harry kid matthews vs joey maxim...

[shommel]

why didnt it happen and who would have won and how?

[OLD FOGEY]

why didnt it happen and who would have won and how?

I see it a very close fight which goes to a decision. Maxim looked great against crude sluggers. Not so good against slick types. Matthews could punch, but he was slick. My guess is a slight Maxim victory, but the wild card is Matthews' body punching. Also Matthews is far more likely to score a flash knockdown or two which could swing the scoring.

Bottom line--probably controversial decision with outcome depending on the personal scoring philosophy of the judges--body punches versus jabs, heavier punches versus quantity of punches, etc.

By the way, both men liked to counterpunch. This could be a real dull matchup. I have seen both against Murphy and Nardico and they were about equally successful against those opponents.

[hhascup]

I believe Maxim would win a decision.

In his overall career Maxim fought much better opponents, such as a prime Charles 0-5 Walcott 1-2 Patterson 1-0 Moore 0-3 Robinson 1-0 Bivins 1-1 Pastrano 0-1 Olson 0-2, (4-14) BUT he lost most of them. BUT he also beat Bob Satterfield, Gus Lesnevich, Freddie Mills, Bob Murphy, Ted Lowry, Danny Nardico, Nate Bolden, Jimmy Webb, Lee Oma, Bob Foxworth, Curtis Sheppard 2-1 and Paul Andrews.

Matthews fought 2 Hall of Famers, Marciano 1 Charles 1. He was KO'ed by Rocky, which is no disgrace and then beat Charles at the end of Charles's career. He also beat Rex Layne, Danny Nardico, Lloyd Marshall, Jose Basora, Bob Murphy and stopped Ted Lowry, who went the distance with Marciano twice. BUT he also lost to Don Cockell 3 times.

Even though Matthews stopped Lowry and Maxim didn't, when I asked Ted who was the best boxer he ever fought, he said it was Maxim.

[mcvey]

I see it a very close fight which goes to a decision. Maxim looked great against crude sluggers. Not so good against slick types. Matthews could punch, but he was slick. My guess is a slight Maxim victory, but the wild card is Matthews' body punching. Also Matthews is far more likely to score a flash knockdown or two which could swing the scoring.

Bottom line--probably controversial decision with outcome depending on the personal scoring philosophy of the judges--body punches versus jabs, heavier punches versus quantity of punches, etc.

By the way, both men liked to counterpunch. This could be a real dull matchup. I have seen both against Murphy and Nardico and they were about equally successful against those opponents.

Joey by dec ,and I dont see him on the floor in this one he had an ATG chin.

[OLD FOGEY]

I believe Maxim would win a decision.

In his overall career Maxim fought much better opponents, such as a prime Charles 0-5 Walcott 1-2 Patterson 1-0 Moore 0-3 Robinson 1-0 Bivins 1-1 Pastrano 0-1 Olson 0-2, (4-14) BUT he lost most of them. BUT he also beat Bob Satterfield, Gus Lesnevich, Freddie Mills, Bob Murphy, Ted Lowry, Danny Nardico, Nate Bolden, Jimmy Webb, Lee Oma, Bob Foxworth, Curtis Sheppard 2-1 and Paul Andrews.

Matthews fought 2 Hall of Famers, Marciano 1 Charles 1. He was KO'ed by Rocky, which is no disgrace and then beat Charles at the end of Charles's career. He also beat Rex Layne, Danny Nardico, Lloyd Marshall, Jose Basora, Bob Murphy and stopped Ted Lowry, who went the distance with Marciano twice. BUT he also lost to Don Cockell 3 times.

Even though Matthews stopped Lowry and Maxim didn't, when I asked Ted who was the best boxer he ever fought, he said it was Maxim.


It is interesting comparing their records:

Matthews-----90 wins-----7 losses-----6 draws 61 ko's

Maxim-----82 wins-----29 losses-----4 draws 21 ko's

Maxim did fight many more tough fighters, but he was also very erratic. Matthews lost only to Jackie Burke (80-22-18) when Matthews was 17 and in his 14 pro fight, to Eddie Booker and Jack Chase when he was still short of 21, and then the Marciano and Cockell fights. The first two Cockell fights were extremely close. The third went to Cockell when Matthews retired with a back injury. Other than the loss to the very experienced and pretty good Burke at 17, Matthews' only other losses were to men ranked at one time or another in the top five. For a man who fought 19 years, that is pretty impressive.

The two men had 10 common opponents, as far as I can see looking over this long records--Phil Muscato, John Thomas, Irish Bob Murphy, Bill Petersen, Lloyd Marshall, Dave Whitlock, Danny Nardico, Charley Eagle, Tiger Ted Lowry, and Ezzard Charles.

Maxim went 13-8-1 with 3 ko's against these men.

Matthews went 11-0 with 8 ko's against these men.

Phil Muscato--won 1 and lost 2 decisions to Maxim. Ko'd in 1 by Matthews.
John Thomas--won 1 and lost 1 decision to Maxim. Ko'd in 1 by Matthews.
Bob Murphy--lost decisions to both men.
Bill Petersen--lost 5 decisions, and 1 ko'd by to Maxim. Ko'd by Matthews in only meeting.
Lloyd Marshall--Maxim lost to Marshall. Matthews ko'd him in 1.
Dave Whitlock--Maxim ko'd him in only meeting. Matthews ko'd him twice.
Danny Nardico--lost decisions to both men.
Charley Eagle--fought draw with Maxim. Matthews ko'd him.
Tiger Ted Lowry--lost decision to Maxim. Matthews ko'd him.
Ezzard Charles--beat Maxim 5 times. Lost only bout to Matthews.

Now I know the rebuttal. Maxim got these men when they were younger and better fighters. Fair point. But still not one did better against Matthews than against Maxim, and four (Muscato, Thomas, Marshall, and Charles) beat Maxim and lost to Matthews. Food for thought. And when the two men did fight an opponent at about the same point in the opponent's career, such as Murphy, Nardico, Lowry, Whitlock, and Petersen, Matthews still did at least as well as Maxim.

As you said in an earlier post, Lowry considered Maxim the best man he fought, over not only Matthews, but also Moore and Marciano. Okay, but I still think a fight between Matthews and Maxim amounts pretty much to a pick 'em, your guess is as good as mine, fight in the early fifties.

[OLD FOGEY]

Joey by dec ,and I dont see him on the floor in this one he had an ATG chin.

Perhaps. Joey had a top chin.

But he was ko'd by Curtis Sheppard

and off Boxrec was down against Oliver Shanks, Booker Beckworth, Lloyd Marshall, Tony Bosnich, Roy Hawkins, Danny Nardico, Archie Moore, Bobo Olson, and Eddie Machen.

Off his record and film, Matthews could bang. He had a good chin himself and a lot more power than Maxim.

[hhascup]

I agree with what you have stated BUT Maxim is in the International Boxing Hall of Fame, the World Boxing Hall of Fame and the Ring Boxing Hall of Fame, so I guess a lot of boxing people thought he was pretty good.

Maxim fought 41 different boxers 58 times, that were at one time rated in the Top 10.

Like you said, your guess is as good as mine, fight in the early fifties and I'll go with Joey.

[mcvey]

Perhaps. Joey had a top chin.

But he was ko'd by Curtis Sheppard

and off Boxrec was down against Oliver Shanks, Booker Beckworth, Lloyd Marshall, Tony Bosnich, Roy Hawkins, Danny Nardico, Archie Moore, Bobo Olson, and Eddie Machen.

Off his record and film, Matthews could bang. He had a good chin himself and a lot more power than Maxim.

Maxim was caught cold in the first round by Shepard a murderous puncher,he easily reversed that result with a convincing decision later.
If you compare Mathews and Maxim against common opponents [wins] Mathews will allways come out best because he could punch and stopped a lot of guys .Maxim had allmost zero power, he was a jab artist.Maxim by dec for me." Aint many boxers better than that boy" Joe Louis.

[Mendoza]

Good match up. I'd go with Maxim. He had the straight jab, and work rate.

[Bummy Davis]

Tough fight ...close fight...I give Joey the edge for the dec. BUT MATTHEWS was a good boxer and could be a tight one

[OLD FOGEY]

Maxim was caught cold in the first round by Shepard a murderous puncher,he easily reversed that result with a convincing decision later.
If you compare Mathews and Maxim against common opponents [wins] Mathews will allways come out best because he could punch and stopped a lot of guys .Maxim had allmost zero power, he was a jab artist.Maxim by dec for me." Aint many boxers better than that boy" Joe Louis.

"If you compare Matthews and Maxim against common opponents (wins) Matthews will allways come out best because he could punch and stopped a lot of guys."

Frankly, I don't understand the logic here. The issue isn't really power. A lot of guys had more power than Maxim, but how many did so much better against common opponents?

"'Ain't many boxers better than that boy' Joe Louis"

Maxim was an IBC stalwart. Matthews was a non-IBC outsider. Louis was on the IBC payroll. Without trying to be critical--Louis needed the money--I would expect Louis to put the most positive possible spin on any comments about Maxim and the most negative possible spin on any comments about Matthews.

I agree with the statement, though, but Matthews might just have been one of the few who was.

[mcvey]

"If you compare Matthews and Maxim against common opponents (wins) Matthews will allways come out best because he could punch and stopped a lot of guys."

Frankly, I don't understand the logic here. The issue isn't really power. A lot of guys had more power than Maxim, but how many did so much better against common opponents?

"'Ain't many boxers better than that boy' Joe Louis"

Maxim was an IBC stalwart. Matthews was a non-IBC outsider. Louis was on the IBC payroll. Without trying to be critical--Louis needed the money--I would expect Louis to put the most positive possible spin on any comments about Maxim and the most negative possible spin on any comments about Matthews.

I agree with the statement, though, but Matthews might just have been one of the few who was.

Its quite simple. You

emphasised that Mathews kod 8 of the common opponents and mentioned how many others he stopped I just pointed out that, when comparing kos , Mathews would allways come out on top.
Louis made the comment about Maxim, before he aligned himself with the IBC, as far as I know he never commented on Mathews,I just threw in his remark on Maxim because I thought it might be interesting to some one,it means nothing in this debate .I dont feel strongly enough about this subject or the views either way to be honest,I can get all the rows I want with Mendoza.

[OLD FOGEY]

Its quite simple. You

emphasised that Mathews kod 8 of the common opponents and mentioned how many others he stopped I just pointed out that, when comparing kos , Mathews would allways come out on top.
Louis made the comment about Maxim, before he aligned himself with the IBC, as far as I know he never commented on Mathews,I just threw in his remark on Maxim because I thought it might be interesting to some one,it means nothing in this debate .I dont feel strongly enough about this subject or the views either way to be honest,I can get all the rows I want with Mendoza.


I see as just a very close fight. I actually picked Maxim, but Matthews I think deserves at least one supporter as I think a pretty good case can be made for him. RING MAGAZINE picked him as the best p4p fighter in the world in 1951, over Maxim among others.

I think what is impressive about the ten common opponents isn't the number of knockouts Matthews scored, although he clearly is the more dangerous puncher, but that he swept these men while Maxim lost to four of them and had a draw with a fifth.

[My2Sense]

why didnt it happen and who would have won and how?

1) It didn't happen because Maxim was an inactive champion who was preoccupied with going after the heavyweight title. It took him almost two years to get around to defending his title, and when he did he chose an opponent that Matthews had already beaten a year or so earlier, Bob Murphy (since losing to Matthews, Murphy had scored a very high profile win over LaMotta, and that earned him the shot).

2) Maxim should've been able to win this by decision. As good as Matthews was, he was like a guy who padded his record against second-rate opposition for years, then emerged from semi-obscurity to score a few good wins, then suffered a crushing defeat (in this case, to Marciano) and never figured into the big picture again. He basically went as far as he was going to go when he beat Murphy. He was not an elite fighter of Maxim's level. Maxim should've been too smart and too well-rounded for him, and won a decision.

[OLD FOGEY]

1) It didn't happen because Maxim was an inactive champion who was preoccupied with going after the heavyweight title. It took him almost two years to get around to defending his title, and when he did he chose an opponent that Matthews had already beaten a year or so earlier, Bob Murphy (since losing to Matthews, Murphy had scored a very high profile win over LaMotta, and that earned him the shot).

2) Maxim should've been able to win this by decision. As good as Matthews was, he was like a guy who padded his record against second-rate opposition for years, then emerged from semi-obscurity to score a few good wins, then suffered a crushing defeat (in this case, to Marciano) and never figured into the big picture again. He basically went as far as he was going to go when he beat Murphy. He was not an elite fighter of Maxim's level. Maxim should've been too smart and too well-rounded for him, and won a decision.

"He was not an elite fighter of Maxim's level."

Maxim certainly was an elite fighter for a long time--much longer as you accurately pointed out than Matthews. In fairness Maxim fought all the tough guys. He about split with them. The truly top men, such as Charles and Moore, dominated him. Robinson was much smaller, and Patterson was much smaller and also green.

Still, Matthews was a pretty serious fighter, rated in the top ten at middleweight, as the #1 contender at lightheavyweight, and at #6 by the RING and at #2 by the NBA at heavyweight. And he was certainly respected in his own day. This is from THE RING, Feb 1952, page 38:

"Robinson continues to stand out as the best all-around fighter in the middleweight division, though he lost prestige through his defeat to Turpin in Europe. While in the past we have honored Ray with the all-around championship as far as ability as concerned, this time THE RING selects Harry Matthews as the world's best all-around fighter of the year. His cleverness, hitting power, ring generalship, and triumphs over all opponents regardless of weight, has gained for him the post occupied by Sugar Ray last year."

The bottom line which should not be overlooked is that Matthews was not an IBC fighter at a time when the IBC had monopoly control. Matthews had badly beaten Murphy but Murphy got the shot at Maxim. Matthews was still not going to get a shot in 1952. Don Cockell was penciled in for the title shot until he lost to Jimmy Slade. Maxim then defended against Robinson so Matthews was out in the cold at lightheavy. When Maxim lost to Moore, the elimination to see who got first challenge against Moore was between Maxim and Nardico, another fighter who had lost to Matthews.

I think you are correct that Matthews' record is padded, but he did much better than Maxim against common opposition and was 17-6-2 against fighters who appeared at one time or another in THE RING's top ten, a much better percentage than Maxim's.

An interesting factoid, Matthews, who at one point had a fifty bout unbeaten streak, never lost a fight at lightheavyweight.

[mcvey]

Mathews manager Jack Hurley twice turned down a title shot against Maxim , when Mathews was the number 1 challenger,surely if they fancied their chances against him it would have made sense to fight him win the LH title and get a big gate against the HVy Champ .I think Hurley was a wise old bird who knew exactly what he had ,[and didnt have in Mathews].

[Bummy Davis]

"He was not an elite fighter of Maxim's level."

Maxim certainly was an elite fighter for a long time--much longer as you accurately pointed out than Matthews. In fairness Maxim fought all the tough guys. He about split with them. The truly top men, such as Charles and Moore, dominated him. Robinson was much smaller, and Patterson was much smaller and also green.

Still, Matthews was a pretty serious fighter, rated in the top ten at middleweight, as the #1 contender at lightheavyweight, and at #6 by the RING and at #2 by the NBA at heavyweight. And he was certainly respected in his own day. This is from THE RING, Feb 1952, page 38:

"Robinson continues to stand out as the best all-around fighter in the middleweight division, though he lost prestige through his defeat to Turpin in Europe. While in the past we have honored Ray with the all-around championship as far as ability as concerned, this time THE RING selects Harry Matthews as the world's best all-around fighter of the year. His cleverness, hitting power, ring generalship, and triumphs over all opponents regardless of weight, has gained for him the post occupied by Sugar Ray last year."

The bottom line which should not be overlooked is that Matthews was not an IBC fighter at a time when the IBC had monopoly control. Matthews had badly beaten Murphy but Murphy got the shot at Maxim. Matthews was still not going to get a shot in 1952. Don Cockell was penciled in for the title shot until he lost to Jimmy Slade. Maxim then defended against Robinson so Matthews was out in the cold at lightheavy. When Maxim lost to Moore, the elimination to see who got first challenge against Moore was between Maxim and Nardico, another fighter who had lost to Matthews.

I think you are correct that Matthews' record is padded, but he did much better than Maxim against common opposition and was 17-6-2 against fighters who appeared at one time or another in THE RING's top ten, a much better percentage than Maxim's.

An interesting factoid, Matthews, who at one point had a fifty bout unbeaten streak, never lost a fight at lightheavyweight.


Matthews was highly underated...he was an excellent fighter.....Maxim overall had the better resume vs ATG's but in a closer look I would not be suprised if Matthews pulled it out over Joey in a Dec....Joey had good wiskers and was durable...Matthews had more POP and also good ring generalship...this one is tight

[OLD FOGEY]

Mathews manager Jack Hurley twice turned down a title shot against Maxim , when Mathews was the number 1 challenger,surely if they fancied their chances against him it would have made sense to fight him win the LH title and get a big gate against the HVy Champ .I think Hurley was a wise old bird who knew exactly what he had ,[and didnt have in Mathews].

1. I am not aware of the second one by Matthews. A fight in 1951 in which both fighters would recieve $50,000, to be on the west coast, was rejected by the IBC for Maxim.

2. Hurley rejected a shot at Maxim in 1952. An article in THE RING, June, 1952 issue written by Barney Nagler, profiles Jack Hurley and gives his reasons for rejecting the bout:

A. Matthews would have to sign an exclusive contract with the IBC.
B. Matthews would get $20,000 of a $100,000 purse, with $40,000 going to Maxim and $40,000 going to the IBC. Hurley claimed he would have accepted the fight if Matthews got $40,000.

"Over a year ago I asked Doc Kearns if he'd fight Matthews." Kearns replies he would for $50,000. Hurley goes on to relate in detail that amount was reasonable for a west coast fight, even with Maxim, who Hurley does not consider box-office. When the IBC vetoes that fight, Hurley contacts US Senator Harry P Cain from Washington State. There is soon an investigation, not only by congress, but also by the Justice Department, of the IBC. Hurley meanwhile has begun negotiating with Walcott for a crack at the heavyweight title, Walcott to get $250,000. In the midst of this, the IBC and its representative, Al Weill, offer Hurley an ultimatum to accept a fight with Maxim.

"They didn't make the offer until after I announced I wasn't interested. They didn't make it until they were sure I wouldn't accept. My job is to get money. Matthews ought to be a professional, he never had an amateur bout, but even if he isn't, I am.
"With the radio and television, The IBC figured Maxim-Matthews would do $100,000 net. They say they must give Maxim 40%, which is all right because he is champion. They are willing to give Matthews 20%. For the use of the hall, the IBC has to get $40,000.
"What's wrong with giving each fighter $40,000 and the IBC taking 20%. The IBC doesn't appear on television that night. Nobody cares if it stays home."

3. Nagler has this to say about Hurley's campaign which got the Justice Department involved investigating the IBC:

"It wasn't as though Hurley wanted to put the IBC to the expense of defending itself against a monopoly suit. He was simply trying to ignite the white light of truth in behalf of Matthews, whom he candidly believes is the greatest fighter in the world and so wanted all to know."

4. I think a key factor here which is obvious reading the whole article is that Hurley hated the IBC crowd in general, and Al Weill in particular. I get the impression that this was not just a new hatred but one which went back years. It might have clouded his judgement about taking the short end of the purse, but the clause turning Matthews over to the IBC certainly also might have been a deal breaker.

5. My own take is to accept that Nagler was close enough to Hurley to probably know what he thought of Matthews. Hurley might have been bullshitting about his high assessment of Matthews, but who can tell at this distance. But logic does back up that he actually thought Matthews could go all the way at heavyweight. It doesn't make that much sense that he would match Matthews with Layne and Marciano but be afraid of Maxim, whose record was always spotty. Even more compelling, would he have matched Matthews with Weill's fighter Marciano if he didn't think Matthews would win? Hurley really hated the arrogant Weill. I can't see Hurley putting himself in a position in which Weill would end up gloating over him.

[mcvey]

"Oh what a tangled web " , etc.