BoxRec

I think Marciano would walk right through Jones and knock him out in brutal fashion...however I think Jones easily outpoints Leon Spinks, unless Spinks can land a lucky shot.

Prime LHW Roy Jones would have a pretty good chance against Marciano. They were about a wash in height, with Jones having the reach advantage and Marciano arguably having a slight weight advantage. Remember, prime LHW RJJ came into the ring at about 182-188. He'd be slightly stronger than normal with not having to drain down to make weight.

I agree with an earlier comment about Jones' chin. He proved to have a pretty good chin during his entire career until he moved back down from heavyweight, losing a good amount of muscle mass in the process, and got KO'd at age 35. Was Marciano even around at 35? In all likelihood, Marciano would have gotten KO'd if he'd stuck around till he was 35, say against Liston, so history cannot hold that against Jones either.

Jones would use his seven-inch reach advantage and stay out of harms way. Remember, we are talking PRIME RJJ and not 35-plus. It's funny that everyone becomes a Jones hater once he loses in his mid-thirties. No one holds it against Joe Louis or Muhammad Ali or Evander Holyfield or Ezzard Charles. Don't forget, Jones dominated the light heavyweights for seven years, not to mention the middleweights and super middleweights for an extra three or so. Marciano only was at the top of his division from '52 to '55 (sorry, can't count '51 since he wasn't champ and can't count '56 since he didn't have a fight).

Now that being said, I am not sold that Jones definitely wins. He has a great chance due to his superior speed and athleticism but Marciano was a tough customer with a never-say-die attitude. It's entirely possible he could catch Jones late in the fight with a big right that lays him cold, but it is also just as possible that Jones outboxes Marciano and takes the win.

Over twelve rounds, I favor Jones by decision. That is what he was accustomed to fighting. Over fifteen, I pick Marciano with a come-from-behind KO. I know I might get a lot of "you are stupid" and "you don't know boxing from ballroom dancing," but that's how I see it and I stick to my pick.

Speaking of which, Leon Spinks over Roy Jones? Don't make me a laugh. Spinks gets a good win over a fat, washed up Muhammad Ali and that makes him better than Jones at heavyweight? Washed up Ali, already exhibiting signs of Parkinson's Syndrome, gave "Neon Leon" a free boxing lesson in the rematch and Spinks was up and down (more often down) for the rest of his career.

Well it appears my matchup was one sided, I should have known better Marciano obviously takes Jones Jr. My next one will hopefully be better.

~A.W.F~

evsrbn, if the prime roy jones ur talking about came into the ring vs marciano at 168-175lb he would end up like harry kid mathews.


i agree with barry.....marciano really would walk right through jones and lay him out cold.


i believe ur selling marciano short here. marciano was very good at cutting off the ring. he had no trouble hitting fast defensive masterminds like charles, walcott, moore, lastarza. jones never fought a fighter like marciano. he never proved he could handle a heavyweight of marcianos stature. marcianos simply way to strong and powerful for jones to handle.even if marciano has trouble hitting jones......he will throw punches everwhere to the arms, body, shoulders that will take the life out of jones. really eversbn, theres no way jones survives 12 rounds vs marciano. jones wont be able to handle marcianos strength or power.....let alone marcianos pressure and non stop volume of punches.

jones speed and athletism will give marciano fits until marciano catches him and let me make it clear marciano WILL at somepoint in the fight catch jones

BrocktonBlockbuster49 wrote:evsrbn, if the prime roy jones ur talking about came into the ring vs marciano at 168-175lb he would end up like harry kid mathews.


i agree with barry.....marciano really would walk right through jones and lay him out cold.


i believe ur selling marciano short here. marciano was very good at cutting off the ring. he had no trouble hitting fast defensive masterminds like charles, walcott, moore, lastarza. jones never fought a fighter like marciano. he never proved he could handle a heavyweight of marcianos stature. marcianos simply way to strong and powerful for jones to handle.even if marciano has trouble hitting jones......he will throw punches everwhere to the arms, body, shoulders that will take the life out of jones. really eversbn, theres no way jones survives 12 rounds vs marciano

I agree with this. Marciano would stop Jones. Marciano would break down Jones, even if Marciano wouldn't be hitting Jones cleanly, it'd hurt Roy's arms and body until eventually he couldn't take it anymore. A bit like Cotto hurt Branco in their fight.

I think Jones is one of the best fighters ever, but he does not have the punch, or durability to keep a fighter like Marciano off him, though he probably might hang around a few rounds, but Marciano was just too powerful for Jones and would bust him up.

evsrbn,


u keep saying "prime roy jones". well wasnt prime roy jones 168-175lb? surely ur not gonna send that version in against marciano. wouldnt u rather send the 193lb version of the ruiz fight in vs marciano?


bottom line: roy jones is not proven enough at heavyweight to be possibly chose over an ATG top 10 heavyweight of all time


roy jones wont be able to simply outbox marciano cause he doesnt have the punch to keep marciano off him

Jones has fought big punchers who couldn't keep up with him. Marciano would keep coming after him and have that sledghammer punch ready any time in the whole fight. He's a lot stronger than Roy and would hurt him on the inside. Prime Jones or Jones at 193 would still get kocked out.


~A.W.F~

BrocktonBlockbuster49 wrote:evsrbn,


u keep saying "prime roy jones". well wasnt prime roy jones 168-175lb? surely ur not gonna send that version in against marciano. wouldnt u rather send the 193lb version of the ruiz fight in vs marciano?


bottom line: roy jones is not proven enough at heavyweight to be possibly chose over an ATG top 10 heavyweight of all time


roy jones wont be able to simply outbox marciano cause he doesnt have the punch to keep marciano off him

I said prime LHW Jones, which would imply Jones at his best at 175 lbs. Jones at LHW would come into a fight with Marciano in the 180s if he wasn't trying to make weight.

Anyway, you can't use an example like Ezzard Charles. Charles in the Marciano fights was notably slower than Jones AND himself only a few years earlier. Charles in '49 against Pat Valentino had better hand and foot speed than the Charles of '51 against Walcott in the third fight and against Marciano in '54. Why? Not only was he past his prime, but as others argued (myself included), Charles was exhausted from his busy, busy schedule. One of the busiest heavyweight champions ever.

Back on track now. If Jones fought against Marciano in a 12-round bout, I still think Jones outpoints him. I think Marciano KOs him late in a 15-round fight. The possible extra nine minutes would be key for Marciano, who trained to go out for the 15th like it was the first. Much like how possibly different a Leonard-Hagler fight might have been if it was 15 rounds.

I'm not trying to disgrace an ATG like Marciano. I just think it is a bad style match up for Rocky. Much like Lennox Lewis and Evander Holyfield are bad style match ups for Marciano.

Charles was exhausted from his busy, busy schedule. One of the busiest heavyweight champions ever.

thats such bullshit. these guys were IBC controlled ham and eggers charles was fighting. they werent gruelling fights that take the life out of you.

why wasnt charles exhausted in 1951 when he clearly outpointed walcott? then all of a sudden in a matter of months charles is exhausted? bullshit exuses. fact is walcott in the 3rd and 4th charles fights adopted a better game plan.

i believe walcott was the better heavyweight than charles

Anyway, you can't use an example like Ezzard Charles. Charles in the Marciano fights was notably slower than Jones AND himself only a few years earlier. Charles in '49 against Pat Valentino had better hand and foot speed than the Charles of '51 against Walcott in the third fight and against Marciano in '54.

why cant i use charles as an example? the june 1954 charles was still a better heavyweight than roy jones. that version would have still beat roy jones. so wut if he was slower, even in 54 he was still quite fast and he was still an all around very skilled fighter. besides the charles of 54 was great in other areas that jones wasnt.



dont even try to downgrade marcianos opponents. who the hell has jones fought that compares to marciano? who has jones fought with marcianos power and strength? what heavyweights in jones prime did he fight? those 175lb scrubs he fought were nothing compared to marciano. jones may have been extremley fast, but he did not possess the power, size, strength, durablity, and inside fighting skills that walcott, charles, moore had. jones would not be able to keep marciano off of him.

u say marciano doesnt match up well with jones? wut about jones with marciano? marcianos power, strength, pressure, volume of punches would give jones fits. wut inside fighting skills and firepower has jones showed that he could keep a ATG heavyweight off of him? jones does not have the durability or power to keep marciano off of him or to take marcianos punches. the first time marciano lands, its over and he will land cause marciano landed on better defensive fighters than jones.


even if marciano has trouble hitting jones head, then he will pound away at jones arms, shoulders, body and it will turn into another lastarza fight with jones taking horribly punishment to the body to the point where he will not even be able to lift up his arms.


look wut happened when marciano faced a top fighter who weighed in near 175lb( 178lb harry kid mathews)...... DOMINATION.





i am also talking about the peak 1951 rocky marciano. not the slower 54-55 marciano whos style changed.

Much like Lennox Lewis and Evander Holyfield are bad style match ups for Marciano.

i think marciano knocks both out. do u share this opinion? qawi showed a short pressure strong fighter gives holyfield fits. holy heart was so big and he would end up trying to brawl with marciano and that would be his downfall.

Both Holyfield and Lewis would batter Marciano; Lewis scoring an early ko and Holyfield tkoing him late. Marciano was much to small to handle these two.

theone wrote:Both Holyfield and Lewis would batter Marciano; Lewis scoring an early ko and Holyfield tkoing him late. Marciano was much to small to handle these two.

a prime holyfield was 205lb yet marcianos too small?


wut if marciano came into the ring at 205lb which he would if he were fighting today? then would u give him a chance?


also holyfield late TKO? marciano had a granite chin. holy wasnt a big puncher. marciano was a killer in the late rounds, much more deadly than evander. yet evander stops marciano late? wanna make any other crazy comments? hell if evander wins, its by decision. quite frankly, i think evander was made for marciano.

i think marciano knocks out lennox with a overhand right hand in mid rounds

Decagon wrote:I think Lennox Lewis's right hand would do more damage than Moore's or Walcott's punches did. This is a big fight. Anything could happen.

i also think walcotts and moores punches were a lot faster, more sneaky than lennox's so there harder to defend. marciano would have a much easier time fending off lennox's punches than a walcott or moores. if accurate sharp shooters like walcott and moore said marciano was hard to hit with a clean punch, then lennox will have a much harder time hitting marciano cleanly.



dont forget......lennox was knocked out twice by one right hand by B level fighters. THIS NEVER HAPPENED TO MARCIANO. marciano lands his overhand right, ITS OVER!

BrocktonBlockbuster49 wrote:

Charles was exhausted from his busy, busy schedule. One of the busiest heavyweight champions ever.

thats such bullshit. these guys were IBC controlled ham and eggers charles was fighting. they werent gruelling fights that take the life out of you.

why wasnt charles exhausted in 1951 when he clearly outpointed walcott? then all of a sudden in a matter of months charles is exhausted? bullshit exuses. fact is walcott in the 3rd and 4th charles fights adopted a better game plan.

i believe walcott was the better heavyweight than charles

Anyway, you can't use an example like Ezzard Charles. Charles in the Marciano fights was notably slower than Jones AND himself only a few years earlier. Charles in '49 against Pat Valentino had better hand and foot speed than the Charles of '51 against Walcott in the third fight and against Marciano in '54.

why cant i use charles as an example? the june 1954 charles was still a better heavyweight than roy jones. that version would have still beat roy jones. so wut if he was slower, even in 54 he was still quite fast and he was still an all around very skilled fighter. besides the charles of 54 was great in other areas that jones wasnt.



dont even try to downgrade marcianos opponents. who the hell has jones fought that compares to marciano? who has jones fought with marcianos power and strength? what heavyweights in jones prime did he fight? those 175lb scrubs he fought were nothing compared to marciano. jones may have been extremley fast, but he did not possess the power, size, strength, durablity, and inside fighting skills that walcott, charles, moore had. jones would not be able to keep marciano off of him.

u say marciano doesnt match up well with jones? wut about jones with marciano? marcianos power, strength, pressure, volume of punches would give jones fits. wut inside fighting skills and firepower has jones showed that he could keep a ATG heavyweight off of him? jones does not have the durability or power to keep marciano off of him or to take marcianos punches. the first time marciano lands, its over and he will land cause marciano landed on better defensive fighters than jones.


even if marciano has trouble hitting jones head, then he will pound away at jones arms, shoulders, body and it will turn into another lastarza fight with jones taking horribly punishment to the body to the point where he will not even be able to lift up his arms.


look wut happened when marciano faced a top fighter who weighed in near 175lb( 178lb harry kid mathews)...... DOMINATION.





i am also talking about the peak 1951 rocky marciano. not the slower 54-55 marciano whos style changed.

Hmmm. Interesting take. First off, Henry "Kid" Mathews was NO Roy Jones Jr. Second, you can't use that version of Ezzard Charles because he was clearly past his best!! CLEARLY!

IBC controlled ham and eggers? He fought Jersey Joe Walcott three times (all competitive, tough fights), former light heavyweight champion Gus Lesnevich, Pat Valentino (a war), Freddie Beshore, Joe Louis (took a lot of punishment), Nick Barone, Lee Oma, and current LHW champ Joey Maxim in under a thirteen months span! 110 ROUNDS IN THIRTEEN MONTHS! This is only covering his title reign. I'll break down a few you might have a problem with:

Oma: 15-1-0, 1 NC in last 17 fights before fighting Charles, including wins over Ted Lowry, a KO 1 over Fitzie Fitzpatrick, two decisions over Freddie Beshore, a win over Nick Barone, and a win over your vaunted Bob Satterfield, avenging his only loss in that run.

Valentino: won a fifteen round decision over Turkey Thompson in the fight before his good fight with Charles. Watch the film, you might learn something. Very capable fighter who I think was blind in one eye or something like that.

Barone: according to reports, gave Charles a good fight. He also went 5-1 before facing Charles, with the only loss being a decision to Lee Oma.

Beshore: I don't know how he got the shot, he is the only one that somewhat fits your "ham and egger" description. Charles easily beat him, but it still went 14 rounds and Ezzard went another 15 against JOE LOUIS barely a month later.

As a rule of thumb, fighters that have over 300 rounds are almost assured to get pugilistica dementia. Charles fought over a third of that only in his title reign. We won't ever know about Charles since he was dealt a worse card medically.

BrocktonBlockbuster49 wrote:

Much like Lennox Lewis and Evander Holyfield are bad style match ups for Marciano.

i think marciano knocks both out. do u share this opinion? qawi showed a short pressure strong fighter gives holyfield fits. holy heart was so big and he would end up trying to brawl with marciano and that would be his downfall.

Marciano KO Holyfield? What? Not likely. Any basis to this? Holyfield fought Qawi in his TWELFTH fight and still won a 15 round decision. So what if he had a tough fight, he won it and he won it spectacularly. Do you think Marciano could have beaten this version of Qawi in his twelfth fight? I don't think so.

Who exactly KO'd Holyfield in his prime, anyway? He was "down" twice, both debatable. A lot of referees would not have called his "knockdown" against Cooper a knockdown because he didn't hit the ground. The ropes might have held him up so it is a debatable call. Holyfield was also training to fight two different fighters, Tyson and Francesco Damiani. Instead, he got a ferocious Bert Cooper, who he beat the hell out of minus the shot he got caught with. He was firing back on Cooper pretty well after the knockdown too. Also, his knockdown agaisnt Bowe in the first fight was BS. Bowe swung out from Holyfield, which caused Holyfield's back to be turned from Bowe and Bowe slammed a right hand to the BACK of Holyfield's head. Holyfield was holding the back of his head and DROOLING from the shot which could have killed him since it was smack dab on the cerebrum.

Prime and post-prime Holyfield was too durable for Marciano. He was not a light hitter as you say and he had a chin superior to Marciano's. He might not have had the one punch power of Tyson, but he had solid punching ability which he showed time and time again. Enough to TKO Marciano anyway. Holyfield TKO 9 Marciano, whether it be cuts or good old regular stoppage.

And Lewis? Lewis KO 4.

holyfield showed in his prime he loved to brawl. he was easy to be drawn into a brawl. he will unquestionably end up trying to brawl in the marciano fight and this will get him knocked out. marcianos would rough up holy on the inside...the better inside fighter than holy. marciano was also the much better puncher than holyfield. marciano will throw non stop punches on the inside and these will take there toll on evander. i believe marciano was the stronger fighter in the late rounds than evander.......and evander will be worn out by this point and try to brawl and marciano will jump all over holy and finish him off. the ref will stop the fight with evander out on his feet. evander simply cant expect to brawl with marciano and come out alive.

evander stop marciano? no way. evander wasnt a big puncher. he was a good puncher but it takes only an ATG puncher to stop marciano. marciano had a granite chin, incredible recup powers. we never seen marciano badly wobbed on film. walcott hit just as hard as evander if not harder(probably harder). walcott hit marciano with everything he had and still didnt come close to stopping marciano in the mid-late rounds. evanders only chance is to win this one on points cause no way will he stop marciano. only the ATG punchers like louis or foreman would stop marciano.


theres really no logical reason for evander stopping marciano

BrocktonBlockbuster49 wrote:holyfield showed in his prime he loved to brawl. he was easy to be drawn into a brawl. he will unquestionably end up trying to brawl in the marciano fight and this will get him knocked out. marcianos would rough up holy on the inside...the better inside fighter than holy. marciano was also the much better puncher than holyfield. marciano will throw non stop punches on the inside and these will take there toll on evander. i believe marciano was the stronger fighter in the late rounds than evander.......and evander will be worn out by this point and try to brawl and marciano will jump all over holy and finish him off. the ref will stop the fight with evander out on his feet. evander simply cant expect to brawl with marciano and come out alive.

evander stop marciano? no way. evander wasnt a big puncher. he was a good puncher but it takes only an ATG puncher to stop marciano. marciano had a granite chin, incredible recup powers. we never seen marciano badly wobbed on film. walcott hit just as hard as evander if not harder(probably harder). walcott hit marciano with everything he had and still didnt come close to stopping marciano in the mid-late rounds. evanders only chance is to win this one on points cause no way will he stop marciano. only the ATG punchers like louis or foreman would stop marciano.


theres really no logical reason for evander stopping marciano

Holyfield was a better inside fighter and better from a distance than Marciano. I think Holyfield showed more incredible recooperative powers than Marciano, who we don't really get to see in that light because the powers that be will not let us see the rounds where Marciano is wobbled by Charles in the first fight.

Holyfield in his prime was one of the best conditioned boxers in history. His training regimine is stuff of legends and so was his stamina. I think you are gauging '94-'99 Holyfield rather than '89 to '93, which was his peak at heavyweight. If they went to war, I'd favor Holyfield to be the fresher fighter in the championship rounds, if it even went that long. Holyfield was just as capable (and probably more so) as Marciano at throwing non-stop punches. His fights against Charles, at least what are shown on film, do not show the relentless punch count that so many people claim. His highest output on film against Charles was 82 in the final round of the first fight. He was throwing 40ish (and even much less on occasion) on average. That is very much the heavyweight average also. If you don't believe me, go count yourself just like I did.

Oh forgot to say earlier, Walcott was not a better heavyweight than Charles. Walcott had a very inconsistent career with some nice wins, but was only able to score a couple huge wins in his career. Both of those were against Charles, the first a one-punch KO and then second a controversial decision. Walcott was KO'd by a similarly washed up Joe Louis who Ezzard Charles easily defeated. Admittingly, Joe was a little further gone against Charles and a little rustier, but I would favor Charles to have beaten the Louis that KO'd Walcott. Walcott a ATG? Probably. Better than Charles at heavyweight? No.

Hmmm. Interesting take. First off, Henry "Kid" Mathews was NO Roy Jones Jr. Second, you can't use that version of Ezzard Charles because he was clearly past his best!! CLEARLY!

once again. i still think the june 1954 charles was better than roy jones......so why cant i use this as an example? this means marciano beat a better fighter than roy jones. even past his prime... charles of the first marciano fight was a great fighter and i would pick that version of charles over jones.


harry kid mathews was alot more durable than jones and mathews was flattedn with 2 vicious hooks. this means if jones gets caught by marciano(which he will).....its lights out.

IBC controlled ham and eggers? He fought Jersey Joe Walcott three times (all competitive, tough fights), former light heavyweight champion Gus Lesnevich, Pat Valentino (a war), Freddie Beshore, Joe Louis (took a lot of punishment), Nick Barone, Lee Oma, and current LHW champ Joey Maxim in under a thirteen months span! 110 ROUNDS IN THIRTEEN MONTHS! This is only covering his title reign. I'll break down a few you might have a problem with:

yes walcott and louis were legit hard fights...


- gus lesnevich was very old and past his prime.....he was nearly washed up

- valentino was an action packed good fight but valentino was no world beater. he wasnt that good. charles easily dominated him. valentino shouldnt even have gotten a shot. it wanst a war, it was a one sided beatdown.

- lee oma was completley washed up and looked awful in that fight. oma had no business getting a shot.

- nick barone was a joke. he didnt even deserve a shot. charles easily handled him.


- joey maxim was an easy fight for charles. he knew maxims style and maxim didnt have the power , strength or pressure to make this a gruelling fight for charles. it was a boring affair

Oma: 15-1-0, 1 NC in last 17 fights before fighting Charles, including wins over Ted Lowry, a KO 1 over Fitzie Fitzpatrick, two decisions over Freddie Beshore, a win over Nick Barone, and a win over your vaunted Bob Satterfield, avenging his only loss in that run.

please dont try to hype up oma. he was a joke. he was a 35 year old washed up ham and egger when he fought charles, he looked awful on film in that fight. he didnt deserve the title shot.

Valentino: won a fifteen round decision over Turkey Thompson in the fight before his good fight with Charles. Watch the film, you might learn something. Very capable fighter who I think was blind in one eye or something like that.

a washed up turkey thompson. valentino was ok......but didnt deserve a shot at the title. there were far better heavies out there.

Barone: according to reports, gave Charles a good fight. He also went 5-1 before facing Charles, with the only loss being a decision to Lee Oma.

another one of the average white hopes controlled by the IBC. there were 15-20 better heavyweights in the world at the time than barone.

Beshore: I don't know how he got the shot, he is the only one that somewhat fits your "ham and egger" description. Charles easily beat him, but it still went 15 rounds and Ezzard went another 15 against JOE LOUIS barely a month later.

ham and egger. beshore never should have gotten the shot at the title.






fact is outside of the walcott and louis fights.......charles had one of the weakest title reigns in history. it was filled with scrub bums who had no business getting title shots.


roland lastarza, rocky marciano, rex layne, bob baker, louis rematch, clarence henry, archie moore, omelio agramonte, all should have gotten title shots over some of the scrubs charles gave title shots too in 1950-51.


in 1949 beshore and old lesnevich?? there were big huge dangerous punchers like sid peaks, kid riveria, gene tiger jones, rematch johnny haynes out there. why not give these guys shots instead in 1949 than those 2??? all 4 were far more dangerous. not to mention other more deserving fighters like jimmy bivins or archie moore.



in 1950 he fought beshore and barone. why not fight bob baker or REX LAYNE(who beat walcott) instead?


in 1951 he fought old washed up lee oma and joey maxim. why not fight archie moore, rex layne, roland lastarza, rocky marciano, clarence henry, rematch joe louis instead of a old lee oma or joey maxim???



charles really outside of louis and walcott had piss poor challengers. there were far better challengers out there especially 1950-51 where guys like bob baker, rex layne, clarence henry, roland lastarza, rocky marciano, louis rematch should have unquestionably gotten title shots over the likes of barone, old oma, barone, beshore, maxim.

Although Jones was a good boxer... Marciano happened to KO better boxers, (the likes of: Walcott + Charles).

I believe that Marciano would win by a late KO. (Say round 9 or 10)...

But Jones Jr. makes a good account of himself...

BrocktonBlockbuster49 wrote:

Oma: 15-1-0, 1 NC in last 17 fights before fighting Charles, including wins over Ted Lowry, a KO 1 over Fitzie Fitzpatrick, two decisions over Freddie Beshore, a win over Nick Barone, and a win over your vaunted Bob Satterfield, avenging his only loss in that run.

please dont try to hype up oma. he was a joke. he was a 35 year old washed up ham and egger when he fought charles, he looked awful on film in that fight. he didnt deserve the title shot.



in 1951 he fought old washed up lee oma and joey maxim. why not fight archie moore, rex layne, roland lastarza, rocky marciano, clarence henry, rematch joe louis instead of a old lee oma or joey maxim???
.

I thought you were real big on Bob Satterfield. I guess not anymore when it doesn't fit your point. So ... how many times does Ezzard Charles have to beat Archie Moore? Seven, eight times? In a row?

Only one outcome. Rocky sparks him out in the 10th.

evndrbsn wrote:

BrocktonBlockbuster49 wrote:

please dont try to hype up oma. he was a joke. he was a 35 year old washed up ham and egger when he fought charles, he looked awful on film in that fight. he didnt deserve the title shot.



in 1951 he fought old washed up lee oma and joey maxim. why not fight archie moore, rex layne, roland lastarza, rocky marciano, clarence henry, rematch joe louis instead of a old lee oma or joey maxim???
.

I thought you were real big on Bob Satterfield. I guess not anymore when it doesn't fit your point. So ... how many times does Ezzard Charles have to beat Archie Moore? Seven, eight times? In a row?

dont forget satterfield BEAT oma....not only beat him satterfield knocked oma out cold in there first fight. i have the newspaper article. the old washed up hairy flabby oma was KTFO!!!! ..... as for the rematch, i have not heard any fight description on it. satterfield was very erratic. when bob satterfield brought his A game, he was a very dangerous fighter. much more so than old oma.




bottom line: charles should have easily replaced some of those ham and eggers he fought during his title reign with a bob baker, clarence henry, rex layne, roland lastarza, rocky marciano, rematch louis, archie moore, etc.

evndrbsn wrote:

BrocktonBlockbuster49 wrote:

please dont try to hype up oma. he was a joke. he was a 35 year old washed up ham and egger when he fought charles, he looked awful on film in that fight. he didnt deserve the title shot.



in 1951 he fought old washed up lee oma and joey maxim. why not fight archie moore, rex layne, roland lastarza, rocky marciano, clarence henry, rematch joe louis instead of a old lee oma or joey maxim???
.

I thought you were real big on Bob Satterfield. I guess not anymore when it doesn't fit your point. So ... how many times does Ezzard Charles have to beat Archie Moore? Seven, eight times? In a row?

he never fought archie moore at heavyweight. dont forget the 2nd and 3rd moore fights were VERY CLOSE. the charles-moore II fight could was a close fight that could have gone to moore(though jaclem made it clear he thought charles deserved it). the 3rd fight was very close and archie nearly knocked out charles. the series was much closer than u think.


charles allowed maxim to fight for his title. it was the 4th time he fought maxim! u could say how many times does charles have to beat maxim? why didnt charles give archie moore that shot instead of maxim. like maxim, if would have been the 4th time moore fought charles. difference is moore-charles series was much closer than charles-maxim series.


so it appears ur arguement on charles having beat moore 3 times already wont work since charles gave maxim a shot and maxim had already fought charles 3 times.