Zora Folley how good is his resume?

1. I can't help you with that one. If you don't feel Pastrano won, of course you don't personally rate it as a great win. But for the people who feel he won...

2. A) And Johnson had won about 20 in a row. I think Jones, Machen, and the like are better wins than the guys Charles beat in that 10 fight tour.

2. B) Disagree. Its been well noted Charles showed up in bad shape and gassed after dominating Valdes for the first few rounds. Valdes' win had so many question marks, Charles was still seen as the outstanding contender and better fighter after the loss. You are trying to make it out to be an ultimate victory, it was not. Nobody thinks Valdes was a better fighter.

3. Charles had a superior overall career but that's the measure of a win.

4. Yeah, your opinion. But overall, Pastrano got the more unique win against an all time Champion.

 

1. Late 50s and early 60s.
2. I think that fight signalled the end of Johnson's prime.
3. No worse. I think Charles putting up such a good fight against Marciano was that one last good fight all greats have in them after they are past their expiration date. And frankly I think Charles is monumentally overrated to begin with but thats for a different discussion.
4. Yes and yes. Ive never understood the people who think Johnson won. Pastrano made Johnson look like he was wearing cement shoes. Im a much bigger fan of Johnson than Pastrano but Johnson was rendered ineffective and made to wait wait wait to do anything while Pastrano just piled up points and never stopped moving.

 

1. I don't like the "prime" labeling, too abstract. Physically he may not have been peak but as an overall fighter he was at the top of his game.
2. I believe he beat a Johnson who was on top of his game.
3. Better than the ill prepared Charles who gassed out against Valdes, yes.
4. Yes and yes.