BoxRec

Don't judge me for this poll . I was just curious on everyone's take after hanging out in the current scene.

Valero was not in that class.....but his numbers were impressive, but in an era that offered no great challengers.

Hank by early KO. Valero was going to get exposed soon enough. His chin was on a platter.

Armstrong wins easy.

Valero never got a chance to get exposed, but near the time of his death there were talks of him fighting Juan Manuel Marquez. Marquez would've mopped the floor with him.

What do you think people in this section of the forum are going to say?

The guy who made the comment about Valero over in the CS makes a lot of outlandish claims and shouldn't be taken seriously; I just ignore most of his posts.

The only reason I don't have him on ignore is that he's just a young passionate fan that doesn't know what he's talking about. I laugh at the CS take on older fighters, because it's CS. I just ignore the trolls like Kalan because he never writes a word worth reading.

Valero would win quickly by KO... The reason is Armstrong led with his head and Valero was a terrific puncher... It's the Foreman-Frazier scenario... Everybody thought Foreman had no experience and had never fought anybody and he was a big underdog... So a poll of what most fans and bettors believe has ZERO validity.. Facts are still facts regardless of who believes them.

Frazier fought a bit like Armstrong and liked to put his head on you... This worked well on everybody until Joe fought a legitimate puncher... Foreman crushed Frazier like a roach because his head was right there pushing in and he couldn't miss him... Armstrong never faced a puncher with a 95% or 100% KO ratio like Edwin Valero... But it's the same matchup dynamics and Valero wins very easily.

Valero got into a motorcycle crash that almost killed him... He wasn't wearing a helmet and it was a really horrendous crackup that would have killed most anybody. He fractured his skull very badly and had to have surgeries to remove blood clots... His friends feel something about that severe head trauma somehow changed his emotional makeup and made him a different person... Eventually he went a little psycho so that was very unfortunate... He had unbelievable raw talent that you just never see.

Valero was mediocre. He never beat any quality fighters. Henry Armstrong one of the best fighters of all time would've absolutely mopped the floor with him easy.

Several fighters from his own time could've and would've beaten him had he not murdered his wife and killed himself before they got the chance.

Henry IN 5

Does he genuinely believe Valero beats Armstrong?
Valero was a good aggressive fighter. A fan favourite in the ring.
But your talking about Henry Armstrong. A all time great. A top 10 all time great. I've seen some people I respect have him as high as 3.

PredatorHayds wrote:But your talking about Henry Armstrong. A all time great

Armstrong lost 14 fights in his 1st 10 years as a pro. he lost 21 and drew 9. He made himself available to be hit by pushing in with his head and using it for leverage. He walked right into punches but never fought any hitters like Valero. The difference between him and Joe Frazier is Joe got off to a better start, didn't shove and butt with his head quite as flagrantly, and was a better and harder puncher. But when Frazier ran into a powerhouse puncher he got smashed. Foreman couldn't miss that head. Armstrong never fought anybody who could hit like Foreman P4P.

Armstrong didn't jab. He wasn't clever. His style was to butt in with his head and push and shove with it and throw non-stop, often not hurting anybody. When he lost to Lou Ambers they hit each other with a million shots for 15 rounds and never hurt each other. They weren't great defenders. They just weren't great hitters like Valero. EV never lost and destroyed all of his opponents in brutal fashion.

Valero was a very clever southpaw who didn't need to butt like Armstrong.. EV had a nice jab.. He was an extremely fast, pint-point puncher, and a relentless finisher.. If you don't believe me watch his fights on Youtube and watch Armstrong's fights. See if you don't think Valero punched faster, harder, more accurately, and was a better finisher - and didn't need to butt people in the face with his head to create openings for punches.

Kalan wrote:

PredatorHayds wrote:But your talking about Henry Armstrong. A all time great

Armstrong lost 14 fights in his 1st 10 years as a pro. he lost 21 and drew 9. He made himself available to be hit by pushing in with his head and using it for leverage. He walked right into punches but never fought any hitters like Valero. The difference between him and Joe Frazier is Joe got off to a better start, didn't shove and butt with his head quite as flagrantly, and was a better and harder puncher. But when Frazier ran into a powerhouse puncher he got smashed. Foreman couldn't miss that head. Armstrong never fought anybody who could hit like Foreman P4P.

Armstrong didn't jab. He wasn't clever. His style was to butt in with his head and push and shove with it and throw non-stop, often not hurting anybody. When he lost to Lou Ambers they hit each other with a million shots for 15 rounds and never hurt each other. They weren't great defenders. They just weren't great hitters like Valero. EV never lost and destroyed all of his opponents in brutal fashion.

Valero was a very clever southpaw who didn't need to butt like Armstrong.. EV had a nice jab.. He was an extremely fast, pint-point puncher, and a relentless finisher.. If you don't believe me watch his fights on Youtube and watch Armstrong's fights. See if you don't think Valero punched faster, harder, more accurately, and was a better finisher - and didn't need to butt people in the face with his head to create openings for punches.

No knowledgeable Boxing fan in the world picks Edwin Valero to beat any great fighter. Let alone one of the very best to ever have laced up a pair of gloves.

Are we really comparing a fighter who had 28 fights mostly against nobodies with a fighter who had over 180 fights, who fought many all time greats and held 3 titles in 3 weight divisions simultaneously when there was only 8 divisions? And someone thinks Valero would win? Valero would have been a prelim fighter back in Armstrong's day.

Ketchel wrote:Are we really comparing a fighter who had 28 fights mostly against nobodies with a fighter who had over 180 fights, who fought many all time greats and held 3 titles in 3 weight divisions simultaneously when there was only 8 divisions? And someone thinks Valero would win? Valero would have been a prelim fighter back in Armstrong's day.

Kalani is just the latest in a long line of know-it-alls who has drifted in and then gone on a posting frenzy trying to force his own simplistic views down our throats.

He'll either realise we've seen his act before, tone down his rhetoric and develop a sense of humour. Or he'll turn nasty and end up getting booted.

I hope the former but suspect the latter given his last few posts since he has realised no one finds his current modus operandi either enlightening or engaging.

Giancarlo wrote:

Ketchel wrote:Are we really comparing a fighter who had 28 fights mostly against nobodies with a fighter who had over 180 fights, who fought many all time greats and held 3 titles in 3 weight divisions simultaneously when there was only 8 divisions? And someone thinks Valero would win? Valero would have been a prelim fighter back in Armstrong's day.

Kalani is just the latest in a long line of know-it-alls who has drifted in and then gone on a posting frenzy trying to force his own simplistic views down our throats.

He'll either realise we've seen his act before, tone down his rhetoric and develop a sense of humour. Or he'll turn nasty and end up getting booted.

I hope the former but suspect the latter given his last few posts since he has realised no one finds his current modus operandi either enlightening or engaging.

I can't believe he isn't on every ignore list.

gilgamesh wrote:No knowledgeable Boxing fan in the world picks Edwin Valero to beat any great fighter. Let alone one of the very best to ever have laced up a pair of gloves.

No "world class expert" such as you claim to be would say Edwin Valero couldn't beat Henry Armstrong. Edwin Valero had 27 professional fights and won them all by KO.. Nobody else in the history of Boxing ever did that. Velaro had very good skills... Valero didn't walk into punches like Joe Frazier, Jack Dempsey, Rocky Marciano, and Henry Armstrong.. Do you EVER go against popular opinion Gilgamesh???? Who did you pick for Frazier-Foreman??? Who did you pick for Tyson-Douglas??? Who did you pick for Mosley-Forrest 1??? Who did you pick for Donaire-Darchinyan 1??? Who did you pick for Klitschko-Fury??? Who did you pick for ANY major upsets, even though that would mean going against popular opinion??? .... or do you just go along and let pubic opinion and "experts" tell you what's coming down???

The reason Valero would easily beat Armstrong.. (I can never prove you wrong, you have to think) is Armstrong walked straight in and loaded his punches.. Armstrong got ripped like crazy but he never fought a puncher except Robinson.. He took a bad beating from Robinson losing all 10 rounds. Robinson didn't have to knock him out but I'm sure if Armstrong tried harder to win SRR would have. Edwin Valero could not only box well, but he could punch your lights out.. Armstrong was a fair puncher but a lousy boxer.. Tunney wasn't a puncher, but why do you think Tunney punched the HELL out of Dempsey??? ... Dempsey gave you his head to shoot at like Armstrong and Frazier.. Dempsey was a big favorite in in the betting but Max Hoff knew Boxing and bet 40,000 on Tunney. He also loaned Tunney 20,000 before the fight and never got it back. But Tunney reinforced his opinion of the winner "Bet as much as you can afford on me. I'm almost certain to win." It's difficult to get away from "Group Think" and everybody is infected with it to a degree.

"Edwin Valero had 27 professional fights and won them all by KO.. Nobody else in the history of Boxing ever did that" ... Who was fighting at a world class level - such as 8 of them being World Title Fights and putting guys out who had never been stopped.

Kalan wrote:"Edwin Valero had 27 professional fights and won them all by KO.. Nobody else in the history of Boxing ever did that" ... Who was fighting at a world class level - such as 8 of them being World Title Fights and putting guys out who had never been stopped.

Would you say Edwin was top 10, all time Kalan? Where does the mediocre Armstrong figure?

Kalan wrote:Valero would win quickly by KO... The reason is Armstrong led with his head and Valero was a terrific puncher... It's the Foreman-Frazier scenario... Everybody thought Foreman had no experience and had never fought anybody and he was a big underdog... So a poll of what most fans and bettors believe has ZERO validity.. Facts are still facts regardless of who believes them.

Frazier fought a bit like Armstrong and liked to put his head on you... This worked well on everybody until Joe fought a legitimate puncher... Foreman crushed Frazier like a roach because his head was right there pushing in and he couldn't miss him... Armstrong never faced a puncher with a 95% or 100% KO ratio like Edwin Valero... But it's the same matchup dynamics and Valero wins very easily.

Valero got into a motorcycle crash that almost killed him... He wasn't wearing a helmet and it was a really horrendous crackup that would have killed most anybody. He fractured his skull very badly and had to have surgeries to remove blood clots... His friends feel something about that severe head trauma somehow changed his emotional makeup and made him a different person... Eventually he went a little psycho so that was very unfortunate... He had unbelievable raw talent that you just never see.

Absolute hogwash of epic proportions. And flat out top flight infotainment at it's best!

Kalan, have you ever seen even ONE of Valero's fights?

Valero beats Armstrong rather easily.

Words you don't expect to hear much in life......sort of like "Hand me that piano".

Tomasino wrote:Would you say Edwin was top 10, all time Kalan? Where does the mediocre Armstrong figure?

Did I say Armstrong was mediocre???? He is certainly an ATG and was good for his day.. He's a bit of a myth though.. If you don't think Edwin Valero would beat Armstrong do me a favor... Watch their fights on youtube and watch how Armstrong came in with his head and pushed and butted illegally with his head for leverage... HA was a crude boxer to say the least.. Then watch a few of Valero's fights and do you see how much more powerfully and accurately he punches with much greater speed... and come back and tell me you don't think somebody who walks in head first without a jab like that wouldn't be a setup for a great puncher -- the way Joe Frazier was for George Foreman... And also tell me if you don't believe styles make fights.

Frazier could absorb most of his opponents punches and beat them down -- For Foreman he was like shooting fish in a barrel.

Kalan wrote:

Tomasino wrote:Would you say Edwin was top 10, all time Kalan? Where does the mediocre Armstrong figure?

Did I say Armstrong was mediocre???? He is certainly an ATG and was good for his day.. He's a bit of a myth though.. If you don't think Edwin Valero would beat Armstrong do me a favor... Watch their fights on youtube and watch how Armstrong came in with his head and pushed and butted illegally with his head for leverage... HA was a crude boxer to say the least.. Then watch a few of Valero's fights and do you see how much more powerfully and accurately he punches with much greater speed... and come back and tell me you don't think somebody who walks in head first without a jab like that wouldn't be a setup for a great puncher -- the way Joe Frazier was for George Foreman... And also tell me if you don't believe styles make fights.

Frazier could absorb most of his opponents punches and beat them down -- For Foreman he was like shooting fish in a barrel.

Quick Question.....

What routines do you follow to get the creative juices flowing, when manufacturing your best material?

BoxBuzz wrote:[What routines do you follow

I have an extremely in depth understanding of the game... A lot of fans are instant experts and refuse to take the time to listen or learn.. Watch both Valero and Armstrong's fights on Youtube.. See which one pushes and butts in with his head and makes himself available to be hit.. See if you can determine why boxing commentators and pundits described Joe Frazier as another Armstrong -- although to be fair, Fraizer didn't push and butt with his head nearly as much as Armstrong.. Ask yourself if the head first Armstrong wouldn't have been vulnerable to a great puncher in the same way Frazier was ... when you've objectively considered these questions (which I'm pretty certain you won't) come back and talk.

I'm Back already Kala, And your imagined depth of your understanding does impress!

But I digress....

So....Henry Armstrong vs Valero plays out pretty much like the Frazier Foreman fights.

I like the cut of your jib!

What's your opinion on caring and concerned bystanders offering up top flight boxing talent, a refreshing O.J. as a post fight thirst quencher?

Just curious.

You're not a serious man...

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:Hank by early KO. Valero was going to get exposed soon enough. His chin was on a platter.

Yep, although expect the myth to get stronger and stronger over the years.