Zora Folley how good is his resume?

"longevity and consistency"

Yes.

But what is the signature win? He defeated no rising or falling heavyweight champions. He defeated a young Foster, but then so did Jones and Mina.

I would say short of folks like Harry Wills, Harold Johnson, Elmer Ray, Rex Layne, Johnny Risko, Jim Maloney, Tommy Farr, etc. Folley has a lot of good wins, but no great ones, except possibly Machen, and Machen also failed every time against champions.

Folley fought to a good level, but failed to ever get that step up win. Might be bad timing, but losses to the likes of Cooper, Lavorante, and Jones leave a sense that he didn't have the extra something to rise higher.

 

It's better than Roy Harris's that's for sure.

 

Both Machen and Folley have great list of wins. Both finally got their title shots too late.

 

Well Folley was around with Liston, Ali, and Frazier. The early 1960's to early 1970's was a very tough time to stand out. I think he did enough to be a top 40-60 all time heavyweight on accomplishments.

 

Folley had a fine record. He beat a lot of contenders who never won a title themselves.

It's a better resume than someone like Andrew Golota, but not as good as someone like Ron Lyle or David Tua (who actually beat some guys who held world titles, although they never won a title themselves).

Folley was a fine fighter. But he was never the best heavyweight in the world. Neither were Lyle or Tua. Everybody can't be.

 

He had a lot of good wins and I believe I counted that he had been ranked by ring for a period of some 11 years. definitely a good career.

 

A solid proven contender. Better than a lot of challengers who did not have to fight elliminators like he did.

Ultimately I think when theres one undisputed champion guys like Folley suffer. If the champ fights only twice a year the division depends on contenders fighting one another. A defending champion feasts on left the overs a bit and can only really lose out when he becomes tired and rusty.

With a 1980s "alphabet belt" system guys like folley and machen would definitely have gotten more glorry but it would be less likely the best would have fought the best. The entire era would have been diluted even further than it was under the "inactive single champion" system.

 

Okay.

Cooper.

and possibly the close decision over Machen.

But taking a name from the past--Steve Hamas has a knockout of Tommy Loughran and a decisive win over Max Schmeling.

I would say Hamas' two biggest wins are more impressive than Folley's.

What Folley did is beat a lot of pretty good heavyweights over a longer period than most contenders.

 

If knocking out Henry Cooper is your signature win then it doesnt really go along way to say youve got this great resume.

 

The Great Folley defeated the Great Cooper whose best win was the Great Folley whose best win was the Great Cooper.

 

Another example of the whole era. You had the champions then you had a lot of guys who were prety equal.

 

If Floyd or Ingo would have fought him he likely would have one ..