Tell me about this hard hitting fighter...I have read a bit on him,
but I have always found what many of you know to be interesting
when it comes to some of these forgotten tough fighters..
Thanks again
Elmer 'Violent' Ray
-
HomicideHenry
- Heavyweight
- Posts: 18722
- Joined: 08 Sep 2005, 00:43
Re: Elmer 'Violent' Ray
I suggest looking through the 'search' option on the site, because there has been quite a few great, sometimes violent, debates about this long forgotten heavyweight; from arguments of whether Joe Louis could have beaten him or not, to his place among the top heavyweight contenders of all time.
Re: Elmer 'Violent' Ray
I shall do just that :)
-
Datsue
- Heavyweight
Re: Elmer 'Violent' Ray
Thanks Robinson, for introducing me to this guy: I'd never heard of him before & shall now search away for the aforementioned threads.
By the way: BEST! NICKNAME! EVER!
By the way: BEST! NICKNAME! EVER!
-
BrocktonBlockbuster49
- Heavyweight
- Posts: 4900
- Joined: 29 May 2005, 00:32
Re: Elmer 'Violent' Ray
This is the best elmer ray article you will ever see written at eastside boxing by the fabulous poster marcianofrazier, one of the most knowledgable men on the era i have ever spoken too....thank him for this.
Part 1:
Elmer Ray is an intriguing fighter, and one on whom information is scarce. He had an outstanding record, but has received very little media coverage, and there is no surviving film of any of his fights. In addition, much of his career, particularly early on, is oddly mysterious and difficult to sort through. This has all made me exceedingly curious, and in recent months, I've spent a fair deal of time sifting for information on him, largely from old magazine and newspaper accounts. I wanted to share some of my more interesting findings here, and discuss the confusing points which still remain.
Here's some background on Ray:
In the years before he became a famous professional boxer, he rose to prominence in the southern battle royale circuit- battle royales being a fight game from that time period in which 10 competitors would be put into the ring with each other and have an "all-against-all" throw-down until only one was left. Ray won 61 battle royales and supposedly once knocked out nine opponents with one hand behind his back during a match in New Orleans, earning himself the title "King of the Battle Royale." According to the Traverse City Eagle, March 11, 1946,
"Ray had a system that let him win 61 of those free-for-alls. In these bouts, the usual order is for the little guys to gang up on the biggest man and down the batting order in that manner. Elmer simply dropped to the floor when the bell sounded, crawled to a corner, placed his back against the ropes and took the whole gang as it came at him."
He also had a reputation as an alligator wrestler. When he held camp near his home town in Florida, he would scare his manager to death by going out into the mud and wrestling 'gators, often to entertain tourists. In fact, he was so comfortable around them that he was known to casually play with them and let them eat out of his hand.
All-in-all, I think the nickname "Violent" fits him just fine. Interesting side note- after WWII, Ray's rather outspoken and creative manager, Tommy O'Loughlin, apparently tried to rechristen him "Elmer 'Atomic' Ray," but it didn't stick.
Now, on to the confusing parts:
First, His Age and Early Record
Ray is listed on boxrec as having been born in March 10th, 1910, but elsewhere on the internet is listed as having been born in October, and, in one newspaper account I've seen, is said to have been born in May. But even odder is the age discrepancy; some accounts have him born in 1910 and hence being in his late 30s at the time of all of his major fights, but others have him at seven years younger. Accounts of the Charles fights disagree on whether he was 31 or 38 at the time of the fights! I've seen one other article which clarifies that Ray himself was not sure how old he was, but even then, a seven year discrepancy in age is hard to account for.
Now, boxrec used to list Ray as having had a series of fights in the late '20s, before taking an inexplicable six-year layoff and then coming back in 1936. However, I have seen it said that the '20s fights were considered "suspect," and they have now been removed from his boxrec record. Still further, I've seen at least one article which specifically describes Ray as having taken up boxing in 1936. If the '20s fights did happen, then the age issue is more or less resolved, since he would've had to have been having professional heavyweight fights when he was 10 years old in order for the younger age to be true, but if they are spurious (which now seems likely), then the younger age actually fits much better with the timeline of his career in a lot of ways, since that would make Ray 19 when he turned pro in 1936 (a typical age for turning professional) and would have him peaking in his mid-late twenties (also typical) before starting to decline in his early thirties, instead of turning pro at 16, having a few fights and then being inactive for six years, coming back in his late twenties and then finally rising to the top of the division in his late thirties, which would be extremely unusual in that era, particularly for a swarming-style fighter like Ray. In addition, I've been able to find no evidence anywhere of Ray dying, and if he's lived to the present day, a younger birth date seems more likely.
The answer to this question could change the way one would look at Ray's record in the late '30s through early '40s. If he was a 19-to-20-year old who probably wasn't completely physically mature and had no prior one-on-one boxing experience, then his results in those years are cast in a considerably different light than if he was an older guy who had had some pro boxing matches a few years back and gone on a layoff.
------------------------------------------------------
The Allegations That He Was Avoided
This one is particularly interesting. Here are some quotes from contemporary newspaper accounts:
"Elmer (Violent) Ray has the extraordinary distinction of being the only man Joe Louis wouldn't even meet in an exhibition. Louis boxed Dan Merritt of Cleveland instead, and stood watching as Ray, a crowding weaver and bobber with the speed of a swift middleweight, ironed out Claudio Villar, a Spaniard, in 29 seconds flat.”
"Arturo Godoy and Tami Mauriello rejected guarantees to square off with Ray at Madison square Garden, Lee Oma the Violent One's share of the swag in addition to his own. Joe Baksi and Lou Nova refused. Melio Bettina will have nothing to do with the Hastings Hammerer. Jimmy Bivins turned down the chance to march front and center with him in Los Angeles, where the terror recorded 19 knockouts in a row. The current Joe Walcott will have no truck with him in Baltimore... Currently he is drawing and at Miami's Negro ball yard, Dorsey Park, while putting the slug on such as Dan Merritt and Al Patterson, the latter a slatty character out of Pittsburgh. "It's better than wrestlingalligators and fighting nine guys at once," beams Violent Ray."
-The Coshocton Tribune, March 8, 1946
"None of the near-name heavies wants any part of Ray, who in a New Orleans battle royal knocked out nine opponents with one hand tied behind his back."
"...in doing so he made of Elmer Ray a modern Sam Langford. You remember the Boston Tar Baby. He was a guy heavyweight champion Jack Johnson dodged and dodged during the six years he held the title some three decades ago. Langford tried desperately to get a bout with the champ, but Johnson never would have a part of him. Louis is that way with Ray. It’s silly to say that Louis, the man who has made so many valiant defenses of the crown, is afraid of Elmer. But it is a fact that he won’t fight the burley puncher from Hastings, Florida."
-Middlesboro Daily News, July 26, 1947
It seems that the white contenders ducked Ray like the plague; about the only one who got in with him was Savold, and he was knocked out cold as a doorknob in two rounds. Louis himself even refused to spar with Ray or fight him in an exhibition, claiming that Ray "didn't know how to fight an exhibition" and one of them was liable to get hurt, and in spite of Ray compiling a 50 fight winning streak that included a crushing blow-out over staple top 10 Savold and a decision over top-five Walcott that brought him to #1 contender, he never received a title shot. It is worth pointing out, though, that Ray was only #1 contender for about three months before he was knocked off his pedestal by Walcott, and then he was #2 again for about a year-and-a-half afterwards. Hence, I don't think comparing this with a Harry Wills or Sam Langford-type situation in terms of title chances is really merited.
Part 1:
Elmer Ray is an intriguing fighter, and one on whom information is scarce. He had an outstanding record, but has received very little media coverage, and there is no surviving film of any of his fights. In addition, much of his career, particularly early on, is oddly mysterious and difficult to sort through. This has all made me exceedingly curious, and in recent months, I've spent a fair deal of time sifting for information on him, largely from old magazine and newspaper accounts. I wanted to share some of my more interesting findings here, and discuss the confusing points which still remain.
Here's some background on Ray:
In the years before he became a famous professional boxer, he rose to prominence in the southern battle royale circuit- battle royales being a fight game from that time period in which 10 competitors would be put into the ring with each other and have an "all-against-all" throw-down until only one was left. Ray won 61 battle royales and supposedly once knocked out nine opponents with one hand behind his back during a match in New Orleans, earning himself the title "King of the Battle Royale." According to the Traverse City Eagle, March 11, 1946,
"Ray had a system that let him win 61 of those free-for-alls. In these bouts, the usual order is for the little guys to gang up on the biggest man and down the batting order in that manner. Elmer simply dropped to the floor when the bell sounded, crawled to a corner, placed his back against the ropes and took the whole gang as it came at him."
He also had a reputation as an alligator wrestler. When he held camp near his home town in Florida, he would scare his manager to death by going out into the mud and wrestling 'gators, often to entertain tourists. In fact, he was so comfortable around them that he was known to casually play with them and let them eat out of his hand.
All-in-all, I think the nickname "Violent" fits him just fine. Interesting side note- after WWII, Ray's rather outspoken and creative manager, Tommy O'Loughlin, apparently tried to rechristen him "Elmer 'Atomic' Ray," but it didn't stick.
Now, on to the confusing parts:
First, His Age and Early Record
Ray is listed on boxrec as having been born in March 10th, 1910, but elsewhere on the internet is listed as having been born in October, and, in one newspaper account I've seen, is said to have been born in May. But even odder is the age discrepancy; some accounts have him born in 1910 and hence being in his late 30s at the time of all of his major fights, but others have him at seven years younger. Accounts of the Charles fights disagree on whether he was 31 or 38 at the time of the fights! I've seen one other article which clarifies that Ray himself was not sure how old he was, but even then, a seven year discrepancy in age is hard to account for.
Now, boxrec used to list Ray as having had a series of fights in the late '20s, before taking an inexplicable six-year layoff and then coming back in 1936. However, I have seen it said that the '20s fights were considered "suspect," and they have now been removed from his boxrec record. Still further, I've seen at least one article which specifically describes Ray as having taken up boxing in 1936. If the '20s fights did happen, then the age issue is more or less resolved, since he would've had to have been having professional heavyweight fights when he was 10 years old in order for the younger age to be true, but if they are spurious (which now seems likely), then the younger age actually fits much better with the timeline of his career in a lot of ways, since that would make Ray 19 when he turned pro in 1936 (a typical age for turning professional) and would have him peaking in his mid-late twenties (also typical) before starting to decline in his early thirties, instead of turning pro at 16, having a few fights and then being inactive for six years, coming back in his late twenties and then finally rising to the top of the division in his late thirties, which would be extremely unusual in that era, particularly for a swarming-style fighter like Ray. In addition, I've been able to find no evidence anywhere of Ray dying, and if he's lived to the present day, a younger birth date seems more likely.
The answer to this question could change the way one would look at Ray's record in the late '30s through early '40s. If he was a 19-to-20-year old who probably wasn't completely physically mature and had no prior one-on-one boxing experience, then his results in those years are cast in a considerably different light than if he was an older guy who had had some pro boxing matches a few years back and gone on a layoff.
------------------------------------------------------
The Allegations That He Was Avoided
This one is particularly interesting. Here are some quotes from contemporary newspaper accounts:
"Elmer (Violent) Ray has the extraordinary distinction of being the only man Joe Louis wouldn't even meet in an exhibition. Louis boxed Dan Merritt of Cleveland instead, and stood watching as Ray, a crowding weaver and bobber with the speed of a swift middleweight, ironed out Claudio Villar, a Spaniard, in 29 seconds flat.”
"Arturo Godoy and Tami Mauriello rejected guarantees to square off with Ray at Madison square Garden, Lee Oma the Violent One's share of the swag in addition to his own. Joe Baksi and Lou Nova refused. Melio Bettina will have nothing to do with the Hastings Hammerer. Jimmy Bivins turned down the chance to march front and center with him in Los Angeles, where the terror recorded 19 knockouts in a row. The current Joe Walcott will have no truck with him in Baltimore... Currently he is drawing and at Miami's Negro ball yard, Dorsey Park, while putting the slug on such as Dan Merritt and Al Patterson, the latter a slatty character out of Pittsburgh. "It's better than wrestlingalligators and fighting nine guys at once," beams Violent Ray."
-The Coshocton Tribune, March 8, 1946
"None of the near-name heavies wants any part of Ray, who in a New Orleans battle royal knocked out nine opponents with one hand tied behind his back."
"...in doing so he made of Elmer Ray a modern Sam Langford. You remember the Boston Tar Baby. He was a guy heavyweight champion Jack Johnson dodged and dodged during the six years he held the title some three decades ago. Langford tried desperately to get a bout with the champ, but Johnson never would have a part of him. Louis is that way with Ray. It’s silly to say that Louis, the man who has made so many valiant defenses of the crown, is afraid of Elmer. But it is a fact that he won’t fight the burley puncher from Hastings, Florida."
-Middlesboro Daily News, July 26, 1947
It seems that the white contenders ducked Ray like the plague; about the only one who got in with him was Savold, and he was knocked out cold as a doorknob in two rounds. Louis himself even refused to spar with Ray or fight him in an exhibition, claiming that Ray "didn't know how to fight an exhibition" and one of them was liable to get hurt, and in spite of Ray compiling a 50 fight winning streak that included a crushing blow-out over staple top 10 Savold and a decision over top-five Walcott that brought him to #1 contender, he never received a title shot. It is worth pointing out, though, that Ray was only #1 contender for about three months before he was knocked off his pedestal by Walcott, and then he was #2 again for about a year-and-a-half afterwards. Hence, I don't think comparing this with a Harry Wills or Sam Langford-type situation in terms of title chances is really merited.
Last edited by BrocktonBlockbuster49 on 08 Oct 2008, 10:54, edited 1 time in total.
-
BrocktonBlockbuster49
- Heavyweight
- Posts: 4900
- Joined: 29 May 2005, 00:32
Re: Elmer 'Violent' Ray
thanx again MF
Part II
For starters, the first Turkey Thompson fight:
This was a No Contest, resulting from a low blow by Thompson that incapacitated Ray in round six of their match. Looking through accounts of the match, it seems that Ray was apparently creaming Thompson before the NC and that Thompson actually threw two hard, flagrant low blows, one in the second and one in the sixth, possibly to bail himself out of trouble. The Modesto Bee account, August 10th, 1943, reads, "Turkey Thompson still wore his crown today after a match with a tough Floridian named Elmer Ray, who punched his better known opponent around the ring for six rounds only to have Referee Lee Ramage atop the bout with no decision after Ray had been fouled twice," and according to the Fresno Bee Republican, "Ray had won all five rounds and was out in front in the sixth when he was hurt by a low blow and Ramage stopped the bout."
I don't know about you, but it sounds to me like Ray was pretty badly ripped off in this fight. Under many commissions, I would expect that to be a DQ win for him. The fact that the somewhat inexperienced Ray was pitching a shut-out over Thompson through five-and-a-half rounds is quite impressive. One of the main knocks on Ray legacy-wise is that he has a rather thin resume against top opponents; close wins over future champs Walcott and Charles, a blow-out over middle-tier contender Savold, and not too much after that. If you threw a dominant win over Turkey Thompson (which it seems he really should have) into the mix, then his resume really wouldn't look so terribly thin.
Second, the 1946 Walcott fight:
This one was a razor-thin split decision for Ray. While this match was very close, from the accounts I've seen of it, there seems to be pretty widespread agreement that Ray did deserve the slim nod. According to Sid Roth, "the Violent One, whom they had kept out of lucrative Madison Square Garden for so long, had a clear winning edge." The New York Times account had it 6-4 for Ray, and every account I've come across has either indicated Ray had a slight edge or just called the match "close" or "closer-than-the-buttons-on-your-vest" or somesuch.
And lastly, the first Ezzard Charles fight:
The boxrec page for this match has a somewhat misleading description, quoting the RING Magazine account, which says that Charles "apparently won handily," making the fight out to be a flagrant robbery. Having looked through several other accounts, I no longer believe this to be accurate. Opinions seem pretty evenly split as to who deserved this decision.
The United Press scorecard had it 5-4-1 for Ray, while the Associated Press card scored the match 5-4-1 for Charles. Here is the description from the Middlesboro Daily News account: "The gallery gods went into ranting hysterics last night when the burly negro who once wrestled alligators for a living smashed the myth which was Ezzard Charles. The boxing bigwigs, who had been grooming Charles for a fight with Joe Louis, laughed. Once more they had given Joe Louis, the heavyweight champion, an excuse to dodge the violent one. For from 10 rows back it looked like Charles all the way. He danced and jabbed and landed a lot on Ray's bobbing pate and Elmer's busy elbows. But inside 10 rows you could see the devastation wrought by Ray's jarring hooks, blasts which raised the sheaf of Ezzard's cheek. “No holding,” was the continual admonition of referee Eddie Joseph. But Ezzard, of the winged retreating feet, had to hold for his life, and in doing so he made of Elmer Ray a modern Sam Langford."
According to the Nevada State Journal, "Ezzard had clicked off 15 straight victories since he received his discharge from the army 18 months ago, including nine knockouts, but he was unable to overcome his heavier and more experienced opponent, and he was unable to score a single knock-down against rugged Ray, who kept marching in, bobbing and weaving and throwing hooks to body and head. Although Ray admits to 31, which would make him at least five years older than his opponent, it was Ray who finished stronger in the 10th round and thereby apparently wrapped up the bout by a close margin
by MarcianoFrazier
Part II
For starters, the first Turkey Thompson fight:
This was a No Contest, resulting from a low blow by Thompson that incapacitated Ray in round six of their match. Looking through accounts of the match, it seems that Ray was apparently creaming Thompson before the NC and that Thompson actually threw two hard, flagrant low blows, one in the second and one in the sixth, possibly to bail himself out of trouble. The Modesto Bee account, August 10th, 1943, reads, "Turkey Thompson still wore his crown today after a match with a tough Floridian named Elmer Ray, who punched his better known opponent around the ring for six rounds only to have Referee Lee Ramage atop the bout with no decision after Ray had been fouled twice," and according to the Fresno Bee Republican, "Ray had won all five rounds and was out in front in the sixth when he was hurt by a low blow and Ramage stopped the bout."
I don't know about you, but it sounds to me like Ray was pretty badly ripped off in this fight. Under many commissions, I would expect that to be a DQ win for him. The fact that the somewhat inexperienced Ray was pitching a shut-out over Thompson through five-and-a-half rounds is quite impressive. One of the main knocks on Ray legacy-wise is that he has a rather thin resume against top opponents; close wins over future champs Walcott and Charles, a blow-out over middle-tier contender Savold, and not too much after that. If you threw a dominant win over Turkey Thompson (which it seems he really should have) into the mix, then his resume really wouldn't look so terribly thin.
Second, the 1946 Walcott fight:
This one was a razor-thin split decision for Ray. While this match was very close, from the accounts I've seen of it, there seems to be pretty widespread agreement that Ray did deserve the slim nod. According to Sid Roth, "the Violent One, whom they had kept out of lucrative Madison Square Garden for so long, had a clear winning edge." The New York Times account had it 6-4 for Ray, and every account I've come across has either indicated Ray had a slight edge or just called the match "close" or "closer-than-the-buttons-on-your-vest" or somesuch.
And lastly, the first Ezzard Charles fight:
The boxrec page for this match has a somewhat misleading description, quoting the RING Magazine account, which says that Charles "apparently won handily," making the fight out to be a flagrant robbery. Having looked through several other accounts, I no longer believe this to be accurate. Opinions seem pretty evenly split as to who deserved this decision.
The United Press scorecard had it 5-4-1 for Ray, while the Associated Press card scored the match 5-4-1 for Charles. Here is the description from the Middlesboro Daily News account: "The gallery gods went into ranting hysterics last night when the burly negro who once wrestled alligators for a living smashed the myth which was Ezzard Charles. The boxing bigwigs, who had been grooming Charles for a fight with Joe Louis, laughed. Once more they had given Joe Louis, the heavyweight champion, an excuse to dodge the violent one. For from 10 rows back it looked like Charles all the way. He danced and jabbed and landed a lot on Ray's bobbing pate and Elmer's busy elbows. But inside 10 rows you could see the devastation wrought by Ray's jarring hooks, blasts which raised the sheaf of Ezzard's cheek. “No holding,” was the continual admonition of referee Eddie Joseph. But Ezzard, of the winged retreating feet, had to hold for his life, and in doing so he made of Elmer Ray a modern Sam Langford."
According to the Nevada State Journal, "Ezzard had clicked off 15 straight victories since he received his discharge from the army 18 months ago, including nine knockouts, but he was unable to overcome his heavier and more experienced opponent, and he was unable to score a single knock-down against rugged Ray, who kept marching in, bobbing and weaving and throwing hooks to body and head. Although Ray admits to 31, which would make him at least five years older than his opponent, it was Ray who finished stronger in the 10th round and thereby apparently wrapped up the bout by a close margin
by MarcianoFrazier
Re: Elmer 'Violent' Ray
The writer fails to mention that Turkey Thompson starched Violent Ray in the first round less than a month later at the Olympic Audirorium in LA.
Or that less than a year after Ray's win over Charles, Ezzard returned the favor and stopped the violent one in nine rounds. From our own boxrec archives:
"Hammer-fisted Ezzard Charles racked up a knockout over Elmer Ray today and called for a shot at light heavyweight champion Gus Lesnevich. The fast moving Charles hanged the aging Ray right out of heavyweight boxing with a left hook at 2:43 of the 9th stanza." -United Press
Or that less than a year after Ray's win over Charles, Ezzard returned the favor and stopped the violent one in nine rounds. From our own boxrec archives:
"Hammer-fisted Ezzard Charles racked up a knockout over Elmer Ray today and called for a shot at light heavyweight champion Gus Lesnevich. The fast moving Charles hanged the aging Ray right out of heavyweight boxing with a left hook at 2:43 of the 9th stanza." -United Press
Re: Elmer 'Violent' Ray
Elmer Ray was reportedly 24 in 1941. He would eventually face Louis in a series of exhibitions, twice lasting the distance with Louis having the best of it and once retiring between rounds.
-
Ambling Alp
- Heavyweight
- Posts: 3627
- Joined: 15 Jul 2005, 22:31
Re: Elmer 'Violent' Ray
Ray is a very hard guy to rate. At first glance, his wins over Charles and Walcott indicate that he must have been very good.
However, Walcott was still pretty up and down; in fact he had lost his previous fight to Joey Maxim. It's hard to say how impressive that win was.
In fairness to Charles, he was still a lightheavyweight when he fought Ray both times, while Ray was a full fledged heavyweight.
However, Walcott was still pretty up and down; in fact he had lost his previous fight to Joey Maxim. It's hard to say how impressive that win was.
In fairness to Charles, he was still a lightheavyweight when he fought Ray both times, while Ray was a full fledged heavyweight.
Re: Elmer 'Violent' Ray
With Ray as his last name, he was probably intelligent, articulate - an excellent fighter with a winsome personality. A fan favorite. An uncrowned champion, for sure. 
All kidding aside, I have only read a little bit about him, but those accounts I've read indicate that he was an awesome puncher with a brawling style. That's about all I know.
All kidding aside, I have only read a little bit about him, but those accounts I've read indicate that he was an awesome puncher with a brawling style. That's about all I know.
-
dempseyfire
- Heavyweight
- Posts: 5534
- Joined: 29 Oct 2003, 22:56
Re: Elmer 'Violent' Ray
Walcott wasn't very up and down. Losing to a prime Joey Maxim is nothing to taint a career, and Walcott's only other loss in the previous 5 years was a 8 round decision loss to the unknown Johnny Allen, which looks like a probable fix or poor decision as they rematched just over a month later with Walcott beating him. Walcott also knocked him out in 3 rounds the following year.Ambling Alp wrote:Ray is a very hard guy to rate. At first glance, his wins over Charles and Walcott indicate that he must have been very good.
However, Walcott was still pretty up and down; in fact he had lost his previous fight to Joey Maxim. It's hard to say how impressive that win was.
In fairness to Charles, he was still a lightheavyweight when he fought Ray both times, while Ray was a full fledged heavyweight.
-
Ambling Alp
- Heavyweight
- Posts: 3627
- Joined: 15 Jul 2005, 22:31
Re: Elmer 'Violent' Ray
You didn't mention that Walcott didn't fight at all for 4 years.
Walcott was inconsistent throughout most of his whole career.
Walcott was inconsistent throughout most of his whole career.
Re: Elmer 'Violent' Ray
How do you define inconsistent? Was Sugar Ray Leonard inconsistent? or does inconsistency extend beyond laying off for a time and then making a comeback?
-
dempseyfire
- Heavyweight
- Posts: 5534
- Joined: 29 Oct 2003, 22:56
Re: Elmer 'Violent' Ray
Alright, you got me there :)Ambling Alp wrote:You didn't mention that Walcott didn't fight at all for 4 years.
Walcott was inconsistent throughout most of his whole career.
That stated, one needs to look at the details when perusing Walcott's career. He often fought many opponents at extremely close intervals to each other (as was the norm back then) and we have no idea what injuries or other conditions Walcott was bringing from fight to fight, as a fighter wasn't going to back out b/c of the flue or another ailment when a purse was going to put food on the table and there were no big-money paydays for anyone except the champion. For example, Walcott fought hard-hitting Tommy Gomez TWELVE DAYS before losing to Maxim. His loss to Brothers was a month after knocking out a young Ray. His loss to Lazer was a month after going 10 rounds with Tiger Jack Fox. That's insane in a modern context. That's why you often see fighters in this time period with seemingly spotty records. Can you imagine Brittali Klitschko surviving with such a relatively unblemished record in the 1940s fighting matches 3-4 weeks apart? He would've had probably 10 more losses.
-
Ambling Alp
- Heavyweight
- Posts: 3627
- Joined: 15 Jul 2005, 22:31
Re: Elmer 'Violent' Ray
I agree that fighters from that era fought more frequently and sometimes at short notice. Of course it's undertandable if under certain circumstances that youo get upset occasionally by a fighter that is a level below you.
No arguement here about Vitaly Klitschko. He would have starved to death the way he pulls out of fights and usually fights very carefully chosen opponets when he does fight.
That being said, one point has to be made. You also have to look at the circumstances of Walcott's opponents that beat him. Take the guys mentioned:
Joey Maxim- Yes, Walcott had a fight 12 days before fighting him. However, Maxim had a fight 14 days before their fight. I don't see how that gives Maxim much of an advantage. Not an easy opponent, but Walcott should have been able to win this fight.
Roy Lazer-Yes, Walcott had a fight about a month before with Fox. However, a month isn't that short of time. Lazer himself just had a fight just 5 days before fighting Walcott. Walcott should have been able to win this fight.
George Brothers-Yes, Walcott had a fight just two weeks before their fight. However, Brothers also fought two weeks before their fight, on the same card as Walcott. Walcott should have been able to win this fight.
Johhny Allen-Yes, Walcott had a fight just two weeks prior to this. However, Allen had a fight just one week before that. and I don't think you can just assume that the fight was a fix or a bad decision. Walcott should have been able to win this fight easily.
Look at Walcott later in his career. Take the 4 fights with Charles. In the first two, he lost fairly convincingly. In the third fight, he was doing much better and was ahead before knocking out Charles.
In the fourth fight, he won a close decision; certainly a better performance than the first two fights with Charles.
And of course what about the Marciano fights? In the first one, he looked very good in the first 12 rounds before getting knocked out in the 13th.
In the rematch, he gave a very poor effort and was knocked out in the first round. He didn't even look like he was trying.
If it was just two or three fights, that would be one thing. Sometimes there are extenuating circumstances. However, we are talking about the early, middle, and late stages of his career. There is a pattern here.
By just about any measure he was inconsistent. The biggest winning streak of his career was 12 fights. Only one other time did he win 6 straight.
No arguement here about Vitaly Klitschko. He would have starved to death the way he pulls out of fights and usually fights very carefully chosen opponets when he does fight.
That being said, one point has to be made. You also have to look at the circumstances of Walcott's opponents that beat him. Take the guys mentioned:
Joey Maxim- Yes, Walcott had a fight 12 days before fighting him. However, Maxim had a fight 14 days before their fight. I don't see how that gives Maxim much of an advantage. Not an easy opponent, but Walcott should have been able to win this fight.
Roy Lazer-Yes, Walcott had a fight about a month before with Fox. However, a month isn't that short of time. Lazer himself just had a fight just 5 days before fighting Walcott. Walcott should have been able to win this fight.
George Brothers-Yes, Walcott had a fight just two weeks before their fight. However, Brothers also fought two weeks before their fight, on the same card as Walcott. Walcott should have been able to win this fight.
Johhny Allen-Yes, Walcott had a fight just two weeks prior to this. However, Allen had a fight just one week before that. and I don't think you can just assume that the fight was a fix or a bad decision. Walcott should have been able to win this fight easily.
Look at Walcott later in his career. Take the 4 fights with Charles. In the first two, he lost fairly convincingly. In the third fight, he was doing much better and was ahead before knocking out Charles.
In the fourth fight, he won a close decision; certainly a better performance than the first two fights with Charles.
And of course what about the Marciano fights? In the first one, he looked very good in the first 12 rounds before getting knocked out in the 13th.
In the rematch, he gave a very poor effort and was knocked out in the first round. He didn't even look like he was trying.
If it was just two or three fights, that would be one thing. Sometimes there are extenuating circumstances. However, we are talking about the early, middle, and late stages of his career. There is a pattern here.
By just about any measure he was inconsistent. The biggest winning streak of his career was 12 fights. Only one other time did he win 6 straight.
Re: Elmer 'Violent' Ray
It may have originally been Violet Ray, but got mixed up along the way.Datsue wrote:Thanks Robinson, for introducing me to this guy: I'd never heard of him before & shall now search away for the aforementioned threads.
By the way: BEST! NICKNAME! EVER!
-
BrocktonBlockbuster49
- Heavyweight
- Posts: 4900
- Joined: 29 May 2005, 00:32
Re: Elmer 'Violent' Ray
I suggest ampling alp check his facts before jumping to conclusions. the walcott-maxim I decision was considered outrageously bad, the paper reports suggest walcott clearly won all 3 fights. see new thread
-
BrocktonBlockbuster49
- Heavyweight
- Posts: 4900
- Joined: 29 May 2005, 00:32
Re: Elmer 'Violent' Ray
I dont know ALP is bringing up walcotts career pre 1940. Blackburn left Walcott early in his career to train with louis when walcott was 6-1.......walcott continued fighting with no training whats so ever and suffering typoid fever.....extremley poor, walcott was forced to fight against top 10 rated heavyweight contenders on 24 hr notice for a payday to support his family of 7....with barely a triscuit in his belly in the past 48 hours.
Walcott said of one fight in the 1930s......."I was so hungry that when I got hit to the ribs it hurt so bad I had to go down"
Walcott claimed of his career in the 1930s "I went to bed hungry every night for almost 10 years".
Still ,Walcott was able to get by on natural talent alone outboxing top contenders fox and simon before sucombing due to his poor condition, and earning wins over Lorenzo Pack the mac foster of the era, and top 10 Willie Reddish.
I dont hold anything against walcott pre felix boccichio, once bocchichio came into the picture, walcott actually got to live like a normal human being
Walcott said of one fight in the 1930s......."I was so hungry that when I got hit to the ribs it hurt so bad I had to go down"
Walcott claimed of his career in the 1930s "I went to bed hungry every night for almost 10 years".
Still ,Walcott was able to get by on natural talent alone outboxing top contenders fox and simon before sucombing due to his poor condition, and earning wins over Lorenzo Pack the mac foster of the era, and top 10 Willie Reddish.
I dont hold anything against walcott pre felix boccichio, once bocchichio came into the picture, walcott actually got to live like a normal human being
-
BrocktonBlockbuster49
- Heavyweight
- Posts: 4900
- Joined: 29 May 2005, 00:32
Re: Elmer 'Violent' Ray
In the first two, he lost fairly convincingly.
Actually if you were to watch the filmed of the first two fights they were alot closer than the scorecards indicate. On film......Walcott hurt charles in round 14 of first fight 1949, and in the 2nd fight walcott staggered charles numerous times.
-
Marciano Frazier
- Heavyweight
- Posts: 326
- Joined: 29 Jul 2003, 13:13
Re: Elmer 'Violent' Ray
My article wasn't intended to be a complete synopsis of Ray's career or a thorough pro/con analysis, and never made such a claim. For the most part, I wanted to: A. get out some background information most people don't know about, and B. highlight the information which leads me to hold Ray in high regard as a fighter.raylawpc wrote:The writer fails to mention that Turkey Thompson starched Violent Ray in the first round less than a month later at the Olympic Audirorium in LA.
Or that less than a year after Ray's win over Charles, Ezzard returned the favor and stopped the violent one in nine rounds. From our own boxrec archives:
"Hammer-fisted Ezzard Charles racked up a knockout over Elmer Ray today and called for a shot at light heavyweight champion Gus Lesnevich. The fast moving Charles hanged the aging Ray right out of heavyweight boxing with a left hook at 2:43 of the 9th stanza." -United Press
-
pound per pound
- Heavyweight
- Posts: 1593
- Joined: 13 Jan 2005, 14:36
Re: Elmer 'Violent' Ray
I read Joe Louis' management was going to schedule a fight with Ray, then changed their minds when they saw him live.
On paper Ray looks like one of those sluggers who bombs out lower class type of fighters, but either lacks the skills, stamina, or the fire power to put away the best.
Is anyone here old enough to have seen him live?
Where can I watch him on film or tape on Ray?
On paper Ray looks like one of those sluggers who bombs out lower class type of fighters, but either lacks the skills, stamina, or the fire power to put away the best.
Is anyone here old enough to have seen him live?
Where can I watch him on film or tape on Ray?
Re: Elmer 'Violent' Ray
Has anyone been able to unearth any clues as to whatever became of Elmer Ray?
When was the last time he was mentioned in the present tense in any newspaper article?
If he is still around,next month(October.9th),will be his 100th birthday.
(although prior to his 6 round exhibition with Joe Louis in Miami January 1949,his manager Tommy O'Loughlin
said in a newspaper article that he was only 37,but perhaps they just shaved a couple years off to make him not look so old)
When was the last time he was mentioned in the present tense in any newspaper article?
If he is still around,next month(October.9th),will be his 100th birthday.
(although prior to his 6 round exhibition with Joe Louis in Miami January 1949,his manager Tommy O'Loughlin
said in a newspaper article that he was only 37,but perhaps they just shaved a couple years off to make him not look so old)
Re: Elmer 'Violent' Ray
I mentioned this in another forum,but perhaps the person to ask would be Angelo Dundee,who came down to Miami
only a few years after Elmer Ray retired from the ring in 1949 after the John Holman fight.
Perhaps even if Dundee never met Ray,perhaps he had heard some scutlebutt around the gym as to what became of him.
only a few years after Elmer Ray retired from the ring in 1949 after the John Holman fight.
Perhaps even if Dundee never met Ray,perhaps he had heard some scutlebutt around the gym as to what became of him.
Re: Elmer 'Violent' Ray
If Elmer Ray had won the heavyweight championship,even if he only defended it once before losing and then just disappeared without a trace,it would be one of the biggest mysterys in boxing history.
At least they found Sonny Liston's body.
I have a few theories,based on speculation.
Perhaps he took his ring earnings and went to Cuba?
(reportly Ray got a check for $25,000. for the fight with Jersey Joe Walcott in 1947.)
Havana Cuba was a great place to visit for a black man in the 1950's,as they treated vacationing Africcan-Americans very well there,compared to Miami Beach,were black people had to be out of town before sundown in the 1950's.
Cuba had been one of Joe Louis's favorite vacation places,even when Fidel Castro took over.
well thats one theory,any others?
,
At least they found Sonny Liston's body.
I have a few theories,based on speculation.
Perhaps he took his ring earnings and went to Cuba?
(reportly Ray got a check for $25,000. for the fight with Jersey Joe Walcott in 1947.)
Havana Cuba was a great place to visit for a black man in the 1950's,as they treated vacationing Africcan-Americans very well there,compared to Miami Beach,were black people had to be out of town before sundown in the 1950's.
Cuba had been one of Joe Louis's favorite vacation places,even when Fidel Castro took over.
well thats one theory,any others?
,
-
Goodnight, Irene
- Heavyweight
- Posts: 9463
- Joined: 24 Sep 2007, 04:43
Re: Elmer 'Violent' Ray
You are right about that opening sentence.Brutu wrote:If Elmer Ray had won the heavyweight championship,even if he only defended it once before losing and then just disappeared without a trace,it would be one of the biggest mysterys in boxing history.
At least they found Sonny Liston's body.
I have a few theories,based on speculation.
Perhaps he took his ring earnings and went to Cuba?
(reportly Ray got a check for $25,000. for the fight with Jersey Joe Walcott in 1947.)
Havana Cuba was a great place to visit for a black man in the 1950's,as they treated vacationing Africcan-Americans very well there,compared to Miami Beach,were black people had to be out of town before sundown in the 1950's.
Cuba had been one of Joe Louis's favorite vacation places,even when Fidel Castro took over.
well thats one theory,any others?
,