Current Heavyweights - The Era With No Name

[Left Hook Tua]

I've got a question for you, LHT, and I hope you take no offense to this...But under the very definition of the word champion being described as "one that is acknowledged to be better than all the others", isn't your comment and opinion about Wladimir being the best heavyweight right now in actuality you stating that he is the champion in your mind?

Think about the meaning of the word 'champion' for a minute and ask yourself what the difference is between "a champion" and "the champion" (two grouping of words you used earlier), because to me there is no difference what so ever between the two statements. A champion is singular in it's meaning, and the whole idea of having one is to determine a sole possessor of only one person worthy of having that title attached to their name. The one guy who stands above all others as the holder of the position that all others strive to achieve in the respective grouping (in this instance, the heavyweight division of pro boxing). In other words, the very best. To say that there's two (or more) champions in any given grouping is a complete contradiction in the very meaning of the word, which means that there is in fact no champion(s). No single person that stands above all others in the grouping. No single person could be classified as the one who is the very best.

You know, as a boxing fan coming from a time from just before the unfortunate and corrupt U.S. championship tournaments from back in 1977 (I was young, yes, but still), which then gave the alphabet boys (with help from television) some power in the boxing world due to The Ring's downfall as a result of their part in that tournament, it does bug me quite a bit to see a younger generation of boxing fans (and writers) become, to steal a word from Shawshank, "institutionalized" into thinking that these messed up ABC groups have any say into who the real champions are for each weight class because the truth is they don't. In fact, like I stated earlier, their very existence and how their importance is percieved by some fans conflicts with the very definition of the meaning of the word "champion", and do no more than try to damage the long standing tradition of the word as far as the great sport of boxing goes. You don't need one guy holding two of those organizations belts to know who "the best" is. You don't need one guy holding three or even all four of them trinkets to know who "the best" is, although in that situation it's very likely that that fighter has proven himself.

All you really need to do is think independantly from those groups that do boxing no good what so ever, go outside the box and ask yourself, "who is the very best right now?". If you are asking that in reference to the heavyweight division right now and don't have any reluctance or confusion in deciding who "the best" is your mind then you don't have a champion. If you have found an answer, like it seems you have, well...there you go. You have found yourself a World Heavyweight Champion, and after Lewis retired as "champion", you have linearacy in the division restored.

no offense taken yogi.

i differentiate "A" champion from "THE" champion because i'm a big believer in The Ring's system of Lineal Titles. holding an ABC org belt to me means you're "A" champion , one of many.

as far as being the best being the champion. i don't agree.

to me the lineal champion at 135 is joel casamayor. i don't really think he's the best at 135 but i still consider him the real champ at 135.

[Chase8400]

Chase, you should know me by now. I can talk specifically or I can range far afield. But there's always a traceable connection.

When I talk about either of the Klitschko's I'm accused, in vulgar, foulmouthed terms, of being a mindless "fan", although I've long ago left the "fan" stage far behind (by about 50 years). I discuss specific points brought up, and attempt to straighten out the warped opinions and statements which often proliferate on these pages. So, if you look, you'll see that I DID write a letter on the dominance and deserved position of Wladimir Klitschko on this thread. Only then did I take up with other points mentioned.

To me it's just a cerebral exercise and a little syntactic(al) practice.

Okay, fair enough explanation. Also, large multisyllable words don't make you seem any smarter nor any more attractive. I figured I would throw that in. Glad to see you are one of the forefather fans of our sport. Carry on then, fine gentleman.

[Thunder Lips]

When Charles fought Marciano he was already in the early stages of the disease which killed him a few years later. What difference does it make that he was 5 lbs heavier than Rocky, he was only a built up light-heavy, and that extra weight was just that, extra weight. And, he'd been in many brutal battles and was so far over the gill that he was almost "out=of-sight. Just like poor demented Louis, and superannuated Walcott, who nevertheless was beating Marciano up until he got caught with a one of a kind punch, in that 13th or 14th round.

When you quote me you should do just that for it was not I who tried to agrue Charles was bigger because he was heavier at fight time. I do take issue to him being just a built up light-heavy since he had a brief but very remarkable run as Heayweight Champion and beyond; beating many larger men in the process.

Now that is cleared up:

"Charles was diagnosed with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, also known as Lou Gehrig’s disease, in 1966. He died in 1975 in Chicago."

A few years later!!!! You are aware that Rocky's last fight with Charles was in 1954. So now that we cleared up the fact that Rocky didn't fight a man a few years away from his death bed I should point out that noticable Lou Gehrig effects don't show up over a decade before being diagnosed(rarely before 40); and than were talking a few years at the most of subtle symptoms before potential fatal stages(aver 3-5 year life span once contracted or developed). Charles was actually diagnosed early in 66 and was lucky to hang in there as long as he did after the fact. Try not to choke as you know....

[Thunder Lips]

REX LAYNE was beaten every time he stepped up in class.

He "offically" upset 4-1 favorite Walcott.
He also stopped 9-5 favorite Satterfield.

He also beat Henry Hall.

Pulling off upsets are usually considered a step up in class. The back to back beatings from Marciano and Charles ruined him as a rising contender though.

[edgarg]

Okay, fair enough explanation. Also, large multisyllable words don't make you seem any smarter nor any more attractive. I figured I would throw that in. Glad to see you are one of the forefather fans of our sport. Carry on then, fine gentleman.

CHASE- You could have stopped ater the first 4 words. The rest didn't mean a thing.

[edgarg]

He "offically" upset 4-1 favorite Walcott.
He also stopped 9-5 favorite Satterfield.

He also beat Henry Hall.

Pulling off upsets are usually considered a step up in class. The back to back beatings from Marciano and Charles ruined him as a rising contender though.

You made the very point that I was hesitant to bare. Does it not seem strange to you that when he was the betting underdog HE WON (I believe in almost if not EVERY case) ....... Now I'm certain that there is no connection here with the odorous fighter/results/scams, manipulations of certain people who went to jail for just that, BUT................ if I was writing a book about those times, I'd devote much digging and a very long chapter to that very situation.

By the way, it was a well talked about -at the time- story that Marciano and his "handlers' got such a fright in the fight against La Starza, which La Starza actually won, but by a refereeing manipulation was made the loser- that for the next nine fights right up to his fight with Rex Layne, he was presented with, as "opponents" as chronic a collection of "NO-HOPERS" as ever an aspiring World Champion could wish for. LOOK THEM UP.... They had a combined record of 204 wins..164 LOSSES and 32 draws. And you should SEE WHO THEY got their paltry wins against..... I think they dug them up from the nearest cemetery.

The 4 fights immediately preceding Rex Layne were against Keene Simmons 8-8-1....Harold Mitchell 3-12-3 .....Art Henri 13-15-1...... willis Aopplegate10-14-2.......
Need any more be said about Rocky Marciano's 49-0 ????

[Thunder Lips]

You made the very point that I was hesitant to bare. Does it not seem strange to you that when he was the betting underdog HE WON (I believe in almost if not EVERY case) ....... Now I'm certain that there is no connection here with the odorous fighter/results/scams, manipulations of certain people who went to jail for just that, BUT................ if I was writing a book about those times, I'd devote much digging and a very long chapter to that very situation.

By the way, it was a well talked about -at the time- story that Marciano and his "handlers' got such a fright in the fight against La Starza, which La Starza actually won, but by a refereeing manipulation was made the loser- that for the next nine fights right up to his fight with Rex Layne, he was presented with, as "opponents" as chronic a collection of "NO-HOPERS" as ever an aspiring World Champion could wish for. LOOK THEM UP.... They had a combined record of 204 wins..164 LOSSES and 32 draws. And you should SEE WHO THEY got their paltry wins against..... I think they dug them up from the nearest cemetery.

The 4 fights immediately preceding Rex Layne were against Keene Simmons 8-8-1....Harold Mitchell 3-12-3 .....Art Henri 13-15-1...... willis Aopplegate10-14-2.......
Need any more be said about Rocky Marciano's 49-0 ????

So in other words....

[Sweet Pea 50]

The HW's are probably the LEAST division that people want to see, right now.
Nothing to do with Eastern Euro's.
H.W.'s just are ass right now.

[edgarg]

When you quote me you should do just that for it was not I who tried to agrue Charles was bigger because he was heavier at fight time. I do take issue to him being just a built up light-heavy since he had a brief but very remarkable run as Heayweight Champion and beyond; beating many larger men in the process.

Now that is cleared up:

"Charles was diagnosed with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, also known as Lou Gehrig’s disease, in 1966. He died in 1975 in Chicago."

A few years later!!!! You are aware that Rocky's last fight with Charles was in 1954. So now that we cleared up the fact that Rocky didn't fight a man a few years away from his death bed I should point out that noticable Lou Gehrig effects don't show up over a decade before being diagnosed(rarely before 40); and than were talking a few years at the most of subtle symptoms before potential fatal stages(aver 3-5 year life span once contracted or developed). Charles was actually diagnosed early in 66 and was lucky to hang in there as long as he did after the fact. Try not to choke as you know....

Tut TUt... I don't want to get into a medical argument with you, since I would have no chance. You know too much..... I was only in medical school for 2 years and had never heard of ALS then. But I know a little about it now, (of course not as much as you) since I had a cousin who died fropm ALS just the year before last in Florida. He was only 67 but had been diagnosed definitely at age 52. His symptoms were so varied that it took a while to pin down, there was no familial genetic relationship. He also had several apparent remissions, but for the last 4 years was in terrible straits. (And I remember very well when Lou Gehrig was diagnosed). Regarding Ezz, he died at age 53, 13 years after he retired. I don't call 13 years more than a few relatively speaking for a supposedly healthy man. The average healthy boxer lives over 40 years after be retires, especially if he hasn't taken beatings. Ezz took some ferocious beatings in his last years as a fighter. From the time he lost to Nino Valdez (his 5th fight before his
1st Marciano fight-he lost his next fight too) to the end of his career, his decline was rather rapid, considering he was only about 30-31. He lost 17 and won 12 (including the 2 Marciano losses). The story when he was diagnosed was that his very noticeable decline had been from the beginnings of ALS. THAT was written and discussed. Whether true of not it makes not a damned bit of difference. The poor guy died miserably at a very young age, after giving us all he had.

[edgarg]

So in other words....

I applaud your clever photographic tricks, am I to assume that this is a photo of you??
Don't feel foolish, the photo says it all.