Rocky Marciano small heavyweight

[Controversial]

I never said fast fighters then would be slow fighters now - you're embellishing for effect. The main thrust of my thesis is 5'10'' and 185 pound Rocky Marciano if magically transported forward in time would be too small to beat the majority of the recent belt holders, certainly at heavyweight, and also (controversially) at cruiserweight. Nobody really agrees, and that's fine. I would also add that I disagree strongly with this idea that boxing training has evolved considerably since the 1940's and 50's, the time of Marciano's development and rise to the top. At one point I think I said that there isn't a single other sport where the world champion then could be a champion today. The rebuttable to that was that ...well boxing is unique ...they all train basically the same. Err... well don't runners basically run? Weight lifters lift weights, etc? It just strikes me as that is just ignorance and nostalgia - a terrible mix!

The problem with "progress" is even in sports where speeds alone are measured the increases aren't always that dramatic. Usain Bolt can run faster than anyone who has ever lived but athletes from yesteryear were not full time sportsmen, they didn't have the luxury of dedicating all their time to training. Carl Lewis run 9.86 in 1991, still better than many runners from today and some outdoor world records are still unbeaten from 1986, surely with the dramatic progression of training, health, nutrition etc... these should have been beaten long ago? We are talking about very small increases in speeds where speed alone is trained for and measured so to say that boxers are dramatically poorer from 50-60 years ago doesn't make sense.

The heaviest un-offical weight ever lifted in history was in 1957 was by Paul Anderson, someone still considered by many to be the strongest man to have ever lived. His training was a million miles off todays guys, home made equipment in his back garden, so compared to the high tech regimes modern lifters use (and other supplements no doubt !!) there hasn't really been any great improvement.

Boxing is so much more than speed or strength alone and the reason why Kimbo Slice might be a great street fighter and a huge and strong bloke but he's a crap and chinny boxer.

[polecateddy]

I never said fast fighters then would be slow fighters now - you're embellishing for effect. The main thrust of my thesis is 5'10'' and 185 pound Rocky Marciano if magically transported forward in time would be too small to beat the majority of the recent belt holders, certainly at heavyweight, and also (controversially) at cruiserweight. Nobody really agrees, and that's fine. I would also add that I disagree strongly with this idea that boxing training has evolved considerably since the 1940's and 50's, the time of Marciano's development and rise to the top. At one point I think I said that there isn't a single other sport where the world champion then could be a champion today. The rebuttable to that was that ...well boxing is unique ...they all train basically the same. Err... well don't runners basically run? Weight lifters lift weights, etc? It just strikes me as that is just ignorance and nostalgia - a terrible mix!

The problem with "progress" is even in sports where speeds alone are measured the increases aren't always that dramatic. Usain Bolt can run faster than anyone who has ever lived but athletes from yesteryear were not full time sportsmen, they didn't have the luxury of dedicating all their time to training. Carl Lewis run 9.86 in 1991, still better than many runners from today and some outdoor world records are still unbeaten from 1986, surely with the dramatic progression of training, health, nutrition etc... these should have been beaten long ago? We are talking about very small increases in speeds where speed alone is trained for and measured so to say that boxers are dramatically poorer from 50-60 years ago doesn't make sense.

The heaviest un-offical weight ever lifted in history was in 1957 was by Paul Anderson, someone still considered by many to be the strongest man to have ever lived. His training was a million miles off todays guys, home made equipment in his back garden, so compared to the high tech regimes modern lifters use (and other supplements no doubt !!) there hasn't really been any great improvement.

Boxing is so much more than speed or strength alone and the reason why Kimbo Slice might be a great street fighter and a huge and strong bloke but he's a crap and chinny boxer.

Yeah, Paul Anderson doesn't feature anywhere on the current world records by some distance;
http://www.powerliftingwatch.com/files/ ... -07-13.pdf

Records from the 1980's are heavily influenced by steroids - see some of the Eastern Block woman's records from the time in athletics. A woman running 47 seconds for 400m for example. Flo Jo, etc.

[polecateddy]

I never said fast fighters then would be slow fighters now - you're embellishing for effect. The main thrust of my thesis is 5'10'' and 185 pound Rocky Marciano if magically transported forward in time would be too small to beat the majority of the recent belt holders, certainly at heavyweight, and also (controversially) at cruiserweight. Nobody really agrees, and that's fine. I would also add that I disagree strongly with this idea that boxing training has evolved considerably since the 1940's and 50's, the time of Marciano's development and rise to the top. At one point I think I said that there isn't a single other sport where the world champion then could be a champion today. The rebuttable to that was that ...well boxing is unique ...they all train basically the same. Err... well don't runners basically run? Weight lifters lift weights, etc? It just strikes me as that is just ignorance and nostalgia - a terrible mix![/quote]

I find it disrespectful of you to call some of the people on here "ignorant", especially after the catalogue of vague, incorrect and unsubstantiated comments you've made on this thread.

In answer to your question about running, modern runners are far more focussed and financially funded to train than ever before. For example, Roger Bannister Bannister trained for his sub-4 on whatever time he could take away from his medical studies at Oxford, often not more than 30 minutes per day. His maximum mileage was less than 30 miles per week, reducing to something like half that at certain times.

Most modern athletes who run similar distances will train for several hours a day, 5 or 6 times per week, with obvious benefits.

You can't make the same comparison with boxers, who historically far more active in their sport than modern fighters.[/quote]

Low mileage is not uncommon today. Bannister was one of the first to incorporate a multiple speed approach to training. From memory his trainer was Frank Howill, who advocated a sophisticated approach to 400's at mile pace, supplemented by 1.5 mile reps slower, and shorter distances faster. I would wager his approach to training was more advanced than anything Marciano was doing.

[Controversial]

Low mileage is not uncommon today. Bannister was one of the first to incorporate a multiple speed approach to training. From memory his trainer was Frank Howill, who advocated a sophisticated approach to 400's at mile pace, supplemented by 1.5 mile reps slower, and shorter distances faster. I would wager his approach to training was more advanced than anything Marciano was doing.

Its a different sport so irrelevant. A swimmers training is different to a runners, a runners different to a weight lifter, a weightlifter different to a high jumper and so on. How has progress made modern fighters any better?

[polecateddy]

Low mileage is not uncommon today. Bannister was one of the first to incorporate a multiple speed approach to training. From memory his trainer was Frank Howill, who advocated a sophisticated approach to 400's at mile pace, supplemented by 1.5 mile reps slower, and shorter distances faster. I would wager his approach to training was more advanced than anything Marciano was doing.

Its a different sport so irrelevant. A swimmers training is different to a runners, a runners different to a weight lifter, a weightlifter different to a high jumper and so on. How has progress made modern fighters any better?

The real question must be how can boxing can be the only sport IN THE WORLD according to you where sportmen haven't improved markedly? The answer is it isn't. Sad but true - Johnny Nelson would school The Rock :)

[Controversial]

Low mileage is not uncommon today. Bannister was one of the first to incorporate a multiple speed approach to training. From memory his trainer was Frank Howill, who advocated a sophisticated approach to 400's at mile pace, supplemented by 1.5 mile reps slower, and shorter distances faster. I would wager his approach to training was more advanced than anything Marciano was doing.

Its a different sport so irrelevant. A swimmers training is different to a runners, a runners different to a weight lifter, a weightlifter different to a high jumper and so on. How has progress made modern fighters any better?

The real question must be how can boxing can be the only sport IN THE WORLD according to you where sportmen haven't improved markedly? The answer is it isn't. Sad but true - Johnny Nelson would school The Rock :)

So no answer then, thought so.

[polecateddy]

Alright muggins. I tell you what has improved. Marciano had a high work ethic, running 5-6 miles a day, walking 10 miles in the evening, running 12-15 miles as a fight got closer, hitting a very heavy bag for a half hour straight. It's the wrong training! Too one paced, too stamina based. It's not building speed, and it's certainly not building speed-endurance. There's no multi-paced approach. Not understanding of cross training and proper interval training. That's what boxers today understand. Train like a middle distance runner not a long distance runner!

[SaadOffTheDeck]

And yet they're still exhausted after throwing 20 punches a round for 3 rounds when Marciano could rifle out 100 for 15 rounds. Obviously you're just trolling, but that might be the worst post to date.

[Clint Magnum]

Alright muggins. I tell you what has improved. Marciano had a high work ethic, running 5-6 miles a day, walking 10 miles in the evening, running 12-15 miles as a fight got closer, hitting a very heavy bag for a half hour straight. It's the wrong training! Too one paced, too stamina based. It's not building speed, and it's certainly not building speed-endurance. There's no multi-paced approach. Not understanding of cross training and proper interval training. That's what boxers today understand. Train like a middle distance runner not a long distance runner!

Marciano fought 15 round fights and needed the stamina. And if I recall he looked in fairly fantastic shape and his fitness was never found wanting during his bouts. Try hitting a heavy bag for half hour straight! What you're suggesting is that interval and HIIT makes today's fighter so much better, negating any argument over today's lack of depth and quality of opponents and more importantly heavily experienced coaches.
When anyone highlights a lot of today's HW as one dimensional then the "modernists" cite that they aren't one dimensional but they have actually learned to hone other skills which make things such as infighting, rolls, parries, redundant. Not to mention the allegation of blind nostalgia towards those who favour past fighters (despite the majority of these nostalgics being current activeboxers and people under 40yrs old!)
It always boils down to the much improved and vauted "size" and alleged power of the modern HW debate. They look but they just don't see. Interval training IS NOT a new technique. Interval bursts are described eloquently in the training of Jack johnson, Gene Tunney and even Greb. Read Mike Sivers book "The Arc of boxing", many of today's "modern" training and nutrition myths are covered with great detail. In other sports technology has improved, ie shoes, tracks, recepticles, kit. All a boxer gets is gloves and a gumshield. The one on one fighting sport is unique in its similarity to over 100yrs ago and it reliance on heart and pain tolerance as well as skill, endurance and natural core strength.

[Controversial]

Alright muggins. I tell you what has improved. Marciano had a high work ethic, running 5-6 miles a day, walking 10 miles in the evening, running 12-15 miles as a fight got closer, hitting a very heavy bag for a half hour straight. It's the wrong training! Too one paced, too stamina based. It's not building speed, and it's certainly not building speed-endurance. There's no multi-paced approach. Not understanding of cross training and proper interval training. That's what boxers today understand. Train like a middle distance runner not a long distance runner!

Now now, no need for name calling, its very childish.

You are still focusing on training, not fighting, fitness only takes you so far. To say Marciano's training was wrong you must have evidence to point to that proves he was doing something wrong? Did he tire in fights, did he stop punching, did he look knackered? There are plenty of modern heavies that tire very quickly so how does that prove their training is better?

[polecateddy]

Alright muggins. I tell you what has improved. Marciano had a high work ethic, running 5-6 miles a day, walking 10 miles in the evening, running 12-15 miles as a fight got closer, hitting a very heavy bag for a half hour straight. It's the wrong training! Too one paced, too stamina based. It's not building speed, and it's certainly not building speed-endurance. There's no multi-paced approach. Not understanding of cross training and proper interval training. That's what boxers today understand. Train like a middle distance runner not a long distance runner!

Now now, no need for name calling, its very childish.

You are still focusing on training, not fighting, fitness only takes you so far. To say Marciano's training was wrong you must have evidence to point to that proves he was doing something wrong? Did he tire in fights, did he stop punching, did he look knackered? There are plenty of modern heavies that tire very quickly so how does that prove their training is better?

I'm not saying every fighter today has a progressive approach to training, but your elite fighters like say the Klitschkos, Froch, Mayweather and Ward to name four do. And by fitness, I mean training and fighting. Do you not think Mayweather is well in tune with with middle distance running principles of interval training when he plays around with longer rounds at slower pace, and shorter rounds at faster pace. These are modern principles for building speed endurance!

[Controversial]

Alright muggins. I tell you what has improved. Marciano had a high work ethic, running 5-6 miles a day, walking 10 miles in the evening, running 12-15 miles as a fight got closer, hitting a very heavy bag for a half hour straight. It's the wrong training! Too one paced, too stamina based. It's not building speed, and it's certainly not building speed-endurance. There's no multi-paced approach. Not understanding of cross training and proper interval training. That's what boxers today understand. Train like a middle distance runner not a long distance runner!

Now now, no need for name calling, its very childish.

You are still focusing on training, not fighting, fitness only takes you so far. To say Marciano's training was wrong you must have evidence to point to that proves he was doing something wrong? Did he tire in fights, did he stop punching, did he look knackered? There are plenty of modern heavies that tire very quickly so how does that prove their training is better?

I'm not saying every fighter today has a progressive approach to training, but your elite fighters like say the Klitschkos, Froch, Mayweather and Ward to name four do. And by fitness, I mean training and fighting. Do you not think Mayweather is well in tune with with middle distance running principles of interval training when he plays around with longer rounds at slower pace, and shorter rounds at faster pace. These are modern principles for building speed endurance!

We are talking HWs though, the extra weight makes a huge difference to someones fitness. Very few HWs are built for stamina and many are out of shape and would be knackered after a few rounds if they had to throw more than 10 punches. Thats not progress if you ask me and thats where your training argument falls flat. As I said to criticise Marciano's training you would need to highlight flaws, times he was gasping for breath or too knackered to do anything but hold.

[polecateddy]

id be curious to see how a 12 round bout between orlin norris and the rock would have went. orlin was a good fighter in his prime and bounced between CW & HW.

any way boxing is the only sport that i know of in the world that u cannot compare to the progress of other sports. i don't even really consider boxing that much of a sport, the only reason it's really a sport is because of the rules and rounds system, other than that the mental aspect of it is so deep its really mind-boggling.

some old school guys are definitely less athletic but their psyches are that much more of a fighter.

a lot of todays guys are athletes that box whereas some of the past legends are fighters that box. big difference to me.

modern training techniques can't teach u how to calm your psyche when u feel like the pressure is mounting or when ur pain tolerance is starting to crack. modern training techniques can't teach u how to dig deep and give it ur all when it seems like u have nothing to give.

the mental aspects of boxing/fighting far outweigh a lot of the athletic side.

for example : wlad k is not a fighter, he's admitted it in interviews that's he truly not a fighter and that he wishes he could be more like his brother.

15 rounds to me are really the true test of will and fortitude.

all in all today's HW scene is terrible (bar a few and far between), their desire and stamina is atrocious.

There's a point being missed here. Okay The Rock may throw a decent amount of punches and was a 15 round fighter. But this thread was based on the principle that he could come and win a world heavyweight title today over 12 rounds. The point being missed is that at 5'10 and 185 he is too small to do that. And secondly, he may have a conditioning edge/punch output edge on some of todays heavies. But in reality he is a light heavy/cruiser, and plenty of those guys can match him for output. And light-heavies weighing 185 do not win heavyweight titles today. Okay, a peak Roy Jones did it at 193 ...but then got the hell out of dodge pretty quickly. And there is no dispute he was never the same fighter again.

[dempseyfire]

Not sure if you are joking or not. I will reply as if you are serious.
Of course they were born before the 90's. So what?
How much footage of Dunkhorst and Morris have you seen?
Morris and Simon could punch, and Mathis certainly was not slow.

My main point is that there have been big heavyweights throughout boxing history. They were not better than smaller fighters who were much more skilled.

If you read the rest of the thread, you'll see that I'm absolutely joking. Polecateddy is genuinely suggesting that a puncher from the 50's would be a non puncher now, and that fast fighters from then would be slow by comparison with fighters now. He even believes that chins have been improved by modern training methods. My post was poking fun at his ridiculous belief.

I never said fast fighters then would be slow fighters now - you're embellishing for effect. The main thrust of my thesis is 5'10'' and 185 pound Rocky Marciano if magically transported forward in time would be too small to beat the majority of the recent belt holders, certainly at heavyweight, and also (controversially) at cruiserweight. Nobody really agrees, and that's fine. I would also add that I disagree strongly with this idea that boxing training has evolved considerably since the 1940's and 50's, the time of Marciano's development and rise to the top. At one point I think I said that there isn't a single other sport where the world champion then could be a champion today. The rebuttable to that was that ...well boxing is unique ...they all train basically the same. Err... well don't runners basically run? Weight lifters lift weights, etc? It just strikes me as that is just ignorance and nostalgia - a terrible mix!

I find it disrespectful of you to call some of the people on here "ignorant", especially after the catalogue of vague, incorrect and unsubstantiated comments you've made on this thread.

In answer to your question about running, modern runners are far more focussed and financially funded to train than ever before. For example, Roger Bannister Bannister trained for his sub-4 on whatever time he could take away from his medical studies at Oxford, often not more than 30 minutes per day. His maximum mileage was less than 30 miles per week, reducing to something like half that at certain times.

Most modern athletes who run similar distances will train for several hours a day, 5 or 6 times per week, with obvious benefits.

You can't make the same comparison with boxers, who historically far more active in their sport than modern fighters.[/quote]

This point can't be stressed enough. People always say "well look at the records being broken" but guys who who competed in running or swimming in the Olympics 100 years ago did it as a part-time thing. Comparing someone like a Phelps who basically lives in a pool year round to Alfred Hajos (back when swimming events were held in the Mediterranean Sea!) is completely nonsensical.

And PCT keeps talking about interval training . . .interval training has been around for over 100 years. And yes people understood about adjusting the pace before it was published in some sports journal.
Mayweather's training regime is very old school and comes out of what his father and uncle did.

[HomicideHenry]

Alright muggins. I tell you what has improved. Marciano had a high work ethic, running 5-6 miles a day, walking 10 miles in the evening, running 12-15 miles as a fight got closer, hitting a very heavy bag for a half hour straight. It's the wrong training! Too one paced, too stamina based. It's not building speed, and it's certainly not building speed-endurance. There's no multi-paced approach. Not understanding of cross training and proper interval training. That's what boxers today understand. Train like a middle distance runner not a long distance runner!

Marciano if anything trained alot like the bare knuckle boxers of the 19th century and prior. He ran 10 miles a day, walked an additional 20 miles, sparred upwards of 40 rounds or more a day, hitting the THREE HUNDRED POUND heavybag for several rounds on end, etc. Marciano trained not just for endurance but for power. Jim Braddock, Max Schmeling, and many of his predecessors said that Marciano, for no bigger than he was when trained down, was easily the strongest heavyweight they had seen in the past 40 years. In sparring he was knocking guys like Tommy Jackson flat and he wasn't going full blast. Mind you, it was just his power and conditioning alone that ALMOST got him into the Olympics with just a dozen matches to his credit as an amateur. When Charlie Goldman got ahold of him he went from being a buller into an awkwardly hard to hit opponent who could get on the inside far more easily than people would originally think.

As far as this interval training nonsense you keep harping on, let's not forget in this day and age you don't see guys really doing calistentics save for the Fury family. You want to think that Marciano wasn't a limber man or was an athlete, but you happen to forget this man was good in most any sport before he went into boxing, he was a baseball player, football player, etc. If he existed today Marciano probably would be one of the more talked about athletes in the world because of his ability to mentally and physically adapt to any game, and any opponent. Whatever improvements there has been to training in the last forty years or better, cannot really be a whole hell of a lot to the boxing game. Nutrition? Strength training? All minimal. Like many a person has pointed out to you here several times is that you can take ANY heavyweight, or really any cruiserweight for that matter, and none of them come close to the work rate that Marciano did in the ring. Lightheavyweights and middleweights, maybe. But none of them could stand up to the kind of power Marciano had. Not to build anyone up but Archie Moore fell in nine one sided rounds and Harry Matthews in two rounds, and both of those men were damned good light heavyweights. I can't see someone like Hopkins, Tarver, Johnson, etc. being able to stand for too long with a Marciano type.

Never forget, for a short time the greatest boxer of all time Sugar Ray Robinson was offered a tremendous pay day to move to heavyweight and challenge Marciano, and he flat out refused saying that Marciano would have killed him. All this speed, reflexes, and all around athleticism you talk about is just not seen at LHW, CW, and HW. None of the present day men in those weight classes are as skilled as Walcott, as fast as Ezzard Charles, etc. I would argue that the elite men are more closer to Joe Louis's performances in old age than they were Marciano's more dangerous opponents.

Mind you, I do think Marciano probably wouldn't have beaten the Klitschko's, but at the same token how many men TODAY in the division can you name as being a favorite over Marciano as is? Dempsey proved time and time again, big men are big targets. Especially slow, plodding, low volume output type men. Which is what the majority of the heavyweight division is. Do you honestly think a man who averages out 20-40 punches a round, is going to distract and keep Marciano off them? I don't think so. There isn't anyone out there with enough ferocity and work ethic to make Marciano think twice. Even if they landed on him with their best Sunday punch, they wouldn't be able to follow it up. Too slow, too ponderous, too sloppy, and simply too damn lazy. I don't care how many crunches and abdominal work outs you do, you could look like you were cut out of marble, but when you have an ATG body puncher in Marciano hitting you with everything he has got non-stop you are going to get hurt, you are going to drop your guard, and you are going to get caught flush on the chin and go down in a big heap. Jesus bless.

[polecateddy]

He might have been the best trained of his era, but as most admit he was short-armed, short on skill, I don't see him having exactly unique attributes. Hence my assertion that Carl Thompson is actually a better version of The Rock.

[Ambling Alp II]

I'm not sure if I have ever disagreed more with an opinion on this forum. Unbelievable.

[polecateddy]

I'm not sure if I have ever disagreed more with an opinion on this forum. Unbelievable.

Physically its a close match. Carl - Bigger frame, stronger. Stamina probably similar. Both hit the deck in fights. Carl isn't so prone to cuts though.

[loaded_gloves]

Why can't people comprehend Marciano workedhis body brutally for months to get down to his peak fighting weight.

The same way heavyweights of today eat for months to reach their peak fighting obesity.

A man with Rocky Marciano's frame but none of his fighting spirit and way too much extra weight spooked Lennox Lewis -the most atheletic, coordinated and gifted of the big men- enough to keep him focussed and running for 12 rds.

Tua being a little man didn't seem to make him less of a threat to LL- the man was a born puncher. Like Marciano. Like Frazier. Like Tyson.

You cannot compare these extraordinary men of yesteryear to some nonentities of today simply because they might have the same frame.

[loaded_gloves]

I'm not sure if I have ever disagreed more with an opinion on this forum. Unbelievable.

Physically its a close match. Carl - Bigger frame, stronger. Stamina probably similar. Both hit the deck in fights. Carl isn't so prone to cuts though.

Carl Thompson was knocked out innumerable times by journeymen.

To say he is better than the great Rocky Marciano... Teddy, seriously. This is shameful behaviour for a man of your age.

[polecateddy]

I'm not sure if I have ever disagreed more with an opinion on this forum. Unbelievable.

Physically its a close match. Carl - Bigger frame, stronger. Stamina probably similar. Both hit the deck in fights. Carl isn't so prone to cuts though.

Carl Thompson was knocked out innumerable times by journeymen.

To say he is better than the great Rocky Marciano... Teddy, seriously. This is shameful behaviour for a man of your age.

Who the frack is Teddy? Which journeymen knocked him cold exactly? Just Sellers in his prime, who was a huge puncher.

[loaded_gloves]

You need to check Thompson's record again. He was a brave, glass jawed, musclebound fighter with severe stylistic limitations. He was stopped multiple times.

To compare him to Rocky Marciano is to compare Tye Fields to Riddick Bowe.

[orbtastic]

Two of the stoppages were injuries.

One was a highly controversial stoppage with him still on his feet.

While the Davis stoppage was legit, he wasn't knocked cold.

So only one guy knocked him out.

[jezzamundo]

Why can't people comprehend Marciano workedhis body brutally for months to get down to his peak fighting weight.

The same way heavyweights of today eat for months to reach their peak fighting obesity.

A man with Rocky Marciano's frame but none of his fighting spirit and way too much extra weight spooked Lennox Lewis -the most atheletic, coordinated and gifted of the big men- enough to keep him focussed and running for 12 rds.

Tua being a little man didn't seem to make him less of a threat to LL- the man was a born puncher. Like Marciano. Like Frazier. Like Tyson.

You cannot compare these extraordinary men of yesteryear to some nonentities of today simply because they might have the same frame.

Nice comparison with Tua - same height as Rocky, slightly longer reach, started his career at 201lb and was chubby for most of his career, even at his prime in the 220s. Even at 210lb against Mauricio Villegas he has no visible abdominal muscles. Tua would have been a better heavyweight had he fought his career at 205lb - more than enough power, strong chin and would have been faster with better stamina.

[polecateddy]

Why can't people comprehend Marciano workedhis body brutally for months to get down to his peak fighting weight.

The same way heavyweights of today eat for months to reach their peak fighting obesity.

A man with Rocky Marciano's frame but none of his fighting spirit and way too much extra weight spooked Lennox Lewis -the most atheletic, coordinated and gifted of the big men- enough to keep him focussed and running for 12 rds.

Tua being a little man didn't seem to make him less of a threat to LL- the man was a born puncher. Like Marciano. Like Frazier. Like Tyson.

You cannot compare these extraordinary men of yesteryear to some nonentities of today simply because they might have the same frame.

Nice comparison with Tua - same height as Rocky, slightly longer reach, started his career at 201lb and was chubby for most of his career, even at his prime in the 220s. Even at 210lb against Mauricio Villegas he has no visible abdominal muscles. Tua would have been a better heavyweight had he fought his career at 205lb - more than enough power, strong chin and would have been faster with better stamina.

This is just typical armchair speculation. Lighter isn't always better. It's actually a fact that a lot of heavies don't like coming too light. Not everyone hit and moves, counter punching style. Fighters who stay inside, use a physical style don't want to be pushed around in there. You might be suggesting that Rocky Marciano was just a freakishly strong guy, but at 185 pounds he just isn't going to be imposing his will on 240 pound heavies with the best will in the world. It's just physics! Realistically being light only works when you do a Roy Jones/David Haye. That was never Rocky's style now was it!