Rocky Marciano ~ December 1954 'Ready to Fight Nino Valdes'

[Ambling Alp II]

Always thought Valdes was overrated. He had a couple of nice wins, but lost constantly throughout his career. Simply wasn't that good. No real reason to think Marciano was afraid of him.

Also don't buy the theory that the era weak just because so many of of them were small and/ or former light heavyweights. (Not saying it was great, but it was decent.)

Bob Baker weighed well over 200 and was probably the best big heavyweight of the time and he lost to Moore, Henry, and Satterfield who were much smaller than him.
As others have mentioned Valdes lost to several smaller fighters.

[Dubblechin]

First of all, if Weill wanted Marciano to fight Valdes, Rocky would have.

Valdes had already beaten half the top 10 heavyweights – Ezzard Charles, the reigning European Heavyweight champ Heinz Neuhaus, “Hurricane” Jackson, Larel Sys and a handful of fringe contenders waiting for his turn. He was the legit number-one contender. Nothing was preventing the fight from taking place BUT AL WEILL.

The link you posted is about the 15th article written on a proposed Marciano-Valdes fight after the second Marciano-Charles bout. The head of the IBC Jim Norris was pushing hard for Marciano to defend against Valdes in Miami because Norris thought he could make a fortune. But there are articles in which Norris is quoted as saying Weill won’t commit. And he never did.

Nobody Marciano was defending against had to win "eliminators" to meet him. What eliminators did Walcott, La Startza, Charles or Cockell win? They didn’t. You schedule “eliminators” to “eliminate” someone.

Nobody was begging for a Cockell-Marciano fight. Cockell was one of the biggest underdogs up to that time in boxing history.

And if Weill wanted to schedule an eliminator, why didn't he match #1 contender Valdes with #2 contender Cockell (who Valdes later destroyed)?

He didn’t because he knew Valdes had previously lost a decision to Moore. Moore’s style (which was nothing like Marciano’s) gave Valdes problems. It didn't matter that Moore wasn't rated in the top 10 at heavyweight. Weill insisted Valdes had to fight Moore.

Weill had Valdes fighting one top 10 guy after another (while Marciano spent a whole year focused on Charles, who Valdes had just beaten), even forcing Valdes to fly to freaking BELGIUM (no easy feat in 1954) to fight Sys, no doubt hoping Valdes would lose to one of them. Hell, the Valdes-Jackson fight was billed as an eliminator, too. When Valdes destroyed him in a round, what happened?

Nothing.

You said Weill passed on Valdes after the Charles fight because he wanted to make sure Marciano’s nose was okay. In other words, Weill was “AFRAID” Valdes would destroy that nose again, with his power punches and his FOOT reach advantage. So they took on short, fat Don Cockell instead.

When the champ doesn't want to fight a guy, it certainly helps when his manager is also the matchmaker for the controlling body. Doesn't it?

You make your fighter's most dangerous opponent first face a guy whose style he has trouble with.

Then you stage that "final eliminator" with Moore in a place where essentially no boxing matches were taking place, no television cameras were rolling, with one referee being the sole judge (a ref who had previously stated his dislike for Valdes).

So when Valdes collapsed in the ring crying after the decision was read because he felt he'd been robbed, nobody could see it because it was in park in the middle of the freaking desert.

How many major fights were held in Vegas before 1955? The Moore-Valdes fight wasn't even held at a casino. It was held in park someplace in town.

And A ONE FOOT reach advantage IS significant. Thomas Hearns had a one foot reach advantage over Duran. Think that reach helped Hearns avoid Duran’s punches and land his own?

I don’t think Valdes was something special. But he was the #1 contender. He earned his shot. His style would’ve given Marciano all kinds of problems. But Marciano’s manager, as the IBC matchmaker, did everything in his power to block the fight and until Valdes finally lost.

Styles make fights. If Frazier and Norton had to beat Foreman before they got a title shot with Ali, they never would’ve got one. Just because Valdes lost to Moore and Moore lost to Marciano doesn’t mean Valdes loses to Marciano.

And Rocky wasn’t invincible. Moore and Walcott had him down. Walcott was leading on all the cards against him. Charles split his nose and Rocky nearly lost via TKO in their rematch. A tall bomber with a foot reach on Rocky would’ve given him all kinds of trouble.

In a way, I’ve always viewed the run Valdes made as similar to the run Jimmy Young later made. Young lost plenty. He lost to some bums. He was knocked out in three rounds by Shavers. He wasn’t superior at anything.

But over a brief period, he beat Lyle, Foreman, and appeared to decision Ali and Norton. Young was arguably the best heavyweight in the world for a span of a few months. But right after losing to Norton in a razor-thin fight, he was losing handily to the likes of novice Ossie Ocasio. And Young’s run was over.

Valdes deserved the shot. Weill blocked it.

And had Valdes somehow overcome the biased ref/lone judge in the Moore eliminator, I doubt Marciano would've fought him anyway. Weill and Marciano never had any intention of fighting Valdes (his style was all wrong for Rocky), they just wanted some other fighter to take care of him.

[dempseyfire]

Stop inferring the Moore-Vadles eliminator was a bad decision . . .none of the ringside writers had Valdes even within a couple points of Moore. Nino gave him a tough fight but Moore was the clear winner.

And Nino didn't use his reach effectively at all . . he preferred to go in on shorter guys and use his strength and power to work the body and come up top with hooks to the head. Marciano would not have had to work hard at all to get Nino on the inside. And he would've destroyed him there. The best Nino would get is maybe stunning Rocky with something at some point in the fight, but no way would Valdes have lasted the distance.

[Crease]

Okay, this is going to be a long one:

First of all, if Weill wanted Marciano to fight Valdes, Rocky would have.

Well that's not necessarily true. This Nino Valdes thing is a MYTH that was created years ago, certain boxing pundits have always had a negative agenda against Rocky because they seen him as clumsy and unskilled compared to more elegant fighters like Louis & Walcott.

And let me add one more thing - if Rocky had fought Valdes and beat him then the doubters would have selected another fighter of that era to promote, maybe someone like Bob Baker, Hurriance Jackson or Bob Satterfield.

Valdes had already beaten half the top 10 heavyweights – Ezzard Charles, the reigning European Heavyweight champ Heinz Neuhaus, “Hurricane” Jackson, Larel Sys and a handful of fringe contenders

You are exaggerating your point. Nino did make an impressive run from 1953-55, but you could only say that Charles, Jackson & Williams were the good contenders. Those others he fought during the streak could not be considered World Title contender by any stretch of the imagination.

One other thing I noticed that you did not highlight was the fact that:
THREE TIMES IN HIS CAREER VALDES WAS WITHIN TOUCHING DISTANCE OF A TITLE SHOT AND HE CHOKED!

This is a irrefutable fact whether you choose to believe it or not. He first came in to the wider title picture in 1952, but then lost to Harold Johnson (a top ten contender at the time) followed by losses to other top ten guys in Archie Moore & Bob Baker.

In the last occurrence, he was going in the right direction after beating Cockell, but then lost to Baker, then Eddie Machen came in to the scene and beat him twice, followed by Zora Folley.

Nino Valdes was good fighter of his time, but he suffered from inconsistency, which affected his whole career and hence he never became World Champion. It's childish to try and blame it on Rocky Marciano. If anything, I suppose you could blame it on Archie Moore or Bob Baker for defeating him at critical times.

But let's be honest about this here, there's no point trying to make a fighter out to be better than what he was, it serves no purpose really.

Nobody Marciano was defending against had to win "eliminators" to meet him. What eliminators did Walcott, La Startza, Charles or Cockell win?

Well just very quickly. Walcott had an immediate rematch clause in his contract when Rocky beat him. Walcott chose to active the clause and Rocky had 12 months to give him his rematch.

He give LaStarza a title shot because he said that it was the toughest fight of his career, so he give him a rematch.

Ezzard Charles was a high-profile fighter in 1954, he was a former World Heavyweight Champion - who many people believed would have the tools to beat Rocky. They were proved mistaken.

As for Cockell- he was the best fighter in Europe at that time and he was coming off a ten fight win streak.

And lastly, Archie Moore beat your boy for his title shot - you seem to have trouble accepting that.

Weill had Valdes fighting one top 10 guy after another

That's a fallacy, Valdes lost more fights to top contenders than what he won. If you care to count them up, you know that you will be found out.

Hell, the Valdes-Jackson fight was billed as an eliminator, too. When Valdes destroyed him in a round, what happened? Nothing.

You said Weill passed on Valdes after the Charles fight because he wanted to make sure Marciano’s nose was okay. In other words, Weill was “AFRAID” Valdes would destroy that nose again, with his power punches

Maybe your right. Valdes was a man with 36 knock outs to his name, it would have been a risky strategy. I suppose it's always better to fight a man who has -
131 KNOCKOUTS and is probably the greatest KO puncher in the history of the sport!

I don't mean to overstate my case. But the facts speak for themselves.

And Rocky wasn’t invincible. Moore and Walcott had him down.

Your right. They really HURT Rocky, and they didn't catach him off balance at all... I mean he was down for a grand total of...... SEVEN SECONDS!!!!

That's right - he was really, really hurt.

Charles split his nose and Rocky nearly lost via TKO in their rematch.

Rocky had one round to knock him out and he did... end of story.

[Dubblechin]

Stop inferring the Moore-Vadles eliminator was a bad decision . . .none of the ringside writers had Valdes even within a couple points of Moore. Nino gave him a tough fight but Moore was the clear winner.

And Nino didn't use his reach effectively at all . . he preferred to go in on shorter guys and use his strength and power to work the body and come up top with hooks to the head. Marciano would not have had to work hard at all to get Nino on the inside. And he would've destroyed him there. The best Nino would get is maybe stunning Rocky with something at some point in the fight, but no way would Valdes have lasted the distance.

First of all, YOU never saw the fight. The fight wasn't scored on POINTS it was scored on ROUNDS, and the actual judge had it close. And how many different ringside reporters reviews of that fight have you read? Because I'd love to read ALL of them.

The only judge (the ref) scored the 15-rounder for Moore 8 rounds to 5 with 2 even. He also admitted to a bias against Valdes in a previous fight. If he gave Valdes the EVEN rounds it's 8-7.

Both men were beaten badly. Both were hurt in the fight.

Given that the lone judge had Moore-Valdes basically a one-round fight, it's fair to say two additional judges could've easily seen it the other way.

Consider the fact that if only ONE judge scored Provodnikov-Algieri last Saturday - and it was the one who had Provodnikov winning by EIGHT points (because he said he favored that style) - AND NONE OF US SAW IT, we'd all be saying that fight wasn't close at all, wouldn't we?

But we know differently. Because we saw it. It wasn't held in a desert with no cameras. And more than one "admittedly" biased judge (because Braddock admitted he didn't like Valdes' style at all) scored it.

And how do you know what Marciano would've done against Valdes?

Marciano was supposed to "destroy" Charles, too. Not only was their first meeting close, Marciano nearly lost the rematch on a TKO. He was supposed to destroy Cockell, too. But he had to hit him about a 1,000 times just to put him down.

Valdes didn't have that much trouble with either.

[Dubblechin]

Crease

First, Nino Valdes wasn't a myth. He was the number-one contender. The actual number one contender in an era when there was ONE CHAMP -- not a half-dozen champs and a half-dozen ratings bodies.

Valdes was the number-one contender.

He rose to the top spot by beating a handful of guys also ranked in the top 10. No one put him there magically. He won the fights and climbed the ratings.

Second, Charles was the #2 contender when Valdes beat him. Neuhaus was the #4 contender when Valdes beat him. #Jackson was the #5 contender when Valdes beat him. All world-rated. So, yes, he earned it.

Third, Valdes was nowhere near a title shot when he lost in 1952 or later in his career when the wheels had come off and he was losing to guys like Machen.

Like Young, Valdes started off losing against most names, then he went on a run where he beat the top contenders and reached the number one spot, and once he "lost" an eliminator to Moore, the wheels came off.

Just like Jimmy Young started losing to everyone again after he lost his eliminator to Norton.

Had they never fought, I'm sure people would say Jimmy Young never could've beaten George Foreman, given Young lost to Gerry Cooney late in his career and to Shavers early in his career. But the fact is when they fought when Young was on his roll, Young BEAT Foreman.

So all this nonsense that Valdes - fighting at his best - would have no chance against Rocky is Bull. Marciano never fought a guy 6'3" slugger with a foot reach on him.

What we DO know is a guy who was a 6'3" slugger with a foot reach on Marciano fought his way to the number-one contender spot, and MARCIANO's manager (who got HALF of all Marciano's income) kept putting up roadblocks and matching that contender tough UNTIL he lost.

[BrocktonBlockbuster49]

First of all, if Weill wanted Marciano to fight Valdes, Rocky would have.

Valdes had already beaten half the top 10 heavyweights – Ezzard Charles, the reigning European Heavyweight champ Heinz Neuhaus, “Hurricane” Jackson, Larel Sys and a handful of fringe contenders waiting for his turn. He was the legit number-one contender. Nothing was preventing the fight from taking place BUT AL WEILL.

The link you posted is about the 15th article written on a proposed Marciano-Valdes fight after the second Marciano-Charles bout. The head of the IBC Jim Norris was pushing hard for Marciano to defend against Valdes in Miami because Norris thought he could make a fortune. But there are articles in which Norris is quoted as saying Weill won’t commit. And he never did.

Nobody Marciano was defending against had to win "eliminators" to meet him. What eliminators did Walcott, La Startza, Charles or Cockell win? They didn’t. You schedule “eliminators” to “eliminate” someone.

Nobody was begging for a Cockell-Marciano fight. Cockell was one of the biggest underdogs up to that time in boxing history.

And if Weill wanted to schedule an eliminator, why didn't he match #1 contender Valdes with #2 contender Cockell (who Valdes later destroyed)?

He didn’t because he knew Valdes had previously lost a decision to Moore. Moore’s style (which was nothing like Marciano’s) gave Valdes problems. It didn't matter that Moore wasn't rated in the top 10 at heavyweight. Weill insisted Valdes had to fight Moore.

Weill had Valdes fighting one top 10 guy after another (while Marciano spent a whole year focused on Charles, who Valdes had just beaten), even forcing Valdes to fly to freaking BELGIUM (no easy feat in 1954) to fight Sys, no doubt hoping Valdes would lose to one of them. Hell, the Valdes-Jackson fight was billed as an eliminator, too. When Valdes destroyed him in a round, what happened?

Nothing.

You said Weill passed on Valdes after the Charles fight because he wanted to make sure Marciano’s nose was okay. In other words, Weill was “AFRAID” Valdes would destroy that nose again, with his power punches and his FOOT reach advantage. So they took on short, fat Don Cockell instead.

When the champ doesn't want to fight a guy, it certainly helps when his manager is also the matchmaker for the controlling body. Doesn't it?

You make your fighter's most dangerous opponent first face a guy whose style he has trouble with.

Then you stage that "final eliminator" with Moore in a place where essentially no boxing matches were taking place, no television cameras were rolling, with one referee being the sole judge (a ref who had previously stated his dislike for Valdes).

So when Valdes collapsed in the ring crying after the decision was read because he felt he'd been robbed, nobody could see it because it was in park in the middle of the freaking desert.

How many major fights were held in Vegas before 1955? The Moore-Valdes fight wasn't even held at a casino. It was held in park someplace in town.

And A ONE FOOT reach advantage IS significant. Thomas Hearns had a one foot reach advantage over Duran. Think that reach helped Hearns avoid Duran’s punches and land his own?

I don’t think Valdes was something special. But he was the #1 contender. He earned his shot. His style would’ve given Marciano all kinds of problems. But Marciano’s manager, as the IBC matchmaker, did everything in his power to block the fight and until Valdes finally lost.

Styles make fights. If Frazier and Norton had to beat Foreman before they got a title shot with Ali, they never would’ve got one. Just because Valdes lost to Moore and Moore lost to Marciano doesn’t mean Valdes loses to Marciano.

And Rocky wasn’t invincible. Moore and Walcott had him down. Walcott was leading on all the cards against him. Charles split his nose and Rocky nearly lost via TKO in their rematch. A tall bomber with a foot reach on Rocky would’ve given him all kinds of trouble.

In a way, I’ve always viewed the run Valdes made as similar to the run Jimmy Young later made. Young lost plenty. He lost to some bums. He was knocked out in three rounds by Shavers. He wasn’t superior at anything.

But over a brief period, he beat Lyle, Foreman, and appeared to decision Ali and Norton. Young was arguably the best heavyweight in the world for a span of a few months. But right after losing to Norton in a razor-thin fight, he was losing handily to the likes of novice Ossie Ocasio. And Young’s run was over.

Valdes deserved the shot. Weill blocked it.

And had Valdes somehow overcome the biased ref/lone judge in the Moore eliminator, I doubt Marciano would've fought him anyway. Weill and Marciano never had any intention of fighting Valdes (his style was all wrong for Rocky), they just wanted some other fighter to take care of him.

You are clearly a troll. I am not going to even bother replying to this post. The only thing I will add is that Marciano had a style which would give Valdes all kinds of problems. Marciano brings punching power, ferociousness, stamina, strength, awkwardness, and a workrate that valdes has never seen before, nor will Valdes be able to cope with. Marciano would have knocked out valdes out.

[BrocktonBlockbuster49]

Stop inferring the Moore-Vadles eliminator was a bad decision . . .none of the ringside writers had Valdes even within a couple points of Moore. Nino gave him a tough fight but Moore was the clear winner.

And Nino didn't use his reach effectively at all . . he preferred to go in on shorter guys and use his strength and power to work the body and come up top with hooks to the head. Marciano would not have had to work hard at all to get Nino on the inside. And he would've destroyed him there. The best Nino would get is maybe stunning Rocky with something at some point in the fight, but no way would Valdes have lasted the distance.

Thanks Dempsey Fire....Saved me the time of responding to this guy. He clearly has an agenda against Marciano. I am surprised he is so hung up on nino valdes. Valdes wasn't even as good as Bob Baker or Clarence Henry

[BrocktonBlockbuster49]

Ill leave this thread at this...


1. Charles was the # 1 contender when he fought Marciano. NOT Valdes.


Ring Magazine May 1954

Champion: Rocky Marciano
1. Ezzard Charles
2. Nino Valdes
3. Don Cockell
4. Jimmy Slade
5. Tommy Jackson
6. Roland La Starza
7. Dan Bucceroni
8. Earl Walls
9. Heinz Neuhaus
10. Tommy Harrison

Ring Magazine July 1954

Champion--Rocky Marciano
1. Ezzard Charles
2. Nino Valdes
3. Don Cockell
4. Jimmy Slade
5. Roland LaStarza
6. Hurricane Jackson
7. Don Bucceroni
8. Bob Baker
9. Earl Walls
10. Heinz Neuhaus


"Charles has earned the chance to fight Marciano. It will not be necessary for him further to prove his right as the No. 1 contender." -Truman Gibson, IBC secretary, regarding Charles's shot at the title.- March 1954

2. Archie Moore-Nino Valdes decision was NOT controversial. It was a close fight in which Archie closed the show in the last 3 rounds, to win a tight decision. Archie went out in the 15th and beat the hell out of Valdes, securing the win.

"Moore's showing tonight against Valdes was so impressive that the heavyweight champion must defend against him, possibly at New York in September." -Truman Gibson, IBC secretary

[Crease]

Valdes lost more fights to top contenders than what he won. If you care to count them up, you know that you will be found out.

I've got a half hour to kill, and I've decided to put this to the test.

Nino Valdes - good wins:
Aug 1953: Defeated Ezzard Charles by UD.
Sep 1953: Defeated Doc Williams by UD.
July 1954: Defeated Hurricane Jackson by TKO 2.
Sep 1955: Defeated Don Cockell by TKO.

losses:
Nov 1952: lost to Harold Johnson by UD.
Mar 1953: lost to Archie Moore by UD.
May 1953: lost to Bob Baker by UD.
May 1955: lost to Archie Moore by Decision.
Aug 1955: lost to Bob Satterfield by UD.
Dec 1955: lost to Bob Baker by UD.
Apr 1956: lost to Eddie Machen by UD.
Jul 1956: lost to Eddie Machen by KO 8.
Sept 1956: lost to Zora Folley by UD.

And these are guys who have reached the top 10 of the Heavyweight Division at some point in their careers. And whilst some fighters like Baker & Satterfield never received a World Title shot, they did linger around the top 10 for a while.

Looking at those lists it's blatantly obvious that Valdes struggled when he fought against top ten contenders, as I already told you. He was strong enough to beat up the bums, but against the finer fighters he kept getting outpointed.

Looking at Nino's career he lost quite a few fights against mediocre opposition (some even by knock out) - so what do you think The Rock would do to him?

[Crease]

1. Charles was the # 1 contender when he fought Marciano. NOT Valdes.


Ring Magazine May 1954

Champion: Rocky Marciano
1. Ezzard Charles
2. Nino Valdes
3. Don Cockell
4. Jimmy Slade
5. Tommy Jackson
6. Roland La Starza
7. Dan Bucceroni
8. Earl Walls
9. Heinz Neuhaus
10. Tommy Harrison

Ring Magazine July 1954

Champion--Rocky Marciano
1. Ezzard Charles
2. Nino Valdes
3. Don Cockell
4. Jimmy Slade
5. Roland LaStarza
6. Hurricane Jackson
7. Don Bucceroni
8. Bob Baker
9. Earl Walls
10. Heinz Neuhaus

Thanks for putting them up Mr Brockton. I find that the monthly Ring rankings are hard to come by. Care to share the link?

[Tuan_Jim]

As one freak with a fixation on a great fighter ducking an average fighter disappears, a brand new freak with a fixation on a great fighter ducking an average fighter pops up. On and on it goes.

These users utterly fascinate me. What a nightmare their minds must be.

[Dubblechin]

Valdes lost more fights to top contenders than what he won. If you care to count them up, you know that you will be found out.

I've got a half hour to kill, and I've decided to put this to the test.

Nino Valdes - good wins:
Aug 1953: Defeated Ezzard Charles by UD.
Sep 1953: Defeated Doc Williams by UD.
July 1954: Defeated Hurricane Jackson by TKO 2.
Sep 1955: Defeated Don Cockell by TKO.

losses:
Nov 1952: lost to Harold Johnson by UD.
Mar 1953: lost to Archie Moore by UD.
May 1953: lost to Bob Baker by UD.
May 1955: lost to Archie Moore by Decision.
Aug 1955: lost to Bob Satterfield by UD.
Dec 1955: lost to Bob Baker by UD.
Apr 1956: lost to Eddie Machen by UD.
Jul 1956: lost to Eddie Machen by KO 8.
Sept 1956: lost to Zora Folley by UD.

And these are guys who have reached the top 10 of the Heavyweight Division at some point in their careers. And whilst some fighters like Baker & Satterfield never received a World Title shot, they did linger around the top 10 for a while.

Looking at those lists it's blatantly obvious that Valdes struggled when he fought against top ten contenders, as I already told you. He was strong enough to beat up the bums, but against the finer fighters he kept getting outpointed.

Looking at Nino's career he lost quite a few fights against mediocre opposition (some even by knock out) - so what do you think The Rock would do to him?

Jimmy Young - Good Wins
* Ron Lyle (twice)
* George Foreman
* Richard Dunn

Jimmy Young - Losses
* Muhammad Ali
* Ken Norton
* Earnie Shavers
* Gerry Cooney
* Michael Dokes
* Randy Neumann
* Ossie Ocasio (twice)
* Greg Page
* Tony Tubbs
* Tony Tucker

Obviously, Jimmy Young was a mediocre fighter who would never come close to being the best in the division.

Oh wait ...he did.


Also, when you get another half hour to kill, Valdes beat a lot more guys who were ranked at heavyweight than that.
*Heinz Neuhaus
*Karel Sys
*Pat McMurtry
*Brian London
*Joe Erskine
*Mike DeJohn
*Johnny Summerlin

But that doesn't help your argument, does it? Better leave those names off.

[Cap]

Let's face it. Rocky was pretty much Weill's stooge. That creep treated the Rock like a dim-witted gofer, even slapping his face once in public for some imagined transgression. Marciano would have fought Godzilla if Weill told him to. Weill for devious reasons of his own twisted mind, did not want anything to do with Valdes. If he had wanted Marciano to defend against Valdes, Rocky would've fought him. End of story.

Would Rocky have whipped Valdes? Probably, but who knows for sure? That's what makes boxing so gaddam interesting. You just never know. Maybe George Molina would've devised a strategy to beat the Rock using Valdes' long left. Jab, Jab, Jab, Clinch. Laying his greater weight over Marciano's back and up against the ropes to tire him out. Or maybe Valdes lands one lucky punch [followed by an elbow] that splits Marciano's forehead so bad the nancy referee stops the fight. You just never know.

[Dubblechin]

Ill leave this thread at this...


1. Charles was the # 1 contender when he fought Marciano. NOT Valdes.


Ring Magazine May 1954

Champion: Rocky Marciano
1. Ezzard Charles
2. Nino Valdes
3. Don Cockell
4. Jimmy Slade
5. Tommy Jackson
6. Roland La Starza
7. Dan Bucceroni
8. Earl Walls
9. Heinz Neuhaus
10. Tommy Harrison

Ring Magazine July 1954

Champion--Rocky Marciano
1. Ezzard Charles
2. Nino Valdes
3. Don Cockell
4. Jimmy Slade
5. Roland LaStarza
6. Hurricane Jackson
7. Don Bucceroni
8. Bob Baker
9. Earl Walls
10. Heinz Neuhaus


"Charles has earned the chance to fight Marciano. It will not be necessary for him further to prove his right as the No. 1 contender." -Truman Gibson, IBC secretary, regarding Charles's shot at the title.- March 1954

2. Archie Moore-Nino Valdes decision was NOT controversial. It was a close fight in which Archie closed the show in the last 3 rounds, to win a tight decision. Archie went out in the 15th and beat the hell out of Valdes, securing the win.

"Moore's showing tonight against Valdes was so impressive that the heavyweight champion must defend against him, possibly at New York in September." -Truman Gibson, IBC secretary

First, I never said Nino Valdes was the number-one contender when Marciano fought Charles. So I have no idea why you posted those ratings.

Also, just because I don't agree with you, that doesn't make me a troll. So I believe Marciano should've fought the number-one rated Valdes. How crazy of me!

And are you seriously quoting TRUMAN GIBSON? Gibson is the guy who said the Marciano-Moore fight was "fixed." Yes, he has a ton of credibility. He was also sentenced to prison for extorting and conspiracy along with Frankie Carbo. Brilliant guy to quote to make your point.

(Side note: If we ever get into a discussion about whether Axel Shulz deserved three straight title shots, don't use a quote from IBF President Bob Lee regarding why he was deserving.)

Weill announced the day after the Walcott rematch that he wanted Rocky to fight Ezzard Charles. Then Ezzard lost to Valdes. Then Ezzard lost again, to Johnson. Marciano beat Roland, and then Ezzard rebounded with a win over ninth-rated Coley Wallace ... and "for some reason" (maybe because he was one of the original IBC fighters) they threw Charles in the number-one contender spot.

That shit has always happened. Tony Tucker was the number-one contender a half-dozen times in the late 80s and 90s, because he was connected.

[Crease]

Just because you are bringing Jimmy Young in to the conversation doesn't prove anything. Young and Valdes are different fighters who fought in different eras.

I can't just throw up an upset like Rahman beating Lewis as proof that Martin Rogan would beat Wlad Klitschsko - it's just not credible. And frankly it doesn't make sense.

[Dubblechin]

Let's face it. Rocky was pretty much Weill's stooge. That creep treated the Rock like a dim-witted gofer, even slapping his face once in public for some imagined transgression. Marciano would have fought Godzilla if Weill told him to. Weill for devious reasons of his own twisted mind, did not want anything to do with Valdes. If he had wanted Marciano to defend against Valdes, Rocky would've fought him. End of story.

Would Rocky have whipped Valdes? Probably, but who knows for sure? That's what makes boxing so gaddam interesting. You just never know. Maybe George Molina would've devised a strategy to beat the Rock using Valdes' long left. Jab, Jab, Jab, Clinch. Laying his greater weight over Marciano's back and up against the ropes to tire him out. Or maybe Valdes lands one lucky punch [followed by an elbow] that splits Marciano's forehead so bad the nancy referee stops the fight. You just never know.

Thank you, fellow troll.

[Dubblechin]

Just because you are bringing Jimmy Young in to the conversation doesn't prove anything. Young and Valdes are different fighters who fought in different eras.

I can't just throw up an upset like Rahman beating Lewis as proof that Martin Rogan would beat Wlad Klitschsko - it's just not credible. And frankly it doesn't make sense.

First, I never said Valdes would beat Marciano. I said Marciano should've fought him but Weill didn't want that fight and blocked it repeatedly until Valdes lost.

And I missed when Martin Rogan beat the number-two contender to Wlad's title ...
And then Emanuel Steward demanded Rogan fight a handful of top 10 contenders ...
And Rogan beat them ...
And then Rogan was asked to fight an eliminator ... and Martin knocked the guy out in two ...
And then Rogan became the #1 contender ... and Steward said he still had to fight another eliminator ...
And then Steward scheduled the final eliminator off television in a desolate location with one judge who reffed previous Rogan fights and said he didn't like him or his style ...
And then that judge scored the eliminator for Rogan's opponent in a close fight ... that no one but the people in the arena saw ...
Thereby preventing Martin from fighting for the title.

When was that? Somehow I missed it.

Because if that's what happened, it sounds a lot like the Valdes situation. And Rogan got screwed, too.

[Crease]

Also, when you get another half hour to kill, Valdes beat a lot more guys who were ranked at heavyweight than that.
*Heinz Neuhaus
*Karel Sys
*Pat McMurtry
*Brian London
*Joe Erskine
*Mike DeJohn
*Johnny Summerlin

But that doesn't help your argument, does it? Better leave those names off.

Are you really going to put those guys in the "World Title Contender" bracket? You can't just start naming a lesser class of opposition and then trying to palm them off as significant movers of the Dvision at that time... They weren't.

Believe me I know. I've researched the 1950s Heavyweight Division for years.

[Dubblechin]

Also, when you get another half hour to kill, Valdes beat a lot more guys who were ranked at heavyweight than that.
*Heinz Neuhaus
*Karel Sys
*Pat McMurtry
*Brian London
*Joe Erskine
*Mike DeJohn
*Johnny Summerlin

But that doesn't help your argument, does it? Better leave those names off.

Are you really going to put those guys in the "World Title Contender" bracket? You can't just start naming a lesser class of opposition and then trying to palm them off as significant movers of the Dvision at that time... They weren't.

Believe me I know. I've researched the 1950s Heavyweight Division for years.

Pass them off. They were all top-10 ranked at heavyweight in the 50s. That was your criteria, right? Oh, I left off Wayne Bethea.

*Heinz Neuhaus
*Karel Sys
*Pat McMurtry
*Brian London
*Joe Erskine
*Mike DeJohn
*Johnny Summerlin
* Wayne Bethea

[Crease]

Dubblechin, Valdes had his big chance in 1955, he really did. That fight against Archie Moore was make or break for him and he failed.

I don't know why you are trying to keep up this one man crusade of yours...

Valdes had a terrible habit of losing against lesser fighters, check his record and you'll notice it. At least Cockell was doing exceptionally well when he got his shot against The Rock.

Listen, with respect - I'm really struggling with your point of view on this. I'm sure other posters could make even more compelling arguments regarding Baker or Satterfield. And yet, Valdes has become this standard which all Marciano-doubters can rally around.

[Crease]

Pass them off. They were all top-10 ranked at heavyweight in the 50s. That was your criteria, right? Oh, I left off Wayne Bethea.

*Heinz Neuhaus
*Karel Sys
*Pat McMurtry
*Brian London
*Joe Erskine
*Mike DeJohn
*Johnny Summerlin
* Wayne Bethea

You do realise that in the top 10 - you can only name 10 fighters... Those guys weren't the cream of the crop and you're deluding yourself if you think otherwise.

[Crease]

Okay, this is open for debate but I'll throw down a list of 10 Heavyweight fighters from the 1950s: (I'll focus in from 1950-55 and I'll exclude Marciano)

Jersey Joe Walcott
Ezzard Charles
Bob Baker
Bob Satterfield
Don Cockell
Rex Layne
Hurricane Jackson
Clarence Henry
Roland LaStarza
Kid Matthews

[Dubblechin]

Dubblechin, Valdes had his big chance in 1955, he really did. That fight against Archie Moore was make or break for him and he failed.

Listen, with respect - I'm really struggling with your point of view on this. I'm sure other posters could make even more compelling arguments regarding Baker or Satterfield. And yet, Valdes has become this standard which all Marciano-doubters can rally around.

More compelling arguments for Baker and Satterfield?

When were Bob Satterfield and Bob Baker the number-one contenders for Marciano's title?

And when did the IBC President Jim Norris publicly state he wanted Marciano to fight them, and when did Al Weill block their title shots by insisting they fight a couple eliminators first - even though they were already number-one?

I'm not a "Marciano doubter" or a "Marciano hater."

My point is the IBC was a dirty organization. Carbo, Gibson, Palermo were all convicted of federal crimes. (Jim Norris only avoided prosecution by using his influence). Al Weill was this collection of criminals' matchmaker ... in addition to being Marciano's manager. And the trials of those guys showed you could just as easily fix a fight through proper matchmaking as you could by paying off one of the participants.

In an era when there were fights on national television four nights a week, in major cities all over the U.S., how the hell did Moore-Valdes ... a heavyweight eliminator featuring the #1 heavyweight contender and the light heavyweight champion of the world ... end up off-television, in minor-league ballpark ... in the freaking desert (when all Vegas had were a half-dozen hotels on a single strip of road ran by the freaking MAFIA) ... with the referee (who didn't like Valdes) serving as the sole judge?

You're in the middle of a desert, the only hotels in town are run by the mob, and the mob staged the fight. Is everyone on the same page?

I keep repeating that but if you are going to fix a fight in favor of one guy, Al Weill couldn't have down a better job of making sure nothing favored Valdes.

We see bad decisions in boxing every week.

But people bring up the Moore-Valdes fight, and everyone is outraged if you raise any questions... even though every effort was made to ensure people didn't see it and, within a couple years, just about everyone involved in making that fight (excluding the fighters themselves) were charged with conspiracy and extortion.

But don't question that result ... or you're a troll.

Take a step back and look at the situation, and that fight sticks out like a sore thumb.

In an era when every major fight was televised, they buried that one in the desert. I checked, there were NO major fights in Vegas in the years before that or that year. Just this one. And, that night, the Moore-Valdes fight wasn't televised (if Nevada even had the infrastructure or capability to broadcast it). Instead, the Virgil Akins fight from New York was the featured fight.

If you don't think that situation was ripe to manipulate, you've got your head buried in the sand.

That's all.

[Dubblechin]

Okay, this is open for debate but I'll throw down a list of 10 Heavyweight fighters from the 1950s: (I'll focus in from 1950-55 and I'll exclude Marciano)

Jersey Joe Walcott
Ezzard Charles
Bob Baker
Bob Satterfield
Don Cockell
Rex Layne
Hurricane Jackson
Clarence Henry
Roland LaStarza
Kid Matthews

I have no idea what you're doing. First you listed some guys Valdes fought who were once ranked in the top 10, now you're making the BEST OF lists from that era. You're all over the place.

Valdes fought and beat a lot of top 10 guys. He earned the number one spot. He was ranked number one. I have no idea what ranking the 10 best heavyweights from 1950 to 1955 has to do with anything.

I'm going to go.