enough is enough..marciano was great!

Rory McCloskey · Post by **Rory McCloskey** » 12 Jul 2005, 03:01

Theres some people on this forum that just do not give rocky marciano any respect at all.. im not saying its not ok for you to think maybe hes a little overhyped, but he was great..how many other boxers (heavyweight champions of the world especially) went undefeated. you can say he never beat anyone like ali or a prime joe louis..but is that his fault? rocky beat everyone that was put into the ring with him..the best of his time, he defeated. He is deffinatly in my top 5 heavyweight rankings of all time, and by the way 6-pack im full blooded irish

Jaclem · Post by **Jaclem** » 15 Jul 2005, 14:33

....i've written often here that i am no fan of marciano...but...to give the man his due...whenever the question of "who did he beat?" comes up....and it has about many fighters, the best response is "Wo beat HIM?"

...an escpecially good question to marciano detractors.

6 Pack · Post by **6 Pack** » 15 Jul 2005, 15:05

looks like this thread may be directed to me. Well...

Rocky is an all-time great, and yes, he was a hell of a fighter. But the question of his opposition is still a valid one. WHile Rocky certainly did not fight tomato cans, and did take on the best the division had, the division was in a transition mode.

Ezzard Charles and Jersey Joe Walcott, two great fighters, were on their way out, and that can not be inquestion. Walcott might as well have mailed in his effort in his second fight with Rocky.

Joe Louis was also a shell of his fighting prime.

But It is not like Walcott and Charles were useless. Walcott was the champ when Rocky beat him, and he was winning when Rocky took him out. ANd Charles still had some fight left in him too when he clashed with the Rock.

But it is also true that Those were Walcott's last two fights, and that Charles was not the same fighter as he was in his fighting prime.

It is just that because Rocky retired undefeated, some seem to try to spin it as if he was unbeatable.

The old "Well who beat him?" answer really does not mean much. I don't care if a guy has never lost if he did not fight so and so. I would rather a fighter fight great fighters and loose a couple but beat some great fighters.

Had Rocky stuck around for Liston or Patterson, then things may be different. But Rocky took out the old guard when they were on their way out and did not stick around for the new bloods (Patterson, Liston and their era).

No question Rocky is an all-time great. No question he deserves to be mention when listing the best of the heavyweights.

But has he been over-rated by some because he retired undefeated. In my mind, yes. BUt in my mind i would rather he stuck around and take a loss to Liston but beat Patterson. Then I would hold him in higher regard, because he would have added another great fighter to his resume.

IF Mike Tyson retired after beating Spinks, and Holmes and retired before he fought Douglas (or Holyfield or Lewis) I beat every body would say he was the greatest of all time. Who would have beaten him? Nobody.

But who would he have beaten?

I think that is a good question

BrocktonBlockbuster49 · Post by **BrocktonBlockbuster49** » 15 Jul 2005, 16:10

if marciano stayed around for one more fight. he would have really had no one worth fighting. he had finally cleaned up the division with his win over moore. he porbably would have fought nino valdez and then waited a year to fight 21 year old floyd patterson who was too inexperienced at the time. then marciano would be 34 and he always said whe nhe retired "i probably had 2 or 3 good fights left." so he would be dramatically aging and would have to face liston well past his prime at age 36 and by then all he would have his a punchers chance. if u have that fight a yearr after the moore fight, liston gets knocked out cause hes too inexperienced and rocky has some left.

i just dont see how beating a young inexperienced floyd patterson then having to wait 3 years to fight liston would give u more respect????

ezzard charles, walcott , and moore were all hall of famers and rate better than patterson. LISTON WENT TO JAIL FOR 9 MONTHS AND TOOK THE YEARS 1956-1957 OFF. SO he will be too rusty when he comes back and then they will have to wait one more year when marciano is by now 36????

he would be a shell of his former self at 36.

marciano got out at the right time. nothing more to prove. beating nino valdez will do nothing to enhance his legacy. NINO HAD HIS CHANCE BUT LOST TO MOORE OVER 15 ROUNDS SO MOORE GOT THE SHOT. whats marciano supposed to do ??? beta up on an inexperienced cleveland williams, floyd patterson, AND light contender hurricane jackson???

BrocktonBlockbuster49 · Post by **BrocktonBlockbuster49** » 15 Jul 2005, 16:17

some people say he didnt fight a big guy liek valdez???

valdez is 6'3 so what???? marciano fought the BEST fighters. moore was a better fighter than nino. i believe marciano would have knocked out nino especially if nino tried to slug it out with him.

marcianos was smart and got out at the right time. he had nothing more to prove and if he stayed fighting, he would have beat on low class contenders or inexperienced upcomers until he would age and get beat .

maybe if floyd was the # 1 contender and in his aboslute prime then marciano should stay around. but he wasnt. thats all their was was nino, bob baker, and hurricane jackson?????

marciano was 32 hwen he beat moore. thats when fighters usually start to lose it. whats the point of getting beat past ur prime????? marciano beat 3 hall of famers in his title defenses. thats worth enough.

bollox · Post by **bollox** » 15 Jul 2005, 16:17

As time goes by and Marciano becomes more of a memory, his avhievements start to become distorted. Today he's probably underrated if anything. Posters look at a 187 pound Marciano and pit him P4P against the 240 pounders of today. This isn't right

Do some reading on what Marciano's contemporaries said about him and it gives a truer picture of what he was, in his day

6 Pack · Post by **6 Pack** » 15 Jul 2005, 17:32

Whether you think Rocky left at the right time or not, or wether more fighters should leave while champ and not go out a losser or not does not change the fact he reign during an enviable time for a Champion to reign.

I realize he fought every contender, and ducked no one, but that does not change the fact the big name guys he beat were past their prime.

I am not saying it is Rocky's fault, nor am I saying he is not an all-time great, but we have to judge him by who he has beaten. Not who he has lost to (which is no one), because EVERY ONE seems to want to bring up that he has to be indistructable because he never lost.

I am not saying any of you personally over-rate Rocky (I don't know where you put him), but when I see a poster saying something along the lines of who would win Rocky Marciano or Muhammad Ali I get a little flustered.

No disrespect to Rocky, but I put in higher esteem Joe Frazier's win over Ali more than any of the Rock's wins over aging Walcott or aging Charles (As I would assume most of you would).

So Frazier would loose to foreman and Ali. So what, I would think both Foreman and ALi would beat Rocky too. The only difference is Rocky didn't have to fight such flippin' heavyweight monsters and such heavyweight legends that have set records.

Foreman beat Frazier twice and Norton (in their primes) which more than wins over aging Walcott and faded Charles.

You know what I mean? Not that Rocky was fighting stiffs. Nor that Rocky is not an all-time great, cause he is. It is just that some people just bring up the Rock and say he retire undefeated and seem to think that is all that has to be said. In reality boxing has always been "who have you beaten". Fancy records are great, but we as hardcore boxing fans know that fancy records are not the whole story.

Now I am not saying you guys are the ones just throwing around Rocky's undefeated record. And to answer the thread starter, I do think Rocky is a great. But in general I have found Rocky's boxing career has taken on mythical legend because he is the only heavyweight champ to retire undefeated in his career (which I am sure you have heard how even that is in question. But those claims of Rocky loosing his first fight have never hit the record books, so lets not even bother to discuss.Though, I do wonder how boxing history would look at him different if he did have a loss on his record? WOuld he be as special?)

It is my opinion there is some stigma to him being undefeated, and to some the rest is just gravy.

BrocktonBlockbuster49 · Post by **BrocktonBlockbuster49** » 15 Jul 2005, 18:00

gene caggiano promoter of AMATEUR boxing shows at the time, promoted marcianos bout vs lester. in that bout marciano was out of shape and tired and got DQed for kicking ted lester in the groin. ted lester was a new england amatuer champion.

bottom line: IT WAS AN AMATUER FIGHT

then rocky fought lee epperson in a pro bout under the name rocky mack so he could save his AMATUER STATUS. rocky fought lester under ROCKY MARCHEGIANO AND ALL OF RCOKYS HOME TOWN FANS CAME TO WATCH.

after lee epperson, he went back to the amatuers and fought as rocky MARCHEGIANO. then when they found out he fought one fight as a pro against EPPERSON, they stripped him of his amatuer status.

u say i hate when people compare ali vs marciano. well if they can compare ali vs frazier, then they can compare ali vs marciano in a fantasy fight. marciaon vs ali would be close and marciano would hurt him and the fight would be close but ali would porbably win on points. i think tyson has the best style to take marciano out and i do think he would. but i think marciano would survive foreman early and knock him out late.

6 Pack · Post by **6 Pack** » 15 Jul 2005, 18:06

Frazier was bigger than the Rock, and more athletic. He had a different style, and his hook worked Ali over.

Foreman loved crushing those short guys, you know that. That is why he crushed Frazier, and that is why he wanted Tyson sooo bad, and that is why Tyson avoided him.

And Rocky was not only short, but he was only a 185 lbs.
Foreman would have crushed Rocky. Way too big and strong for the little guy. Rocky fought no one on either prime Foreman, prime Frazier, or prime Ali's level, and that is fact.

BrocktonBlockbuster49 · Post by **BrocktonBlockbuster49** » 15 Jul 2005, 18:57

STOP USING THAT WORD BIG. foreman was 215 lb in his prime, so its he doesnt have a hgue weight difference. AND SIZE ISNT EVERYTHING. iwill give the strentgh edge to foreman, though marciano has a lot fo strentgh. like i said many times, MARCIANO FOUGHT IN A CROUCH, AND unlike frazier could hit hard with both hands. that would throw off foreman if frazier could have done that. foreman can also be hit with a right hand, which marciano has unlike frazier. and marciano can throw short powerful punches that come inside foremans long looping punches. marciano also could land hard on foremans body and when he connects with foremans head he will hurt foreman. i believe marciano can push this fight into the later round and thats when hell take foreman apart for a late round stoppage. but like u said foreman can very well stop marciano early but dont be suprised if marciano drags this to mid rounds and knocks foreman out. he had a better style agisnt foreman than frazier.

DONT SAY TYSON DIDNT WANT TO FIGHT FOREMAN. IF EVEN THE 1995 TYSON FOUGHT 45 YEAR OLD GEORGE, we would be attending foremans funeral the next morning. an old foreman would get knocked out by tyson easily. thats a fact. a prime vs prime is a different story.

im not saying marciano will do it, i just think marciano will fare better agianst foreman than frazier , and frazier would fare better against ali than marciano. THATS WHY I SAY FOREMAN VS MARCIANO IS A TOSS UP BUT I GIVE THE EDGE TO MARCIANO. foreman will be tried by the 7th round and he will get his by shots all around the body hes never felt before.

either foreman stops marciano early, or marciano wins by late knockout. those are the two thinggs that could happen .

and DID I CLARIFY WITH U ABOUT MARCIANO'S AMATUER FIGHT DQ LOSS????? IT WAS NOT A PRO FIGHT . if u want more info i can give it to u .

6 Pack · Post by **6 Pack** » 16 Jul 2005, 00:38

BrocktonBlockbuster49 wrote:STOP USING THAT WORD BIG. foreman was 215 lb in his prime, so its he doesnt have a hgue weight difference. AND SIZE ISNT EVERYTHING. iwill give the strentgh edge to foreman, though marciano has a lot fo strentgh. like i said many times, MARCIANO FOUGHT IN A CROUCH, AND unlike frazier could hit hard with both hands. that would throw off foreman if frazier could have done that. foreman can also be hit with a right hand, which marciano has unlike frazier. and marciano can throw short powerful punches that come inside foremans long looping punches. marciano also could land hard on foremans body and when he connects with foremans head he will hurt foreman. i believe marciano can push this fight into the later round and thats when hell take foreman apart for a late round stoppage. but like u said foreman can very well stop marciano early but dont be suprised if marciano drags this to mid rounds and knocks foreman out. he had a better style agisnt foreman than frazier.

DONT SAY TYSON DIDNT WANT TO FIGHT FOREMAN. IF EVEN THE 1995 TYSON FOUGHT 45 YEAR OLD GEORGE, we would be attending foremans funeral the next morning. an old foreman would get knocked out by tyson easily. thats a fact. a prime vs prime is a different story.

im not saying marciano will do it, i just think marciano will fare better agianst foreman than frazier , and frazier would fare better against ali than marciano. THATS WHY I SAY FOREMAN VS MARCIANO IS A TOSS UP BUT I GIVE THE EDGE TO MARCIANO. foreman will be tried by the 7th round and he will get his by shots all around the body hes never felt before.

either foreman stops marciano early, or marciano wins by late knockout. those are the two thinggs that could happen .

and DID I CLARIFY WITH U ABOUT MARCIANO'S AMATUER FIGHT DQ LOSS????? IT WAS NOT A PRO FIGHT . if u want more info i can give it to u .

Okay, lets take this one step at a time.

As for me pointing out Foreman was a lot bigger than your boy Rocky...it seems you have gone out of your way to say Foreman was only 215 in his prime and thus did not have a big size advantage over the Rock.

Foreman's most significant fights were against Frazier, Ali, Norton, Lyle, and Jimmy Young while in his prime.

In those fights he weighed 217.5 lbs. in his first Frazier fight, 224 in his second frazier fight, 220 lbs. against Ali, 224 against Norton, 226 against Ron Lyle, and 229 against Young.

Rocky was between 185 to 190 pounds in his prime years. That is roughly 35 pounds Foreman had on Rocky! Not to mention Rocky was only 5'10" and Foreman was 6'3".

So we have Foreman at roughly 35 pounds heavier, and 5" taller. ANd you don't think that is much of a size advantage?

But lets take size out of the equation for a minute. Who has Rocky beat that was in their prime that cracks the all-time greats heavyweight top ten?

Foreman destroyed Frazier twice, and by most historians (don't take my word for it) Frazier is in the all-time top ten.

Charles and Walcott at heavyweight rank some where in 10-15, or 15-20. That being said they were both past their prime when Rocky fought them. Yet Norton, who is routinely ranked anywhere from 10-20 in the all-time rankings was in his prime when Foreman KOed him.

You see, I say Foreman would KO the Rock based on him KOing other great heavyweights from the all-time top ten (like Frazier). But you say Rocky would beat Foreman just on what you would like the outcome to be. Nothing the Rock has done would lead me to believe he would beat a legend like Foreman in his prime.

Not even his mythical status.

Whick may I add you seemed to have fallen hook line and sinker for. I had stated there was controversy about whether Rocky had lost a fight as a pro (his first). See, to those that have bought so deeply into Rocky being this undefeated legend it is disturbing to even think of such a thing.

When in reality, it would change nothing. So what if Rocky lost his first fight? Does that make what he did in his career less? Of course not, he still beat who he beat. But to some, the fact that he was undefeated is something they have to hold onto. Like his other wins and career accomplishments do not warrant the status he has without the mystic of having gone undefeated.

In reality, whether he lost his first fight or not means nothing in terms of his greatness.

You think of Benard Hopkins any less because he lost his first fight? How about Alexis Arguello? I bet most even forget they lost their first fight, and why wouldn't they? It means nothing in terms of their greatness. Their legacy does not bank on the fact they retired undefeated, but rather by who they have defeated.

Like a true Rocky fan you will defend that The Rock retired without a loss, and contend that he would have prevailed against all-time greats who have proven themselves against other heavyweight all-time greats in their prime.

I can agree Rocky was an all-time great, and that he could beat some of the other all-time greats, but Foreman was not one of them.

Foreman fought in an the greatest heavyweight division boxing has ever known, and then returned two eras later to once again become the Heavyweight Champion. The competition Foreman fought in his prime cannot be touched (Frazier, Ali, Norton).

I truely think we can both agree on the Rock being an all-time great, and I bet we don't disagree too much on his placement. But I think we disagree on how we view his career and the significance of his career wins, and how he would fare against the heavyweights that would follow him.

I have stated Rocky is over-rated by many in another thread, and now you know why (the mystic of him retiring undefeated to some gets blown out of portion). I have also stated in another post that Rocky would loose to Ali and that it is really a fight I don't have much doubt about, and I have stated why (Ali has beaten the like of Liston, Patterson, Frazier, Foreman, Norton, and every damn contender of his era).

Now you understand my previous posts. Not that I don't like the Rock, or don't respect him. I just rate him differently.

BrocktonBlockbuster49 · Post by **BrocktonBlockbuster49** » 16 Jul 2005, 01:28

ok well 220 lb , not 215 lb

and when ur that high in weight, size doesnt matter as much thats why the weight class back then was over 175 and up. just for a side note.
but the first reason u gave why foreman would beat marciano is size, and id rather u use reasons why marcianos style would prevent him from beating foreman rather than use size as a main focus.

walcott fought marciano one year after he won the title with his best preforamce of his career over charles. he then gave marciano a life and death battle and id say walcott was still in his prime because ur in ur prime when u win the title in most cases, and walcott had just won the title.

as for charles, in the first fight he looked very much in his prime.

6 pack wrote

But lets take size out of the equation for a minute. Who has Rocky beat that was in their prime that cracks the all-time greats heavyweight top ten?

Foreman destroyed Frazier twice, and by most historians (don't take my word for it) Frazier is in the all-time top ten.

Charles and Walcott at heavyweight rank some where in 10-15, or 15-20. That being said they were both past their prime when Rocky fought them. Yet Norton, who is routinely ranked anywhere from 10-20 in the all-time rankings was in his prime when Foreman KOed him.

You see, I say Foreman would KO the Rock based on him KOing other great heavyweights from the all-time top ten (like Frazier). But you say Rocky would beat Foreman just on what you would like the outcome to be. Nothing the Rock has done would lead me to believe he would beat a legend like Foreman in his prime.

based on what the outcome i would like it to be????? thats not me. im realistic about marciano. i defend him with good reason and never put him head over heels above the rest nor do i say he beats everyone. I GAVE IN MY LAST POST the reasons why i think he would beat foreman and its BASED ON STYLE, STAMINA, AND HEARt, AND WEARING DOWN FOREMAN TO KNOCK HIM OUT.

the way u put it u make it sound like rocky doesnt have any chance at all. isnt that what they said about ali against foreman????? what did ali do to foreman??

You see, I say Foreman would KO the Rock based on him KOing other great heavyweights from the all-time top ten (like Frazier).

so what ur saying is that because foreman beat frazier and norton hes beat marciano????? ok then since max schmelling beat the greatest heavyweight of all time joe louis, then max would beat geoge foreman. u have to look at foreman-marciano films, read in depth on them and compare them together. dont use the norton fight as a reason he would knock out rocky.

u say charles was past his prime, i could argue frazier was past his prime and had lost his stuff after ali. frazier put on 10 pounds and slowed down a little. charles looked much better at 33 against marciano, than frazier at 29 against foreman. and norton???? i wouldnt rate him over walcott and charles. nortons a top 20-25 heavyweight. in fact i think walcott and charles when they faced marciano would have beaten norton.

i came up with reasons based on style, and other intangebiles u do the same. just because fighter A beats fighter B, and fighter B beats fighter C, that doesnt mean fighter C wont beat fighter A.

and the only reason why i went out of my way to do that was because i thought that was one of the reason u were discrediting marciano and that u beleived he did lose one fiight or thought he may have, and i was just clarifying. WHEN UR THE ONLY UNDEFEATED HEAVYWEIHGT CHAMP, YES BEING UNDEFEATED IS A HUGE ACCLAIM AND SHOULD GET THE CREDIT. and marciano didnt beat up on tomatoe cans. he beat the best the division had and the best wasnt all that bad. they werent 70s material but there were some legit champions and contenders. WHEN U DONT LOSE ITS A BIG DEAL. AND MARCIANO HAD SOME LEGIT OPPONENTS TO BACK UP HIS RESIME.

keep it up , good stuff

Jaclem · Post by **Jaclem** » 16 Jul 2005, 01:46

....i've written too much on marciano already....and usually negatively....to add anything more. however...as usual, i will do so anyway.

but.....it maybe of interest here to know that the first time i heard the"yeah....but who's beaten him?" riposte was said about......Joe Louis!!! this was when the bomber's greatness was being disputed (joe louis!!!!) by those who thought he made his record over mediocre opponents.

...as for marciano's 49/0.....i'll say it again... those who call marciano a great fighter do not have to use that record as the main basis of their argument. if he had stayed in longer eventually he would have lost....depending on how long he would have stayed....(and as brockton boy has correctly pointed out that would have had to been a long time) ...that would not diminish his accomplishments up to that time. Joe Louis stayed too long because of financial reasons....ezzard charles much too long for the same reason......he had his telephone and electricity turned off in cincinnati for lack of payment, for chrissake!!!

rocky was able to quit because he could afford to. so his record stands as is. i do not think he was a great fighter....and i've harped on that enough over the years. i think he was the least skillful heavyweight champion if not of all time (there have been some pips since)...but up to his time. if anything, though, i was always amazed when i watched him how a fighter who looked so bad could still win as forcefully as he did....even against fighters past their primes.

that ambulance you hear is heading for tomato can's house ....another defense of marciano by jaclem!!!!!

Rory McCloskey · Post by **Rory McCloskey** » 16 Jul 2005, 02:18

marciano vs foreman..cmon marciano would rip foreman apart... foreman wasnt a hulking behemoth liek some people make him out to be.. i love rocky marciano.. i think he had alot of heart and he would have taken down foreman by using skill instead of brute strength.. marciano by ko in 9

ABA Boxing · Post by **ABA Boxing** » 16 Jul 2005, 08:20

Rory McCloskey wrote:ITS BORING...YOU DONT KNOW ANY OF THEM.. MOST OF EM SUCK..NO KNOCKOUTS..JUST SUCKS ALL THE WAY AROUND

The same kind of respect you give Amateur Boxers!!! People give to Rocky!

Sweet Scientist · Post by **Sweet Scientist** » 16 Jul 2005, 08:55

Marciano belongs with the all time greats...at about #10...He'd have big time trouble with the fighters above him on that list...Foreman would utilize his size advantage and would be the guy who could catch him early...Ali & Holmes would out box him...Liston would KO him, Liston was viscious, had an 84" reach and a superb jab...Dempsey would handle him, Tunney would out box him...Frazier would be a hand full too...Johnson would make him look silly...

What some people forget is...some of the guys he fought past their prime gave Rocky a lot of trouble...he wasn't exactly blowing guys out of there early every time out...Charles, Walcott, Moore and Louis all gave him trouble, he didn't dominate them the whole way through...Joe Louis won several rounds when they fought, but he just couldn't let loose with the combinations any more...

Another thing, Rocky missed a lot...he might have only needed to land one big one, but there were tons of misses...you miss like that against an Ali or Holmes or Johnson...you're going to get countered more effectively than you would against an old Charles, Walcott, Moore or Louis...There is just no way he would ever outpoint Ali, Holmes, Johnson or Tunney...he would have to knock them out...and they were all clever and skilled enough to avoid that...

Rocky is in my top 10...but not at the top of the list...he may have had heart, guts, stamina, and a super punch...but that's not enough to beat everybody...especially those who had skill, speed and size advantages over him...and Foreman would use his arms to push Marciano away, same as he did against Frazier and the other smaller guys he fought, When did you ever see Foreman effectively swarmed by a smaller fighter?...Foreman would have the best chance of an early KO...would Marciano be able to upset any of those guys?...sure, if he can land the 'big one'...would he beat any of them 2 out of 3?...highly unlikely...he'd have to beat them with body punches while somehow avoiding the jabs that would cut him up, everybody who fought him was able to hit him...hell, he was bloodied up a little against 37 year old Joe Louis...fight somebody substantially bigger with speed who can consistently beat him to the punch, and then have the physical strength to tie him up in close...he's definitely in trouble, he's going to swell, he's going to bleed...he could hit, but the master boxers aren't just going to stand in front of him...there going to stick and move, tie him up, lean on him in clinches, and make it difficult and frustrating...and Rocky missed a lot against guys standing right there...if they had compubox punch stat numbers back then, his connect percentage would be very low...and the guys I mentioned could all take a punch...

dempseyfire · Post by **dempseyfire** » 16 Jul 2005, 11:33

6 Pack wrote:Whether you think Rocky left at the right time or not, or wether more fighters should leave while champ and not go out a losser or not does not change the fact he reign during an enviable time for a Champion to reign.

I realize he fought every contender, and ducked no one, but that does not change the fact the big name guys he beat were past their prime.

I am not saying it is Rocky's fault, nor am I saying he is not an all-time great, but we have to judge him by who he has beaten. Not who he has lost to (which is no one), because EVERY ONE seems to want to bring up that he has to be indistructable because he never lost.

I am not saying any of you personally over-rate Rocky (I don't know where you put him), but when I see a poster saying something along the lines of who would win Rocky Marciano or Muhammad Ali I get a little flustered.

No disrespect to Rocky, but I put in higher esteem Joe Frazier's win over Ali more than any of the Rock's wins over aging Walcott or aging Charles (As I would assume most of you would).

So Frazier would loose to foreman and Ali. So what, I would think both Foreman and ALi would beat Rocky too. The only difference is Rocky didn't have to fight such flippin' heavyweight monsters and such heavyweight legends that have set records.

Foreman beat Frazier twice and Norton (in their primes) which more than wins over aging Walcott and faded Charles.

You know what I mean? Not that Rocky was fighting stiffs. Nor that Rocky is not an all-time great, cause he is. It is just that some people just bring up the Rock and say he retire undefeated and seem to think that is all that has to be said. In reality boxing has always been "who have you beaten". Fancy records are great, but we as hardcore boxing fans know that fancy records are not the whole story.

Now I am not saying you guys are the ones just throwing around Rocky's undefeated record. And to answer the thread starter, I do think Rocky is a great. But in general I have found Rocky's boxing career has taken on mythical legend because he is the only heavyweight champ to retire undefeated in his career (which I am sure you have heard how even that is in question. But those claims of Rocky loosing his first fight have never hit the record books, so lets not even bother to discuss.Though, I do wonder how boxing history would look at him different if he did have a loss on his record? WOuld he be as special?)

It is my opinion there is some stigma to him being undefeated, and to some the rest is just gravy.

Good post. Although after re-watching Marciano-LaStarza 11 last night I would give Marciano a pretty big shot at beating Ali. Foreman is a huge question mark b/c Marciano never faced a puncher near his calibre.

BrocktonBlockbuster49 · Post by **BrocktonBlockbuster49** » 16 Jul 2005, 13:01

sweet scientist, by saying all those all time greats would beat marciano i think is wrong. and marciano could make up for his skill with power, strentgth, heart, conditioning, and toughness. marciano also had underated defense in my opinion.

when he fought joe louis, marciano was coming off a strong one punch knockout win over rex layne. joe louis even at 37, had won 10 in a row and was the best opponent marciano faced up to date. even though joe was past his prime, he was still a legit contender compared to the rest of the feild. i had marciano winning the fight 5 rounds to 1 with 1 even . marciano was willing to take a jab to land two hard shots to louis head. louis still had the best jab, even though it lost sting, and was able to bust up marcianos face a little but joe took a battering himself. i though marciano killed joe when joe was like a rag doll on the ropes and then rocky came with that crashing right. joe louis himself praised rockys abililtys saying he hit him harder than max schmelinig or anyone else and that he could beat anybody. it was like the rise and fall of two all time great heavyweights. also did u see the way a 184 lb marciano totally outphysicaled a 213 lb louis pushing him into the ropes the whole fight and bullying him around. louis weighed 29 lb heavier

la starza was a decent heavyweight boxer and marciano completely wore him down breaking blood vessels in his arms in the proccess.

marciano may have not had the skill to beat a ali or holmes, but he didnt have the skill ot beat any ofd his opponents. he beat his opponents in other ways. and i still say he was a lot harder to hit CLEANLY than it looked.

the only heavyweights i see marciano losing to is joe louis, muhammad ali, mike tyson, and george foreman is a toss up.

marciano would knock out liston late. and in regards to jack dempsey, i think rocky would knock him out. dempsey didnt have the best chin, and was a sucker for a right hand. he would have been knocked out by firpo had he not been helped by the ringside people. firpo knocked himthrough the ropes with a hard right followed by a barrage of punches. marciano hit a lot harder than firpo. and dempsey kept his lands low and didnt always have the best defense. that said he had quick hands, two handed power and it would be a slug fest but i give the edge to marciiano.

6 Pack · Post by **6 Pack** » 16 Jul 2005, 13:25

BrocktonBlockbuster49 wrote:ok well 220 lb , not 215 lb
and when ur that high in weight, size doesnt matter as much thats why the weight class back then was over 175 and up. just for a side note.
but the first reason u gave why foreman would beat marciano is size, and id rather u use reasons why marcianos style would prevent him from beating foreman rather than use size as a main focus.

walcott fought marciano one year after he won the title with his best preforamce of his career over charles. he then gave marciano a life and death battle and id say walcott was still in his prime because ur in ur prime when u win the title in most cases, and walcott had just won the title.

as for charles, in the first fight he looked very much in his prime.

6 pack wrote

But lets take size out of the equation for a minute. Who has Rocky beat that was in their prime that cracks the all-time greats heavyweight top ten?

Foreman destroyed Frazier twice, and by most historians (don't take my word for it) Frazier is in the all-time top ten.

Charles and Walcott at heavyweight rank some where in 10-15, or 15-20. That being said they were both past their prime when Rocky fought them. Yet Norton, who is routinely ranked anywhere from 10-20 in the all-time rankings was in his prime when Foreman KOed him.

You see, I say Foreman would KO the Rock based on him KOing other great heavyweights from the all-time top ten (like Frazier). But you say Rocky would beat Foreman just on what you would like the outcome to be. Nothing the Rock has done would lead me to believe he would beat a legend like Foreman in his prime.
based on what the outcome i would like it to be????? thats not me. im realistic about marciano. i defend him with good reason and never put him head over heels above the rest nor do i say he beats everyone. I GAVE IN MY LAST POST the reasons why i think he would beat foreman and its BASED ON STYLE, STAMINA, AND HEARt, AND WEARING DOWN FOREMAN TO KNOCK HIM OUT.

the way u put it u make it sound like rocky doesnt have any chance at all. isnt that what they said about ali against foreman????? what did ali do to foreman??

You see, I say Foreman would KO the Rock based on him KOing other great heavyweights from the all-time top ten (like Frazier).
so what ur saying is that because foreman beat frazier and norton hes beat marciano????? ok then since max schmelling beat the greatest heavyweight of all time joe louis, then max would beat geoge foreman. u have to look at foreman-marciano films, read in depth on them and compare them together. dont use the norton fight as a reason he would knock out rocky.

u say charles was past his prime, i could argue frazier was past his prime and had lost his stuff after ali. frazier put on 10 pounds and slowed down a little. charles looked much better at 33 against marciano, than frazier at 29 against foreman. and norton???? i wouldnt rate him over walcott and charles. nortons a top 20-25 heavyweight. in fact i think walcott and charles when they faced marciano would have beaten norton.

i came up with reasons based on style, and other intangebiles u do the same. just because fighter A beats fighter B, and fighter B beats fighter C, that doesnt mean fighter C wont beat fighter A.

and the only reason why i went out of my way to do that was because i thought that was one of the reason u were discrediting marciano and that u beleived he did lose one fiight or thought he may have, and i was just clarifying. WHEN UR THE ONLY UNDEFEATED HEAVYWEIHGT CHAMP, YES BEING UNDEFEATED IS A HUGE ACCLAIM AND SHOULD GET THE CREDIT. and marciano didnt beat up on tomatoe cans. he beat the best the division had and the best wasnt all that bad. they werent 70s material but there were some legit champions and contenders. WHEN U DONT LOSE ITS A BIG DEAL. AND MARCIANO HAD SOME LEGIT OPPONENTS TO BACK UP HIS RESIME.

keep it up , good stuff

First off, let me say this is the first time in a while that I actually have gone to boxrec on a daily basis to check up on the forum.

Good boxing talk here.

BUt as for why I think Foreman would KO Marciano...

Rocky took quite a bit of leather. He was no defense master. He got cut up in his fights, and he got banged up in his fights and often rallied back with heart to win.

That being said, Foreman has always maintained, as do most boxing historians, that short squat brawlers coming forward are his easiest pray. No one Rocky has fought hit like Foreman.

To suggest that Rocky would outbox Foreman seems unrealitic to me. Rocky got hit too much, and with Foreman hitting him, the outcome would be like Foreman-Frazier.

Foreman was never crowded, and no one ever went in brawling with Foreman and won, not even when he was in his late 40's!

So what is the Rock gonna do? Is he gonna pull an Ali or Jimmy Young? Not a chance. Rocky was a hell of a fighter, but his style was nothing close to either Ali or Young. He came forward banging like Frazier.

Frazier tried crowding him, but Foreman was too strong. Frazier had great stamina (check his Ali fights) but Foreman took him out early. And Frazier was a hell of fighter.

Looking at their styles, what choice would Rock have? Do you think he is gonna dance around Foreman and tire him out? Do you see him bobbing and weaving and showing great defence and not getting tagged?

I see Rock doing what he always does, coming forward banging every thing he can reach. Hips, body, arms, forearms, head, neck, ears, and trying to take the fight out of Foreman.

But I cannot see Rocky coming forward on Foreman and surviving. It would be suicide. I see Rocky getting tagged as he always does, but getting tagged by a much harder hitter then he ever has before, and him getting dropped much harder than he ever has before.

He would get up and keep fighting, but he would keep getting knock around. A TKO stoppage just like Frazier.

That is how I see that fight, based on their styles. No one has ever outslugged Foreman, and he fought on and off from 69' to 97'. Rocky just had the wrong style. A short relentless pressure fighter IS NOT going to beat Foreman. A great fleet-footed boxer MIGHT.