LaStarza-#17 is too high. If he should be on the list, he should be at #24 or #25. Yes, he gave Marciano a lot of trouble, but otherwise theres not much on his record. A split decision over Rex Layne is probably his biggest win. His overall competition wasn't impressive.
Archie at # 8? Well I guess we have already argued to death how good he was at heavyweight.
roland lastarza has a decieving record u cant go by his record. outside of one embarassing loss to unknown rocky jones which lastarza avenged......lastarza beat everyone in his PRIME outside of rocky marciano. fact is........ lastarza never got any fights with top big names outside of marciano becuse of lastarzas manager, jimmy "fats" deangelo. the guy was a horribly inexperienced manager who had no connections, and it got to the point where he told roland he wanted to sell him to a manager with more connections but roland refused because deangelo was his cloee friend and roland couldnt do that to his firend. in a way, roland hurt his career by keeping fats deangelo. fact is, he was never able to get any big fights outside of marciano because of deangelo. but if u watch lastarza one film he was an incredible defensive fighter with very solid technicial boxing skills who lacked a killer instinct and powerful offense. lastarza was never the same after that 2nd marciano fight in which he took a horrible beating, and he started losing to nobodies shortly afterward. but i have no doubt had roland got fights with the bob bakers, nino valdes, heinz naushas's he would have beat them all. I imagine those big slowe sluggers were hestitant to make a match with a higly skilled fast defensive boxer like lastarza due to styles. but roland proved in marciano II he was very good. I watch him on film and think he had the boxing skills and defense to be tough in other eras.
Roland did beat some good contenders though.....he beat a fading rex layne, # 3 ranked dan bucceroni, and 6'3 200lb cesar brion. he got his shot because he beat dann bucceroni a highly rated contender and marciano wanted to rematch him to clear controversy from the 1st fight.
lastarza 53-3 in his prime with the only man he didnt beat was rocky marciano, its too bad lastarza didnt get to fight charles,walcott, or valdes because he could have truelly tested himself. but I think lastarza was one of the better heavies to never win a title, watch him on tape thats where u can get ur best view on him because his record is decieving. I think of him as a eddie machen or billy miske.
i never used to think much of lastarza either because i would only read his record. rex layne at his peka 1950-52 had beat very quality fighters more than lastarza did, but i rate roland higher becuase i think he looks better on film. same with guys like valdes, i think lastarza looks better on film.
- the only heavyweights archie moore ever lossed to was rocky marciano, floyd patterson and muhammad ali. every other heavyweight moore beat. moore was beating floyd patterson by wide margin on the scorecards before he got caught and moore himself said he wasnt himself in that match because of personel problmes, he wanted to call that fight off.
but look at the contenders archie moore beat at heavy
KO 3 bob satterfield
KO 8 Jimmy Bivins
W 10 top contender clarence henry(underated)
KO 6 bob dunlop
W 10 Jimmy Slade
W 10 Nino Valdes - 6'3 210lb
W 15 Nino Valdes
TKO 9 Bob Baker - 6'2 220lb
4 times he beat harold johnson and 3 times joey maxim during this period
KO 6 bert whitehurst- in two meetins sonny liston could not stop whitehurst
TKO 9 James J parker - 6'3 212lb
KO 10 Alejandro Lavorante- 6'4 213lb
the only guys who could beat archie more were the all time great heavies
if i might add, a past his prime harold johnson beat eddie machen who im guessing is on ur list.
moore IMO would have outboxed outsmarted ray mercer and won a unanimous decision.
I would put Mercer much higher than 14, probably around # 6 or 7. On paper, he doesn't have many big wins, but he probably should have the decison over Lewis, and gave Holyfield a lot of trouble when Holyfield still had some gas left in the tank. I think this more than cancels out his fights with Jessie Ferguson.
yeah but remember mercer nearly lost to that journeyman whats his name mario wilson??? and even in the rematch i remember fergusson gave ray mercer problems. mercer was very inconsistent in his later career but on his game he was tough and thats why i rate him high at 13.
Archie at # 8? Well I guess we have already argued to death how good he was at heavyweight.
name me other heavyweight contenders whom i ranked behind him that would beat him?
The guys that I feel shouldn't have been left out are Schaaf, Choynski, and Folley.
Schaaf had some bad losses but wins over Baer,Stribling, Uzcudun and Braddock(if that can be considered a big win ) should be enough to get him in the top 25 of this list.
i dont think shaaff could beat the other 25 i put in front of him. if i had to put shaaf, then i would have to put johhny risko. back in the early 30s it was a weaker period in heavy history and guys were losing to eachother right and left and they were fighting a lot more so guys liek baer had a lot more off nights not to mention baer was still green when shaaf beat him. uzcuden wasnt anything special, and braddock had terribly hurt hands. stribling was inconsistent .
i dont go by wins, i go by whose the best... who looks the best on film, who matches up head to head.
Choynski knocked out Johnson, had a draw with Jeffries, and gave Corbett a very tough fight. Certainly one of the top 25.
johnson and jeffries were greener than my granny smith apple
Folley is a borderline case. As pointed out previously, he had some embarrassing losses. However he had a draw and a win over Machen, a win over Chuvalo. And don't forget a win over the legendary Nino Valdes. It's a close call, but I think he did just enough to be in the top 25.
valdes was past his prime when folley beat him. folley had a glass jaw and had to many embarrasing losses to put him on. he lossed to young jack johnson, johnny summerlin, doug jones, alejandro lavorante all by KO.
- i watched folley vs cooper I the other day, machen was the better fighter, i dont know why he never beat folley.
Elmer Ray is hard for me to rate. I'm guessing that he is so high mainly because of wins over Walcott and Charles. However, this may be decieving. I keep hearing that Walcott hadn't reached his prime until he was older, so if that's the case, Ray's victory over Walcott is insignificant.
ray was one of the best heavyweights to never win a title. imagine a cleveland williams who was faster, better boxer, better defenisevly and you have elmer ray. ray in his prime was 71-3!!!! he was a latebloomer and didnt his his prime till early 40s and outside of a bad knockout loss to turkeythompson, the only other losses were to a peak ezzard charles and peak jersey joe walcott. i might add controversial decison or not, he was the only fighter to beat a peak ezzard charles. he also beat a prime jersey joe walcott. Ray at his peak was a terror! in 1946, he knocked out top contender lee savold, it was the first time savold had ever been knocked out in his career.
herbert goldman ranks elmer ray in his top 20 heavyweights of all time
i admit these rankings are hard to do, and perhaps i should move down some guys and move others up , but thanx for the thoughts.
Arturo Godoy - Same as Brennan. No big wins.
gody at 6'2 200lb was a very good fighter who is underated because of his decieving record. dont pay attention to his record, many of his losses were those hometown sketchky decisions. but godoy showed how good he was in joe louis fight giving a prime joe louis a very close fight losing a split decision. of course louis put on a peak preformance dominating the rematch but godoy stayed in there taking a horrible beating. Godoy got in a low crouch and was hard to hit and very ackward, and he was strong with a good punch.
but just in case u didnt know godoy beat many contenders of note
tommy loughran
tony galento
gus dorazio
tony musto
jack roper
even well past his prime he drew with europe champ karel sys
godoy defintley top 25
Brennan was a very good boxer/puncher who had a decieving record. his fights with billy miske were very close and he gave dempsey hell in the title fight. in fact he was winning on the cards entering the 10th which shows u something about his skills giving a prime dempsey a helluva fight.
i admit these rankings are hard to do, and perhaps i should move down some guys and move others up , but thanx for the thoughts.
It's a close call, but I think he did just enough to be in the top 25.
. he couldnt even beat a old shot ali who would lose to amatuer leon spinx in his next fight. shavers was also stopped numerous times throughout his career because of stamina problems, like holmes and lyle, ron stander, etc.