspaper reports of the day. Whether or not you "agree" with the rankings doesn't matter; the fact is, that's what the rankings were, and the NBA is the one with the authority to enforce its rankings.


In saying that Zale shouldn't have fought Rocky, you're saying that he should've openly DEFIED -
1. his sanctioning body
2. the writers
3. the fans
- all for the sake of satisfying some folks on a boxing board 60 years in the future.

When has something like that ever been expected of a champion?

 

1. The reports from the time that clearly state so.
2. The fact that roughly 40,000 of those fans filled the stadium and paid a combined $342,497 to see the fight.
3. The fact that the fans wagered heavily on Graziano and made him a solid betting favorite.

You tell me. I've yet to come across anything that describes any great outcry among fans for Zale fighting Graziano instead of someone else, nor did any of LaMotta's or Burley's fights draw the kind of attendance this one did.