Jaclem wrote:..first of all..it was the ibc who was making most of the matches in the period under discussion. joe louis had some say in the deals..he was responsible for the pat valentino (who was not half blind) match up.
charles did not opt to fight walcott for "the millionth time." this was a shady deal made by jake mintz whi had been..ah..."placed" into the charles camp as the elkus family was being eased out. the walcott folks gave mintz $10,000 to make the third walcott fight..for which no one, including those left from the original charles backers were aware of...until weeks after it was made.
if you consider, as i do and everyone but nat fleischer did..that charles won the title in the first match with walcott...look at the dates..that fight was on june 22, 1949...and he defended against lesnevich..ON AUGUST 14 OF THAT SAME YEAR.. the quickest first defense of a heavy title in boxing history..faster even than joe louis' record....and then again ..against pat velentino....on OCTOBER 14 OF THAT SAME YEAR.!!! These were fights made until a name opponent came to the fore. lesnevich had been built up as an opponent on the basis that his losses as a light heavy were because he was weight drained. plus, he a was popular in new york.
strictly for purses.
the real contenders were walcott and louis...who was winning again, after his loss to charles. as bad as he had looked in that fight, he was being rehabilitated .... with these wins and stories than he wsn't really in shape when he fought charles...plus his unmatched record in rematches...and he was still a box office draw.
as for charles's wins in 1948..before he fought walcott ....they were seven out of seven...and included his kayo over moore, his tragic kayo of baroudi...a kayo over elmo ray...another win over jimmy bivins....and his one sided battering over joe baksi....a tough and highly regarded heavyweight who had once been in line to challenge joe louis which never came about because he was erratic,accident prone and a little nuts....but big and tough and experienced.
niether lastarza or marciano were in the mix for challenging during the periods i have listed. there was no way al weill was going to put marciano in with charles at this stage of the latter's career. he hadn't yet proved himself, and certainly la starza hadn't.
the above paragraph has points that have already been made by others on this thread.
charles was a fighting champion...and the valentino, barone and beshore fights were made not INSTEAD of fighting better challengers, but in additiion to.
incidentally,the reason for the long long layoff for charles...all the way from..gasp....october of 1949 until august 15 of 1951.....gee ..nearly a year!!!.....was because he had an injured muscle leading to the heart and doctors insisted he take some time off.
while i am still here....in 1949 lee oma was listed as no. 2..under charles with "title vacant" in fleischerville...walcott , bivins and valentino were all rated above the number 10 guy..lastarza. in 1950 joe louis was the number one contender..maxim #3..walcott #7 and rocky marciano #10.
henry and bob baker were in the top 10........and good old lee oma was also still hanging around in the top ten.
this post has nothing to do with any other champions and their title defenses. just about charles and his.
the valentino match was because valentino (he with the long hair and 20/20 vision) had a west coast following and ezzard hadn't really been seen there.
Valentino was past his prime and had a bad eye when he fought charles.
I heard from a sourve that Valentino had 4 weeks to train for that fight and he was coming off of a year layoff following an eye operation Valentino got 5000$ for that fight and 7500$ for his next an exhibition against Louis in which he was kod in the 8th ,what many people dont know is that Valentino was blind in his right eye at the time of the Louis fight
.baker's camp wanted "more time" before they issued a challenge to charles.
when and where did bakers camp say this??
.rex layne..in the top ten had already lost to charles
layne didnt lose to charles until after charles was champion. while charles was champion, rex layne beat jersey joe walcott in 1950 and was a top contender yet rex layne never got a shot at the title and walcott did instead. surely layne deserved a title shot over nick barone!!!
why didnt charles give gene tiger jones, sid peaks title shots?? these guys deserved shots more than a shot lesnevich and beshore.
clarence henry was higher ranked than lee oma and a much better fighter. why did lee oma get a title shot instead of clarence henry??
