Rocky Marciano vs Deontay Wilder

[Onetimeonly]

[oogiebe]

Glad you got a laugh out of it. I remember Angelo Dundee upon hearing Norton's waist size, that he was afraid Ali would break him in half. Of course it was Ali's jaw that got broke. Norton was around 205 for the rematch. You need to do some homework. You criticize casual fans in many of your posts, yet you post like one yourself.

[Onetimeonly]

Id love to see one of those posts criticizing casuals. I don't think they exist. When I say no casuals here know wilder, fury or aj that's just straight up truth. As for my homework, lol again. It's not even a matter of boxing. Those 3 aren't just a little bigger than povetkin, it would be evident to anyone. Norton coming in light to face the fastest heavyweight in the world was probably smart. What you're not grasping is that he easily could have weighed 230 and still been I. Much better shape than povetkin. Conditioning is Alexander's biggest problem since he's presumably off the gear.

[oogiebe]

Id love to see one of those posts criticizing casuals. I don't think they exist. When I say no casuals here know wilder, fury or aj that's just straight up truth. As for my homework, lol again. It's not even a matter of boxing. Those 3 aren't just a little bigger than povetkin, it would be evident to anyone. Norton coming in light to face the fastest heavyweight in the world was probably smart. What you're not grasping is that he easily could have weighed 230 and still been I. Much better shape than povetkin. Conditioning is Alexander's biggest problem since he's presumably off the gear.

Ok! What a fighter "could've been" vs what he was are two very different things. I remember Ali/Lyle. I was surprised that Lyle didn't look much bigger than Ali. or bigger at all. The only fighter who really was built bigger than the rest of the top HW of the that time was George. Norton looked like a beanpole in the ring compared to Foreman. Norton had small joints and skinny legs. Povetkin, at 225LBS and 6'2" would have been comparable at worse to Ali, Norton, and Lyle, and not overly small as compared to Foreman. I don't care about the 'why's' concerning this. It was just as it was. If you want to play 'what if' concerning PED's, that's different.

[Onetimeonly]

You can't seem to differentiate between weight and size. Anyway, dead horse coming. A guy in spectacular shape with barely any body fat is smaller than a fat guy because he weighs 5 or 10 pounds less?

[oogiebe]

You can't seem to differentiate between weight and size. Anyway, dead horse coming. A guy in spectacular shape with barely any body fat is smaller than a fat guy because he weighs 5 or 10 pounds less?

I agree with the point that each of those we chatted about with today's training methods, could put on 10 - 15 LBS of weight. The fact is they didn't. That's all I'm saying. Can you imagine George with today's training methods? 240 - 250 probably. So in that regard, I agree with you. Povetkin at 225 is in shape for Povetkin and was his prime fighting weight.

[Onetimeonly]

They wouldn't have too. The scale is not the end all be all when it comes to size. They could have weighed 20 pounds more then, instead they were in absolute peak shape. Povetkin has never been in that kind of shape.

[Onetimeonly]

Anybody watch the bounty hunter Jr beat the dogshit out of his 3rd straight super heavy?

[HomicideHenry]

The achievement has to be taken into context. Ustinov hasn't really been a serious contender for a long while. A big man whose older, slower, and reflexes gone isn't really telling.

[Controversial]

Again the fundamental differences are being missed. The small guys who have varying degrees of success at HW are invariably fast, move well and have good boxing ability. Hunter is an awkward, slippery guy as he still has the physical dimensions of a HW (6'2" and 80" reach). Marciano had none of these.

[Onetimeonly]

Neither did maidana.

[Controversial]

Neither did maidana.

Eh, Marcos Maidana?

[Onetimeonly]

Just an odd thing to say.

[Controversial]

Just an odd thing to say.

Why odd? The debate is about Marciano after all. Mentioning Maidana is odd.

[Ambling Alp II]

Fitzsimmons and Dempsey did very well against big heavyweights. Marciano would have as well.

[Cojimar 1946]

Povetkin is not that much larger than some top heavies of the past but he doesn't really help alps case because when he stepped up against the best big men (Wladimir and AJ) he was conclusively beaten.

As for Holyfield if he had been around in Wladimir's era I think he might have beaten everyone aside from Wladimir and Vitali up until Anthony Joshua appeared. But I think he loses to Wladimir so I don't see him dominating.

[HomicideHenry]

While I do believe it'd take a very exceptional small Heavyweight to beat the best big men of the passed thirty years--- I don't know if Jack Dempsey is who I'd nominate as being the best of the old-timers to beat the giants today.

Yes, he beat alot of big men. No question about that. However, those men are in no way shape or form like the Lennox Lewis's or Riddick Bowe's or Tyson Fury's, etc.

Context is everything. Luis Firpo was a manufactured "threat" to the title, just like Georges Carpentier was. Willard hadn't fought in three years, and quite frankly he wasn't really a skillful man and had the mobility of a skyscraper. Fred Fulton? He was on the downside & like Willard was of the stiff-legged, stiff-backed, arms out style.

Maybe if Dempsey had a year or two behind closed doors sparring with the athletic big men of today he'd find that sweet spot and close the gap--- but in a one off, head to head, without that preparation, there's no way a man 6'1" and 187 pounds is doing anything with George Foreman, let alone the other giants of modern times.

Maybe if Dempsey fought and convincingly defeated a guy like Luther McCarty, 6'4" & 220 pounds, who was a mover & jabber--- then I'd change my mind a bit. But he never fought a large man like that. The only gauge we have is Dempsey sparring with Bill Tate, but even the 6'8" Tate was not the best guy out there in the division.

[Controversial]

We don’t need to go back decades, the proof is in the pudding. There hasn’t been a 14 stone man under 6 foot who has any success at HW for god knows how long. That isn’t a coincidence. Also plenty of interviews on YouTube from fighters and trainers where they say that size makes a difference, but what do they know. All you need are a few pics of Marcianos knuckles and resuts from 100 years ago lol.

[Ambling Alp II]

Yes we do. You are completely missing the point if you think that. Just because the heavyweights nowadays are almost always really big, does not mean bigger is better.

For about 100 years there were big heavyweights, smaller heavyweights and everything in between. Sometimes the bigger guy won, sometimes he did not.

You can't just say Dempsey and Fitzsimmons and many others couldn't beat big heavyweights when they actually did.

[Ambling Alp II]

While I do believe it'd take a very exceptional small Heavyweight to beat the best big men of the passed thirty years--- I don't know if Jack Dempsey is who I'd nominate as being the best of the old-timers to beat the giants today.

Yes, he beat alot of big men. No question about that. However, those men are in no way shape or form like the Lennox Lewis's or Riddick Bowe's or Tyson Fury's, etc.

Context is everything. Luis Firpo was a manufactured "threat" to the title, just like Georges Carpentier was. Willard hadn't fought in three years, and quite frankly he wasn't really a skillful man and had the mobility of a skyscraper. Fred Fulton? He was on the downside & like Willard was of the stiff-legged, stiff-backed, arms out style.

Maybe if Dempsey had a year or two behind closed doors sparring with the athletic big men of today he'd find that sweet spot and close the gap--- but in a one off, head to head, without that preparation, there's no way a man 6'1" and 187 pounds is doing anything with George Foreman, let alone the other giants of modern times.

Maybe if Dempsey fought and convincingly defeated a guy like Luther McCarty, 6'4" & 220 pounds, who was a mover & jabber--- then I'd change my mind a bit. But he never fought a large man like that. The only gauge we have is Dempsey sparring with Bill Tate, but even the 6'8" Tate was not the best guy out there in the division.

That's nonsense. Fulton was a top contender when Dempsey beat him. Carl Morris was as well. Firpo and Carpentier were not "manufactered contenders". Wouldn't really call Tyson Fury a skillful manor most big heavyweights man either.
btw- Carpentier beat Bombardier Wells who was much taller than him.

[Cojimar 1946]

More big heavyweights cracked the top 10 from 2011 to 2018 a period of just 7 years than did from 1940 to 1980 a period of 40 years. That in itself is pretty overwhelming evidence of a massive improvement in ability if you have more in the top 10 in just 7 years than you did in an earlier 40 year period.

[Cojimar 1946]

Morris, Fulton, and Firpo would not even be considered big heavyweights today. Fulton and Firpo would probably be fighting at cruiserweight.

[oogiebe]

Morris, Fulton, and Firpo would not even be considered big heavyweights today. Fulton and Firpo would probably be fighting at cruiserweight.

Spot on. Firpo was barely 6'3" and 215 LBS.

[Controversial]

Yes we do. You are completely missing the point if you think that. Just because the heavyweights nowadays are almost always really big, does not mean bigger is better.

For about 100 years there were big heavyweights, smaller heavyweights and everything in between. Sometimes the bigger guy won, sometimes he did not.

You can't just say Dempsey and Fitzsimmons and many others couldn't beat big heavyweights when they actually did.

I'm not missing the point, I don't doubt Marciano could beat some big HWs. But the bigger and better they are the harder it would be. Marciano was a walk forward and slug it out fighter, that's suicide against Wilder. That tactic worked against other 13-14 stone men, not so wise against 15-18 stone men who are in shape and can fight back. Mike Tyson even said he would struggle against the giants of the sport.

[oogiebe]

Yes we do. You are completely missing the point if you think that. Just because the heavyweights nowadays are almost always really big, does not mean bigger is better.

For about 100 years there were big heavyweights, smaller heavyweights and everything in between. Sometimes the bigger guy won, sometimes he did not.

You can't just say Dempsey and Fitzsimmons and many others couldn't beat big heavyweights when they actually did.

I'm not missing the point, I don't doubt Marciano could beat some big HWs. But the bigger and better they are the harder it would be. Marciano was a walk forward and slug it out fighter, that's suicide. That works against other 13-14 stone men, not so wise against 15-18 stone men who are in shape and can fight back. Mike Tyson even said he would struggle against the giants of the sport.

Big Heavyweights of yesteryear do not compare with the well skilled and much larger big men of today. It's just a fact. Same goes in other sports. Every sport has athletes much larger; faster; stronger and better skilled than past eras with few exceptions.