I hate to say it, but Larry Holmes=overrated???

[Rory McCloskey]

um kikibalt i havent talked abotu braddock this whole fight and no ive only seen just abotu every big fight louis ever had.

[BrocktonBlockbuster49]

i think its funny when unintelligent posters say rocky had no defense, because they saw the rocky movies and think he is exactley like balboa.


Marciano had good head movement. He slithered along and parried jabs very well.

Study the first Walcott fight and observe how many Fast/accurate Walcott jabs he avoids:



http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y152/J ... oslip1.jpg

http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y152/J ... oslip2.jpg


http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y152/J ... oslip3.jpg




The Rock was doing this all throughout the fight. Quick leans to his right and push away with his right hand to the left to avoid the fast jab

[evndrbsn]

did u guys read that post??? he was completey innacurate in most of his evidence and he even went as far to say rocky wouldnt stand a chance against holmes competition.


am i the only one here that defends marciano when people make post like these??? i mean i know if someone did this to johnson, or holmes everyone would be all over this poster.

i am sick of defending him time and time again, some people like this poster will never comprehend what i say so why bother???

Actually I was 100% correct in all the facts I listed. The only thing that would be "inaccurate" would be my opinion since it differs than yours. Facts are facts, opinions are opinions. The fact of the matter is we could debate how boxers of different eras would face off against each other to no end and no matter what anyone says, the conclusion will always be an opinion. The point is to have an intellectual conversation and put out interesting information regarding the boxers which might show how they would match up. If you disagree, I have no problem with that. Just state the facts relevant to your opinion instead of saying something like, "You're wrong and stupid; I'm right and smart." It is very easy to separate the facts I list from the opinions I share. I never say that what I think is going to be 100% right all the time. No one is and no one can be. The reason there is a forum is so people can debate these issues, not so everyone can agree that "The Rock" or whoever was the next messiah.

For example: Maybe Marciano KO's Lennox Lewis in five rounds. Maybe not. Either agree or disagree and state why. Then we can have an intelligent conversation instead of an elementary scuffle.

[evndrbsn]

i think its funny when unintelligent posters say rocky had no defense, because they saw the rocky movies and think he is exactley like balboa.


Marciano had good head movement. He slithered along and parried jabs very well.

Study the first Walcott fight and observe how many Fast/accurate Walcott jabs he avoids.

The Rock was doing this all throughout the fight. Quick leans to his right and push away with his right hand to the left to avoid the fast jab

Who said Rocky had no defense? I didn't.

[BrocktonBlockbuster49]

evndrsbrn wrote

The fighters Holmes fought may not have been as highly regarded historically, but posed a greater threat than the over-the-hill challengers Marciano faced off against. These fighters were closer to their primes when they fought Holmes, which is something to take into account.

An entirely different way to look at it would be that almost any of Holmes' competition would crush Rocky, who in essense was a small, cut prone heavyweight with the reach of a ten year old girl. I respect Rocky Marciano historically, especially given his perfect record, but he was a limited fighter even in his day when he was defending his title against light heavyweights and the contenders of years prior.

Marciano had a great punch against other small heavyweights, but to think he could have competed against Holmes or any of Holmes' major competition is laughable. If you do not want to match them up since they are different eras, Holmes still had the better title run and fought the alive competition.

Marciano had a close fight with an old Joe Louis, a come from behind win in a losing war with Jersey Joe Walcott (who took five tries to win the title), two close bouts with a totally washed up Ezzard Charles, a couple grueling fights with Don Cockell and Roland LaStarza (who many believed beat Marciano in 1950), and a dance with 43-year old light heavyweight champ Archie Moore where he had to climb off the canvas. His only other title defense was his one round return bout with Walcott, who was petrified of getting in the ring again after getting KO'd cold by Marciano eight months before.

Holmes, on the other hand, went on to defeat four future world champions during his title reign and would go on at the advanced age of 40-plus to get the better of WBC champ Oliver McCall and Brian Nielson before getting jobbed by terrible judging from the officials. Don't discredit his victory over 18-0 Ray Mercer either, who was coming off a spectacular stoppage of Tommy Morrison and remained a top contender for years after his loss to Holmes.

Somehow I don't see Rocky Marciano proving just how great he really was during his prime by beating top contenders at the age of 40 and over like Holmes did.

Ah, unifying the belts. Interesting people always bring that up. Remember that Holmes was the WBC champ before he got stripped for not rematching against Tim Witherspoon. He was then awarded the newly created IBF title. Who was the WBA champion? Oh yeah, Mike Weaver, someone Holmes already defeated. Then the WBA title changed hands every couple months since none of the fighters were good enough to hold the championship.

So we have the WBC title that he didn't unify since he was stripped of it and the WBA. Again, to unify the WBA title, he either would have just faced Mike Weaver again (who he stopped in 12) or one of the other five fighters who held the title from 1982 to 1986.

He was considered THE champion; there was no reason to go face someone who basically received his stolen belt or to go face the other boxers who fought for a different championship since they weren't good enough to compete with Larry.

Marciano had a close fight with an old Joe Louis

did u see the fight?? it wasnt close, marciano was clealy in comman. u had it in rounds 5-1-1 marciano. most people seemed to have it around 5-2 in rounds for marciano. louis won a couple rounds at most. and he was never in position to win.

two close bouts with a totally washed up Ezzard Charles

first of all ezzard was 32 and not washed up. he was coming off 11 wins out of his last 13 fights. in the first marciano fight, charles got himself in the best shape in years coming in a rock solid 185lb and showed amazing speed and skill in early rounds before marciano took over and won the decision. it was close but a clear win for rocky in one of the most gruelling heavy fights of all time.

nat fleischer said "no other fighter in the world could have lasted 15 rounds against ezzard charles that night, let alone win the decision."

other writers even went as far to mention it was the best fight of charles career.


once again, a classic person who hasnt seen the 2nd fight. the fight wasnt close. marciano won practically every round. the scores at the time of the knockout had marciano winning every round. besides the horrendous cut, the fight wasnt close. marciano knocked charles down 3 times in a fight where charles didnt have the same spark he had in the first fight. he was overweight and a little slower.

charles went on to lose his last 13 of 23 fights becuase marciano ruined him.

Somehow I don't see Rocky Marciano proving just how great he really was during his prime by beating top contenders at the age of 40 and over like Holmes did.

roland lastarza- age 26 rocky marciano gave lastarza a terrible beating breaking bones in his arms, and giving him huge hematoes all over his arms. he needed 6 surguries to replace the damage.

don cockell- age 26- british champ 5'11 210lbs, a very tough englishman who gave it everything he had. cockell was even vomitting in his corner between rounds thats how much he wanted it.

rex layne- 22 years old 34-1 top contender and highly touted fighter who beat walcott, and knocked out bob satterfield. marciaon knocked out layne with one punch.

harry kid mathews- 29 years old 80-5 when he fought marciano. he was a very good boxer and top contender. marciano needed two left hooks to dispose of him.

Roland LaStarza (who many believed beat Marciano in 1950),

marciano was still green and not yet fully trained by goldman yet when he fought the 37-0 lastarza. marciano knocked lastarza down in the fight. anyways u saw what a peak marciano did to a very good lastarza.

reach of a ten year old girl.

did he ever show he had problems hitting guys because of reach??

but posed a greater threat than the over-the-hill challengers Marciano faced off against. These fighters were closer to their primes when they fought Holmes, which is something to take into account.

i see u do not follow walcotts career and record closely. he was a late bloomer and very much in his prime when he fought marciano in the first fight coming off the two best wins of his career, despite being 38.

moore despite being 42 was also at his best, he was a freak of nature. he was 45-1 in his last 46 fights before he fought marciano and his age hadnt caught up with him.

Marciano had a great punch against other small heavyweights, but to think he could have competed against Holmes or any of Holmes' major competition is laughable

its been proven a 185lb marciano punches over 1000 PSI, and this was taken in the late stages of rocks career, which is better than almost all the big modern day heavies. only 250lb wlad punches 1100 PSI, so wlad cant punch harder than marciano despite outweighing him by 75lbs.

now imagine marcianos punch rate, wlad doesnt throw a lot of bombs. marciano throws many more punches and thats what makes him so devastating.

marciano knocked out many big heavyeeights



pat connelly 6'5 213lb - marciano KO 1 one punch


jerry jackson 6'4 254lb- marciano KO 1 one punch


big bill wilson 6'3 229lb - marciano TKO 1


Johnny Skhorr 6'3 220lbs- Marciano TKO 6

Carmine Vingo 6'4 200lb - hard hitter and the fight was a brutal slugfest for 6 rounds until marciano knocked vingo into a coma and nearly killed him

joe louis 6'2 213lb - marciano KO 8

a couple grueling fights with Don Cockell and Roland LaStarza

gruelling??? u havnt seen those fights then, marciano won every round but the 2nd round agaisnt cockell giving him a huge beating, and marciano was ahead on points and gave lastarza a huge beating.

[Rory McCloskey]

BB... whats the story of carmine vingo... how did he get a fight with the great marciano at age 23. I heard somewhere what u just said, that vingo put up a hell of a fight before getting laid out by the much better rocky. I heard vingo never fully recovered. and in 1961 marciano said it was the toughest fight of his championship career.

do you have any pics of vingo or the fight? and anything you can add/confirm would be great.

[BrocktonBlockbuster49]

now archie moore before he fought marciano was coming off his best wins of his career, and was 45-1 in his last 46 fights!!! THE ONLY loss being harold johnson whom moore beat him in the return matches


now lets see moore in the preceding two years he fought marciano '

1954: joey maxim W 15
bob baker 6'3 220lb TKO 9
Bert whithurst KO 6 - liston didnt knock him out in two fights
harold johnson TKO 14

1955: Nino Valdes 6'3 210lb W 15
Bobo Olsen KO 3
rocky marciano KO'd 9


so as u see and i could go into even more depth, moore was at the peak of his career going 45-1 in his last 46 fights and coming off his best wins.

if u dont believe me, believe archie. " there was no doubt i fought one of my best fights against rocky."

gil clancy said "moore was very much in his prime when he fought marciano".

even max kellerman states moore was at his best or near his best agaisnt rocky.


moore also went on to dominate the light-H division for the next 6 years and be a top contender in the heavy division.


and if u watch the fight compared to moores other fights, he looks the best hes ever been.




as for walcott, Jersey Joe Walcott was a 38 year old veteran who had knocked down Joe Louis three times, beaten the highly regarded Ezzard Charles and was, of course, the Heavyweight Champion of the World. Walcott was not over the hill - infact far from it, he was close to his peak. He had boxed for many years in obscurity, and after getting his shot at Louis, he finally came alive. He was a dangerous boxer who didn't learn new moves - he invented them. Rocky was being outpointed over thirteen rounds, although being blinded for three of those, only to score a devastating and brutal knockout to win the title.

The Ring issue said, "It wasn't so much old age that beat Jersey Joe. It wasn't a decrepit old man who faced the Brockton Block Buster. Walcott put up one of the best fights of his long career, a most remarkable one. Had he not been up against the ropes when the mighty crash felled him, he might have carried on to win the nod of the three officials. It was a miscalculation of a trick he often had used to good advantage that cost him the fight. With back against the ropes, he shifted his body in an effort to baffle his opponent, and that movement brought him in direct line for the right that put him away."


"Walcott had the legs of a twenty-year-old," Silverman said. "He was having the best fight of his career. He must've put Rocky into two hundred head-on collisions. It was one of the worst lickings I ever seen a guy get...The poor kid couldn't see. He was getting the shit punched out of him."



"Champion Joe Walcott, though 37 years old, was in excellent shape and by all accounts of the time was considered a late-bloomer, a fighter with a late prime, such as Lennox Lewis is showing. Marciano was considered a strong, tough, but crude brawler who stood little chance to beat the slick Walcott in the opinions of many of the experts of the time. For those who don't know of Walcott, or just know his age when he lost to Marciano, and think that tells all you need to know, read up on the man. He was a superb boxer. He did a baffling move with his feet called the Walcott"-
from a walcott-marciano article


Max Kellerman "walcott was in his prime when he fought marciano"

[BrocktonBlockbuster49]

BB... whats the story of carmine vingo... how did he get a fight with the great marciano at age 23. I heard somewhere what u just said, that vingo put up a hell of a fight before getting laid out by the much better rocky. I heard vingo never fully recovered. and in 1961 marciano said it was the toughest fight of his championship career.

do you have any pics of vingo or the fight? and anything you can add/confirm would be great.

because rocky marciano was not great at the time, he was considered a club fighter who would never be great. he had basically no training from charley goldman ealry on and scored huge knockout wins over prospects. he was a slugger at the time he fought vingo with no polish at all. marciano was still green.

vingo was 15-1 and a 2o year old 6'4 upcoming prospect with a hard punch.


there fight totally outclassed the main event. it was a hard ofought action packed slug out for 6 rounds. marciano knocked vingo down 4 times during those 6 rounds, but vingo managed to land some hard punches and one almost put marciano down. marciano finally ended it in the 6th where he knocked vingo out unconciouns and into a coma with a left hook. vingo had a bright future ahead, who knows how good he would have been.


there are a few pics, ill try to find one that isnt blurry, perhaps barry can find a good pic of vingo.

[Rory McCloskey]

thats all i could find on the immediate search engines that i checked outhttp://www.lafortezzaclub.it/boxe/marcianovingo.jpg

[BrocktonBlockbuster49]

i believe there is one of vingo out cold on the canvas with his handlers trying to revive him

[evndrbsn]

Marciano had a close fight with an old Joe Louis

did u see the fight?? it wasnt close, marciano was clealy in comman. u had it in rounds 5-1-1 marciano. most people seemed to have it around 5-2 in rounds for marciano. louis won a couple rounds at most. and he was never in position to win.

two close bouts with a totally washed up Ezzard Charles

first of all ezzard was 32 and not washed up. he was coming off 11 wins out of his last 13 fights. in the first marciano fight, charles got himself in the best shape in years coming in a rock solid 185lb and showed amazing speed and skill in early rounds before marciano took over and won the decision. it was close but a clear win for rocky in one of the most gruelling heavy fights of all time.

nat fleischer said "no other fighter in the world could have lasted 15 rounds against ezzard charles that night, let alone win the decision."

other writers even went as far to mention it was the best fight of charles career.


once again, a classic person who hasnt seen the 2nd fight. the fight wasnt close. marciano won practically every round. the scores at the time of the knockout had marciano winning every round. besides the horrendous cut, the fight wasnt close. marciano knocked charles down 3 times in a fight where charles didnt have the same spark he had in the first fight. he was overweight and a little slower.

charles went on to lose his last 13 of 23 fights becuase marciano ruined him.

Somehow I don't see Rocky Marciano proving just how great he really was during his prime by beating top contenders at the age of 40 and over like Holmes did.

roland lastarza- age 26 rocky marciano gave lastarza a terrible beating breaking bones in his arms, and giving him huge hematoes all over his arms. he needed 6 surguries to replace the damage.

don cockell- age 26- british champ 5'11 210lbs, a very tough englishman who gave it everything he had. cockell was even vomitting in his corner between rounds thats how much he wanted it.

rex layne- 22 years old 34-1 top contender and highly touted fighter who beat walcott, and knocked out bob satterfield. marciaon knocked out layne with one punch.

harry kid mathews- 29 years old 80-5 when he fought marciano. he was a very good boxer and top contender. marciano needed two left hooks to dispose of him.

Roland LaStarza (who many believed beat Marciano in 1950),

marciano was still green and not yet fully trained by goldman yet when he fought the 37-0 lastarza. marciano knocked lastarza down in the fight. anyways u saw what a peak marciano did to a very good lastarza.

reach of a ten year old girl.

did he ever show he had problems hitting guys because of reach??

but posed a greater threat than the over-the-hill challengers Marciano faced off against. These fighters were closer to their primes when they fought Holmes, which is something to take into account.

i see u do not follow walcotts career and record closely. he was a late bloomer and very much in his prime when he fought marciano in the first fight coming off the two best wins of his career, despite being 38.

moore despite being 42 was also at his best, he was a freak of nature. he was 45-1 in his last 46 fights before he fought marciano and his age hadnt caught up with him.

Marciano had a great punch against other small heavyweights, but to think he could have competed against Holmes or any of Holmes' major competition is laughable

its been proven a 185lb marciano punches over 1000 PSI, and this was taken in the late stages of rocks career, which is better than almost all the big modern day heavies. only 250lb wlad punches 1100 PSI, so wlad cant punch harder than marciano despite outweighing him by 75lbs.

now imagine marcianos punch rate, wlad doesnt throw a lot of bombs. marciano throws many more punches and thats what makes him so devastating.

marciano knocked out many big heavyeeights



pat connelly 6'5 213lb - marciano KO 1 one punch


jerry jackson 6'4 254lb- marciano KO 1 one punch


big bill wilson 6'3 229lb - marciano TKO 1


Johnny Skhorr 6'3 220lbs- Marciano TKO 6

Carmine Vingo 6'4 200lb - hard hitter and the fight was a brutal slugfest for 6 rounds until marciano knocked vingo into a coma and nearly killed him

joe louis 6'2 213lb - marciano KO 8.

a couple grueling fights with Don Cockell and Roland LaStarza

gruelling??? u havnt seen those fights then, marciano won every round but the 2nd round agaisnt cockell giving him a huge beating, and marciano was ahead on points and gave lastarza a huge beating.

Connelly was 8-5, Jerry Jackson 2-1, Wilson was stopped on a cut in the first round and was beaten by a light heavyweight in his previous fight, and Skhorr was 29-18. Sorry, Joe Louis was not a big heavyweight. He did not weigh in the 210's until he came back from serving 4 years in the US Army and was never the same fighter again. The only reason Vingo is ever mentioned with Rocky's name was because he was put in a coma. He was hardly a big hitter with 7 KOs in 16 wins. To think Marciano, all 5'10.5" and 192.5 lbs (at his heaviest weight) with a 67" reach could defeat the 6'7" 240 lb Klitschko, who has an 81" reach is ridiculous. Klitschko has made a career out of fighting guys between 207 and 263. Marciano is a GREAT cruiserweight. When I try to think how he would match up against todays era, thats how I do it, against the cruiserweights. We are dealing with an entirely different super heavyweight division these days. And Ezzard Charles? He went 11-4 in his last 15 before facing Marciano. He lost to Harold Johnson, Nino Valdes, and Rex Layne along with a disputable loss to Walcott in their 4th fight. Johnson was a very good light heavy but not the calibre of Charles. Nino was a big guy but not a great heavyweight. Rex Layne? He had just stopped Rex Layne. Charles was among the best light heavyweights of all time and an underrated heavyweight champion, but he was an old 32 by the time he faced Marciano. Charles had a run of 24-0 before losing to Walcott the first time for goodness sakes. Charles just aged like all great fighters do. And Archie Moore was not in his prime at age 42. He was a ducked and overlooked fighter during his prime who unfortunately did not get a title shot until he was 39. Moore for all intents and purposes was the same fighter a year later when he fought Floyd Patterson and was KO'd in five rounds easily. He looked old. Cockell was not a heavyweight. He went 10-3 in the big mans division. He spent 6 years as a middleweight to light heavyweight before moving up to spend his final 4 years at heavy. Your Marciano bias clouds your judgment too much. Marciano was ahead 5-2 twice and 4-3 before he KO'd Louis and those scores were very much in line with the action that was going on. And the entire point about the LaStarza I victory was written in my first post on this subject. People like you would not be so enamored with Marciano if he had not had the benefit of the scoring in that fight. What if the ref gave LaStarza the edge? Then we'd have a 48-1 Marciano who spent very little time at the top of his division. The only reason that he retired undefeated at 32 was because he had chronic back problems and his wife often begged him to retire. Without the back problems, Marciano would have gone on to face Floyd Patterson and possibly a young Sonny Liston if he would not have assaulted a police officer and been sent to prison. Remember that Patterson ducked Liston for a long time before they fought, something I doubt Marciano would have done.

Oh, and I have Marciano vs. Rex Layne, Kid Matthews, Joe Louis, Walcott I & II, Charles I & II, Cockell, LaStarza II, and Archie Moore. The only fights Marciano did not struggle in were: Matthews and Walcott II. I haven't seen the Rex Layne fight in a while so I'm not sure about that one. And by struggling in Charles II, I was referring to the fact that his nose was split open and nearly stopped (wrongfully) on a TKO. He was a desperate man when he went out for the 8th round.

[flboxing]

its been proven a 185lb marciano punches over 1000 PSI, and this was taken in the late stages of rocks career, which is better than almost all the big modern day heavies. only 250lb wlad punches 1100 PSI, so wlad cant punch harder than marciano despite outweighing him by 75lbs.

Where is your proof? Or is this only your opinion? I have NEVER seen any listing of the amount of PSI Marciano can hit. I love how people feel they can just state "facts" and not ever give evidence on where they found the information. And if your response is "they tested it," who is they?

And any one commenting on Marciano with a screen name of "BrocktonBlockbuster49" and is from Needham, MA (22 miles from Brockton, MA - Marciano's home) already is clearly biased. That is not even including the over 68 pages of posts this person has already done on Marciano.

Would you believe me if I stated Fernando Vargas could punch over 1500 PSI or 1.5 kludge or 10,342,135.9 pascals and was the greatest fighter ever if I had a name of "ElFeroz4Life" ? My statement on Vargas holds just as much weight as your does, because "they tested it."

But on that note, my money would be on Vargas over Marciano.

[flboxing]

BrocktonBlockbuster49 gets his facts from Rocky IV.

See! "its been proven"

[Tantum]

Where the fornicate are these numbers coming from?

[BrocktonBlockbuster49]

i am going to bed, i will show u proof in the morning.


- it might change some of u marciano haters minds






- u will find i hadnvt posted about marciano in a while, most of my posts were about other fighters and topics, i simply only chime in on marciano now when i feel people arnt giving him his due

[flboxing]

i am going to bed, i will show u proof in the morning.


- it might change some of u marciano haters minds

Normally it doesn't take two hours to find proof, I mean you did just post on this subject, I'd hope you had the source handy.

But if you need to run to bed and can't do it now, I understand.

It takes time to make things up at times.

[evndrbsn]

i am going to bed, i will show u proof in the morning.


- it might change some of u marciano haters minds






- u will find i hadnvt posted about marciano in a while, most of my posts were about other fighters and topics, i simply only chime in on marciano now when i feel people arnt giving him his due

I never said I hated Marciano. I think he was an entertaining fighter. I just don't think he could stop bullets with his mind and devour the entire planet with a single thought like you. Your obsession with Marciano is ... disburbing.

[BrocktonBlockbuster49]

E



archie moore was at or near his best, he lost many fights by knockout and by decision to less calibre fighters when moore was in his thirties. he was ducked but fact is moores age hadnt caught up with him. moore in the marciaon fight looked fast and sharp with a pistol fast jab and sharp reflexes. moore didnt loose his speed or reflexes and actually gained ring smarts, experience which made him a better fighter at 38-42 years of age.

my friend had an interview with gil clancy who said "moore was very much at his best against marciano".

moore was 45-1 in his last 46 fight before facing rocky!!!!!!!!!!!

he was coming off the best preformances and wins of his career and after he lossed to rocky he still went on to dominate light-H division for 6 years


tell me what moore could do in his thirties that he couldnt do at 42????


if moore wasnt in his prime, then when was his prime?????





marciano did not struggle with rex layne, it was a one sides beating. marciano had fast handspeed in that fight, he was 26 and young.


marciano did not struggled vs louis

marciano did not struggle vs cockell - he won every round but one

marciaon did not struggle vs charles II

marciano only slightly struggled with lastarza but broke lastarza arms



marciano would beat klitschko, klitscko doesnt have the work rate to keep up with marciano. marciano proved he can knockout men vitalis size.


moore looked great against marciano.

[BrocktonBlockbuster49]

Evn where do u rate marciano on an all time heavyweight list????



- its funny how u think walcott was over the hill when facts prove otherwise, same with moore


- if u watched charles-marciano I, uwould see charles in early rounds was as fast and sharp as he as ever been AT HEAVYWEIGHT. charles peak was at light-H. charles was also only 2 years older than rocky.

[evndrbsn]

Evn where do u rate marciano on an all time heavyweight list????



- its funny how u think walcott was over the hill when facts prove otherwise, same with moore


- if u watched charles-marciano I, uwould see charles in early rounds was as fast and sharp as he as ever been AT HEAVYWEIGHT. charles peak was at light-H

You are obviously a clueless, biased little man so I will respond only one more time to your Marciano love fest. Like I said, I HAVE Marciano-Charles I. I have seen it several times. Charles does not look like he did in the Louis fight or the second Walcott fight. He looks AGED and WEATHERED. Walcott was indeed over the hill when he faced Marciano. Just because he accomplished his most significant feat at an advanced age does not make him all of a sudden in his prime. His best performance was in '47 at the age of 33 against Louis in their first fight. He deserved the decision but was robbed. After that fight, his only big wins were a KO over light heavyweight Harold Johnson and a KO over Ezzard Charles. As great as the victory over Charles was, Charles bested him in the rematch but was screwed by the judges. Walcott went 7-7 from the first Louis fight to the second Marciano fight. Hardly that of a prime fighter. If he was in his prime, he would not have retired after losing to Marciano in the rematch. And for Moore being in his prime in his 40s, my oh my. You obviously are not involved in boxing other than watching. Do what I do and actually cover events and talk to fighters and you'll learn that every single one of them tells you they can't do what they used to do when they were in their twenties or even early thirties. If they do, they retract the statement as soon as they lose.

There was a great program called "Shadow Boxing" years ago on HBO about black fighters being shut out of title contention. Moore was one of the fighters featured on the program. His best years were spent fighting for little money against the other top fighters of the division until the powers to be could not keep him from fighting for a title any longer. This is in part due to The Ring magazine clamoring for a fair shake for Archie. So he gets his big break at 39 and makes the best of it. Great for Moore. Just because his best accomplishment was achieved at 39 does not make it his prime! Same as Walcott.

One more thing about Ezzard Charles. I am fortunate enough to know Jimmy Williams and been able to talk boxing with him on several occassions. For those that do not know who Jimmy Williams, he is a talented trainer that is now based in Tampa, Florida. One of his most recent fighters was Antonio Tarver, a fighter he built up from an amateur and was with him for a while in his pro career. Williams used to train with Ezzard Charles back after Charles lost the heavyweight title. Mr. Williams always tells me how Charles was thinking about retiring after the Walcott III fight because he didn't have it anymore. The reason Charles kept fighting was a reason many fighters keep fighting: he needed the money. And we all know the story from there. He fought well past his prime just to get a lousy extra paycheck to support his family.

[BrocktonBlockbuster49]

i find it hilarious u call me 100% bias, even thouh i back up all my arguements with facts and quotes while u base urs soely on opinion.




i think walcotts best fight was against louis, but his next best fight was vs marciano. are saying walcotts prime lasted one fight???

fact is, walcott was inconsitent and took some less tier guys not as seriosuely like rex layne and lost because of it.

- why did all the boxing writers say that was one of if not walcotts best fight of his career against rocky???

- walcott got better with age, he was a nobody in his twenties who was horribly malnourished and took fights on a weeks notice against top contneders.


walcott was inconsisten even in his prime sometimes, but showed when he brought his A game like aainst louis, marciano, charles how good he was.

are u saying the 47 walcott who beat louis would beat marciano?? even though he wasnt that much different??

and charles did not best walcott as much as u think, charles backpedalling and playing it safe cost him at the end.


- watch marciano-charles I in the early rounds, charles looks very fast and sharp. fact is u might mistaken that because unlike other charles fights, marciano forced charles to fight on the inside. and charles started to get worn down in mid rounds because of marciano and the punch to the adams apple. very gruelling fight.



i would like to see ur top 10 heavies of all time ??




say all u want about moore, u still havnt told me when as moores peak and what could he do then that he couldnt do at age 38-42 years old???

Walcott went 7-7 from the first Louis fight to the second Marciano fight.

and 6 of those losses genius were to all time greats louis, marciano, charles. the other was a lackluster bad preformance loss to top contender rex layne.

[flboxing]

i find it hilarious u call me 100% bias, even thouh i back up all my arguements with facts and quotes while u base urs soely on opinion.

Brockton, you back up nothing. Your "quotes" you've used so far are only your own. You show no proof on where they can be found, just like your psi.

Marciano was a very good boxer, but that's it. Very good. He never faced any of the greats in their prime. No boxer reaches their prime in the 40s. Michael Jordan did not hit his prime in his 40s, nor did Wayne Gretsky, Ted Williams, or Brett Favre. Amazing how boxing is the only sport that people can reach their prime in their 40s, according to you.

Try to be a little more realistic about things and then people would actually place Marciano where he deserves to be.

He was a good boxer in a weak era of heavyweight boxing.

[BrocktonBlockbuster49]

i never said charles was in his prime, he wasnt but he defintely wasnt washed up.

charles realized in tha tfirst marciano fight, he had a chance to earn his respect he never earned. he had nothing to lose and everything to win. so he trained harder than he had since his best days, and got himsel to incredible shape and he went to war for 15 rounds. the early rounds, charles was very fast and busy and looked as fast as he did in the walcott fights. charles got worn down, simple as that.


marcianos peak was at 27 against joe louis or a 29 against walcott

[BrocktonBlockbuster49]

The Ring issue said, "It wasn't so much old age that beat Jersey Joe. It wasn't a decrepit old man who faced the Brockton Block Buster. Walcott put up one of the best fights of his long career, a most remarkable one. Had he not been up against the ropes when the mighty crash felled him, he might have carried on to win the nod of the three officials. It was a miscalculation of a trick he often had used to good advantage that cost him the fight. With back against the ropes, he shifted his body in an effort to baffle his opponent, and that movement brought him in direct line for the
right that put him away."

http://www.eastsideboxing.com/news/bearden2309.php


there u go genius, quoted and everything by the ring issue.


marciano beat walcott in his prime. bernard hopkins was in his prime at 38, how come walcott cant be?????

lennox lewis was in his prime till 37, how come walcott cant be???



u give me no evidence to prove walcott wasnt in his prime . u simply compare apples and oranges and use jordan as an example

[evndrbsn]

Walcott went 7-7 from the first Louis fight to the second Marciano fight.

actually 7-5 genuis. and 4 of those losses were to all time greats louis, marciano, charles.

Thanks for helping me make you look stupid. Although you edited your post, just so you are sure, here are the 14 fights (7-7) in order:

L split 15 Joe Louis (0-1)
KO by 11 Joe Louis (0-2)
L unan 15 Ezzard Charles (0-3)
TKO 5 Olle Tandberg (1-3)
KO 3 Harold Johnson (2-3)
TKO 7 Omelio Agramonte (3-3)
KO 1 Johnny Shkor (4-3)
W unan 10 Hein ten Hoff (5-3)
L unan 10 Rex Layne (5-4)
L unan 15 Ezzard Charles (5-5)
KO 7 Ezzard Charles (6-5)
W unan 15 Ezzard Charles (7-5)
KO by 13 Rocky Marciano (7-6)
KO by 1 Rocky Marciano (7-7)

And as per your request:

Top Ten Heavyweights
1. Muhammad Ali
2. Joe Louis
3. Larry Holmes
4. Evander Holyfield
5. George Foreman
6. Lennox Lewis
7. Sonny Liston
8. Joe Frazier
9. Jack Johnson
10. Rocky Marciano

Ezzard Charles and Jersey Joe Walcott would rank in the top 15. Both superb fighters but did not accomplish enough at heavyweight to crack top 10. My number one light heavyweight is Ezzard Charles, though.