Early 60's seems like a very weak era in boxing where Liston thrived

[Controversial]

Of course, the average 180-200 pound didn't have success in the hw ever. but occasionally a very good-great fighter under 200 guy did really well. We shouldn't pretend it didn't happen.
When a great fighter under 200 fights a big hw, he almost always won.

As Liston's era, it wasn't great. There were better and there were worse.

Yes but as we’ve said being big isn’t the be all and end all, name some examples where a small great HW beat a large great HW who wasn’t at the end of their career or past it.

There has only been two large heavyweights who were great; Lewis and Bowe. As homicide mentioned Bowe lost to Holyfield. Lewis got a dubious decision over a well past it best Holyfield in their second fight. Lewis also struggled with Mavrovic who was virtually unknown.

So two of your three examples lost and Holyfield won by MD but lost the two rematches. The scorecards for Mavrovic were wide for Lewis too. So you are basically saying there were no great large HWs other than Lewis and Bowe. So where does that leave the other examples normally rolled out like Carnera, Simons, Willard etc? Or are we saying the big guys like this just weren’t that great and their size is kind of irrelevant.

[Ambling Alp II]

The official scorecards? Have you ever seen the Mavrovic-Lewis fight? Lewis did not have an easy fight. Besides the rounds that he lost, there were some close rounds that he won. Mavrovic was virtually unknown before the fight. Yet he have Lewis more trouble than most of his opponents.
Carnera, Simon, and Willard were good fighters; far from great. They had their stregnths and weaknesses and ups and downs. And yes, for the millionth time, their size is irrelevant. You don't get to hit your opponent with a scale if you are bigger. They (like anyone) should be judged on well that they performed, not what the scale says.

This has been explain a million ways, but I will try another;

Think of Rocky Marciano. Modern fans like to point his size and automatically blow him off. After boxrec says he was only about 5'10 1/2 and about 185 pounds. It's a perfect way to rip a guy who fought before their time.

But what if he was say 6'3 and 230, but all of his abilities was exactly the same? The 230-pound version didn't punch any harder or weaker. Chin, stamina, defense, hand speed, literally everything was exactly the same.
He would not be any better of a fighter. He would be any harder or easier to beat. But people would criticize him much less. They would have to be more creative in their criticism because he fought before their time.

[HomicideHenry]

Marciano trained down to 187 though. In civilian life he was like 220 pounds. So he wasn't as small as people think. Him being 187 was more a fitness thing in order to unload 80-110 punches per round.

He's my favorite heavyweight but I do think he'd struggle with the likes of Tyson Fury, Deontay Wilder, etc. Just too short these days at 5'11.5", because when's the last time you've seen a guy basically 6'0" and 190 pounds reach the top ten?

[Controversial]

The official scorecards? Have you ever seen the Mavrovic-Lewis fight? Lewis did not have an easy fight. Besides the rounds that he lost, there were some close rounds that he won. Mavrovic was virtually unknown before the fight. Yet he have Lewis more trouble than most of his opponents.
Carnera, Simon, and Willard were good fighters; far from great. They had their stregnths and weaknesses and ups and downs. And yes, for the millionth time, their size is irrelevant. You don't get to hit your opponent with a scale if you are bigger. They (like anyone) should be judged on well that they performed, not what the scale says.

This has been explain a million ways, but I will try another;

Think of Rocky Marciano. Modern fans like to point his size and automatically blow him off. After boxrec says he was only about 5'10 1/2 and about 185 pounds. It's a perfect way to rip a guy who fought before their time.

But what if he was say 6'3 and 230, but all of his abilities was exactly the same? The 230-pound version didn't punch any harder or weaker. Chin, stamina, defense, hand speed, literally everything was exactly the same.
He would not be any better of a fighter. He would be any harder or easier to beat. But people would criticize him much less. They would have to be more creative in their criticism because he fought before their time.

So some think Lewis struggled. So have lots of ATGs, Ali would likely have been stopped by Cooper if the knockdown didn’t happen with seconds of the round left, Louis was getting outboxed by LHW Conn, Marciano got a dubious decision over Lowry, Holmes had close wins that some didn’t think he deserved etc etc. Anyone can have an off night, especially when you are defending the title against an unknown fighter you are expected to beat. What doesn’t happen though is for a small HW in stature and weight dominating the division against equally as good large HWs. As for Marciano we only know what he could do against effectively blown up LHWs or guys at the end of their careers. He wasn’t outslugging in their prime big punching world class HWs who were 2-5 stone heavier than him. For all we know someone like Ron Lyle would’ve flattened him inside a few rounds.

[Cojimar 1946]

Of course, the average 180-200 pound didn't have success in the hw ever. but occasionally a very good-great fighter under 200 guy did really well. We shouldn't pretend it didn't happen.
When a great fighter under 200 fights a big hw, he almost always won.

As Liston's era, it wasn't great. There were better and there were worse.

That's not true because prior to Liston most top heavyweights were under 200 pounds and it was totally normal to have a champion and top contenders under 200. That hasn't been the case recently

Floyd Patterson
Jersey Joe Walcott
Rocky Marciano
Ezzard Charles
Max Schmeling
Jack Dempsey
were all under 200 pounds

[Ambling Alp II]

And Jeffries, Johnson, McVey, Godfrey, Sharkey, Baer, Louis, were all 200 or more. Most of the guys that you mentioned were not far under 200.
Dempsey destroyed guys well over 200.
The point is, if a guy did it, he did it. Lets stop pretending that it didn't happen, just because he doesn't neatly fit the modern narrative.
There were great heavyweights (small to large) before you became a fan.

[Ambling Alp II]

The official scorecards? Have you ever seen the Mavrovic-Lewis fight? Lewis did not have an easy fight. Besides the rounds that he lost, there were some close rounds that he won. Mavrovic was virtually unknown before the fight. Yet he have Lewis more trouble than most of his opponents.
Carnera, Simon, and Willard were good fighters; far from great. They had their stregnths and weaknesses and ups and downs. And yes, for the millionth time, their size is irrelevant. You don't get to hit your opponent with a scale if you are bigger. They (like anyone) should be judged on well that they performed, not what the scale says.

This has been explain a million ways, but I will try another;

Think of Rocky Marciano. Modern fans like to point his size and automatically blow him off. After boxrec says he was only about 5'10 1/2 and about 185 pounds. It's a perfect way to rip a guy who fought before their time.

But what if he was say 6'3 and 230, but all of his abilities was exactly the same? The 230-pound version didn't punch any harder or weaker. Chin, stamina, defense, hand speed, literally everything was exactly the same.
He would not be any better of a fighter. He would be any harder or easier to beat. But people would criticize him much less. They would have to be more creative in their criticism because he fought before their time.

So some think Lewis struggled. So have lots of ATGs, Ali would likely have been stopped by Cooper if the knockdown didn’t happen with seconds of the round left, Louis was getting outboxed by LHW Conn, Marciano got a dubious decision over Lowry, Holmes had close wins that some didn’t think he deserved etc etc. Anyone can have an off night, especially when you are defending the title against an unknown fighter you are expected to beat. What doesn’t happen though is for a small HW in stature and weight dominating the division against equally as good large HWs. As for Marciano we only know what he could do against effectively blown up LHWs or guys at the end of their careers. He wasn’t outslugging in their prime big punching world class HWs who were 2-5 stone heavier than him. For all we know someone like Ron Lyle would’ve flattened him inside a few rounds.

If you actually, watch the Ali-Cooper fight, and seemed fine, despite the myths surrounding the fight. But anyway, yes everyone struggles, no one is perfect. No argument there. But we were talking about Lewis. Isn't is quite a coincidence that he struggled with the smallest guys that he fought? You mentioned Louis. Isn't interesting that he struggled so much with Conn, but crushed guys the only guys weighed 250 pounds plus?

As for Marciano, we know that he threw a lot of punches. An awful lot. and that he puncher very hard. Not just hard for a guy that weighed 185, but hard for anyone. Those two things alone make you a very dangerous fighter.

Yes, Louis was near the end of the line. However, Walcott and Moore were the exception to the rule. They actually were better at the age than they were in their 20s. Hard to find many other examples of that. Watch the first Walcott-Marciano fight. It was a great fight. Walcott clearly still had a lot left.

By watching Marciano and Lyles fights, we can tell that it is unlikely that Lyle would flatten Marciano. Notice how badly Lyle did against smaller hws that he fought like Quarry and Young.

[Controversial]

The official scorecards? Have you ever seen the Mavrovic-Lewis fight? Lewis did not have an easy fight. Besides the rounds that he lost, there were some close rounds that he won. Mavrovic was virtually unknown before the fight. Yet he have Lewis more trouble than most of his opponents.
Carnera, Simon, and Willard were good fighters; far from great. They had their stregnths and weaknesses and ups and downs. And yes, for the millionth time, their size is irrelevant. You don't get to hit your opponent with a scale if you are bigger. They (like anyone) should be judged on well that they performed, not what the scale says.

This has been explain a million ways, but I will try another;

Think of Rocky Marciano. Modern fans like to point his size and automatically blow him off. After boxrec says he was only about 5'10 1/2 and about 185 pounds. It's a perfect way to rip a guy who fought before their time.

But what if he was say 6'3 and 230, but all of his abilities was exactly the same? The 230-pound version didn't punch any harder or weaker. Chin, stamina, defense, hand speed, literally everything was exactly the same.
He would not be any better of a fighter. He would be any harder or easier to beat. But people would criticize him much less. They would have to be more creative in their criticism because he fought before their time.

So some think Lewis struggled. So have lots of ATGs, Ali would likely have been stopped by Cooper if the knockdown didn’t happen with seconds of the round left, Louis was getting outboxed by LHW Conn, Marciano got a dubious decision over Lowry, Holmes had close wins that some didn’t think he deserved etc etc. Anyone can have an off night, especially when you are defending the title against an unknown fighter you are expected to beat. What doesn’t happen though is for a small HW in stature and weight dominating the division against equally as good large HWs. As for Marciano we only know what he could do against effectively blown up LHWs or guys at the end of their careers. He wasn’t outslugging in their prime big punching world class HWs who were 2-5 stone heavier than him. For all we know someone like Ron Lyle would’ve flattened him inside a few rounds.

If you actually, watch the Ali-Cooper fight, and seemed fine, despite the myths surrounding the fight. But anyway, yes everyone struggles, no one is perfect. No argument there. But we were talking about Lewis. Isn't is quite a coincidence that he struggled with the smallest guys that he fought? You mentioned Louis. Isn't interesting that he struggled so much with Conn, but crushed guys the only guys weighed 250 pounds plus?

As for Marciano, we know that he threw a lot of punches. An awful lot. and that he puncher very hard. Not just hard for a guy that weighed 185, but hard for anyone. Those two things alone make you a very dangerous fighter.

Yes, Louis was near the end of the line. However, Walcott and Moore were the exception to the rule. They actually were better at the age than they were in their 20s. Hard to find many other examples of that. Watch the first Walcott-Marciano fight. It was a great fight. Walcott clearly still had a lot left.

By watching Marciano and Lyles fights, we can tell that it is unlikely that Lyle would flatten Marciano. Notice how badly Lyle did against smaller hws that he fought like Quarry and Young.

But again as we’ve said one off fights don’t set a precedent. Anyone can have an off night and the challenger can be better than they’ve ever been, they invariably are as it’s their chance of glory. Sometimes some fighters just struggle with certain styles. Same for undefeated fighters, they often fight out their skin when undefeated but when they lose they aren’t the same again. But generally speaking smaller guys don’t dominate the division when there are equally as good bigger HWs around. Who knows how Marciano would be against a huge hitter, he never fought a world class big puncher who was that much bigger than him.

[Ambling Alp II]

Sure the fights that picked could have been a coincidence. Off nights happen. But we can only pick with what we have to go on. The two smallest fighters that Lewis fought in his prime he struggled with. One was Holyfield when he was well past his best, and the other was a guy no one ever heard of.

The best contenders that Lyle fought that were small both beat him. Again, I am just going by the data available.
Who did Tyson Fury have a draw with? The lightest opponent that he has in years.
Wilder and Usyk are two of the lightest hws around. Almost everyone was much heavier. Yet they were two of the top 4 hws.
This not cherry picking. This is simply going by the real life data that is available.

Marciano did fight world class punchers. Walcott, Moore were world class punchers. When I say, I am not saying that punched hard for a guy that weighed only 195 or whatever. They would be "world class" punchers today or any era. And you don't think Marciano himself hits harder than most of todays super heavyweights you are sadly mistaken.

Again I don't think under 200 is ideal. I don't think over 250 is either. I think 210-225 or so is "ideal.' On average, a guy that size usually has the best combination of power, durability, stamina, defense, speed etc. However, if a guy is smaller or larger and did it, lets stop pretending that he couldn't.

[HomicideHenry]

I'll comment at least on Marciano... People always talk about taller, hard hitting opponents and they'll usually bring up Nino Valdez or Bob Baker... thing is, those guys kept knocking themselves out of the heavyweight title picture losing to guys like Archie Moore.

So my view on it is. The big men that were around in Marciano's time wouldn't have troubled him in the least bit. Virtually all of Marciano's opponents and sparring partners were unanimous in saying Marciano hit harder with a single punch than Louis did with four. Even Louis said Marciano was the hardest puncher he ever faced, and yet Marciano was one of the lightest and shortest of the top heavyweights throughout boxing history.

But then again Valdez and Baker were 6'2"-6'3". Same size as Ali, Holyfield, Usyk, Haye, Foreman, Holmes, etc. It's physically bigger than Marciano, yes, but it's not as problematic as someone 6'5", 6'6", 6'7", 6'8", 6'9", 6'10". I think the tallest opponent Marciano faced was Carmine Vingo who was 6'4", but that was in Marciano's prospect years. We have no real gauge as to how good Vingo was or could have been because Marciano nearly killed him.

I don't put a lot of stock into sparring because anything can happen in such scenarios, but from what I've read or heard Marciano beat the crap out of Valdez the one time they did spar, and if it gives any weight to how well Marciano would've done against bigger heavyweights then I suppose that's where I'd look because Valdez weighed anywhere from 200 to as much as 244 throughout his career.

[DrDuke]

There has only been two large heavyweights who were great; Vitali und Wladimir

Fixed.

[Ambling Alp II]

What were they great at? Badminton, volleyball?

[HomicideHenry]

What were they great at? Badminton, volleyball?

I seem to recall your argument against the Klitschko brothers were the guys they lost to.... for Vitali it was Chris Byrd, and for Wladimir it was Ross Puritty and Sanders and Brewster... but you've also said Lennox Lewis is an all-time great. If the Klitschko brothers aren't greats then how can Lewis be a great losing to McCall (who was seen as a stepping stone at the time) or Rahman?

If im not mistaken you've said in the past ATG's don't lose to guys like Hasim Rahman. So I'm curious about the change of heart on Lewis, or why you don't hold it against Lewis but you do the Klitschko brothers?

[HomicideHenry]

One more thing on Marciano.... Tommy Jackson was listed between 6'2" and 6'4", depending on the sources, and he acted as a sparring partner for Rocky on quite a few occasions. One story is he hit Jackson in the body so hard Jackson hit the canvas and puked. Although, to be fair, Jackson was usually in the 190-199 range. Don't think he was 200+ ever in his career, or if he was it was seldom.

[Ambling Alp II]

It's who you lost and who you have beaten. To a lesser extent how badly you won and lost have to be considered. Head to head and common opponents (if applicable) should count when rating opponents. To some degree, you have to factor in available footage of a fighter as well.

I never said that you can't be an ATG if you lost to Rahman. Maybe you are thinking of someone else.
Obviously, losses to Rahman and McCall hurt Lewis' case when ranking him. However, he also had some wins that were impressive.

The quality of opponents that Wladimir lost to is much worse. Corrie Sanders was a fringe contender at best. Brewster was almost unknown. And Klitschko didn't just lose a tough fight. He got embarrassed by these guys. And he got to a journeyman.

Vitaly doesn't have quality win in his career. Not interested in his opponents win/loss records or WBS titles. None of them were very good. He lost both time against quality opponents. Byrd was good, though not great. He lost to him. At the time he fought Lewis, Lennox had a lot of miles on him. He still couldn't beat him. Couldn't go the distance either time. Not interest in the crybaby excuses.

So Lewis (though past prime) beat Vitaly head to head, beat far better opponents.
Lewis had less embarrassing looses and to better opponents than Wladimir. And he beat better opponents.
lewis often looked good on film. At times Wladimir did. Vitaly clearly didn't.

So no Lewis obviously wasn't the best hw of all time. However, he was a clear top 10. No way is Wladimir. Vitaly is well behind Waldimir.

[Controversial]

Sure the fights that picked could have been a coincidence. Off nights happen. But we can only pick with what we have to go on. The two smallest fighters that Lewis fought in his prime he struggled with. One was Holyfield when he was well past his best, and the other was a guy no one ever heard of.

The best contenders that Lyle fought that were small both beat him. Again, I am just going by the data available.
Who did Tyson Fury have a draw with? The lightest opponent that he has in years.
Wilder and Usyk are two of the lightest hws around. Almost everyone was much heavier. Yet they were two of the top 4 hws.
This not cherry picking. This is simply going by the real life data that is available.

Marciano did fight world class punchers. Walcott, Moore were world class punchers. When I say, I am not saying that punched hard for a guy that weighed only 195 or whatever. They would be "world class" punchers today or any era. And you don't think Marciano himself hits harder than most of todays super heavyweights you are sadly mistaken.

Again I don't think under 200 is ideal. I don't think over 250 is either. I think 210-225 or so is "ideal.' On average, a guy that size usually has the best combination of power, durability, stamina, defense, speed etc. However, if a guy is smaller or larger and did it, lets stop pretending that he couldn't.

If you are picking the biggest guys like Wilder, Lewis and Fury then invariably their opponent are going to be smaller. Usyk was smaller than AJ too. But they are still the same size as guys considered big in early decades. They way people described Liston and Foreman you’d think they were giants when in fact they’re pretty average / small for a HW today. Walcott and Moore were not huge punchers at HW and were mainly knocking out guys that were LHWs or just not particularly great HWs and both put Marciano over.

[HomicideHenry]

Sure the fights that picked could have been a coincidence. Off nights happen. But we can only pick with what we have to go on. The two smallest fighters that Lewis fought in his prime he struggled with. One was Holyfield when he was well past his best, and the other was a guy no one ever heard of.

The best contenders that Lyle fought that were small both beat him. Again, I am just going by the data available.
Who did Tyson Fury have a draw with? The lightest opponent that he has in years.
Wilder and Usyk are two of the lightest hws around. Almost everyone was much heavier. Yet they were two of the top 4 hws.
This not cherry picking. This is simply going by the real life data that is available.

Marciano did fight world class punchers. Walcott, Moore were world class punchers. When I say, I am not saying that punched hard for a guy that weighed only 195 or whatever. They would be "world class" punchers today or any era. And you don't think Marciano himself hits harder than most of todays super heavyweights you are sadly mistaken.

Again I don't think under 200 is ideal. I don't think over 250 is either. I think 210-225 or so is "ideal.' On average, a guy that size usually has the best combination of power, durability, stamina, defense, speed etc. However, if a guy is smaller or larger and did it, lets stop pretending that he couldn't.

If you are picking the biggest guys like Wilder, Lewis and Fury then invariably their opponent are going to be smaller. Usyk was smaller than AJ too. But they are still the same size as guys considered big in early decades. They way people described Liston and Foreman you’d think they were giants when in fact they’re pretty average / small for a HW today. Walcott and Moore were not huge punchers at HW and were mainly knocking out guys that were LHWs or just not particularly great HWs and both put Marciano over.

I will make one correction and that is that Walcott is ranked among the top 100 punchers according to RING Magazine. Because of his accuracy and his speed, setting up traps, etc he knocked out a lot of guys.

Moore's power is questionable at heavyweight but he certainly hit hard enough at heavyweight where the heavyweight contenders certainly respected him. Then again, like Walcott, his punching power came from timing and accuracy.

Both knockdowns on Marciano may as well have been flash knockdowns because I think on both occasions Marciano got up at the count of, "Four!", and you can argue those knock down's happened because he was off balance.

[Ambling Alp II]

I agree with what some of what you said. However, Wilder was actually pretty light (by modern standards) for much of his career. Yes Fury, Klitschko, and Joshua were bigger than most of their opponents. I was just pointing out that when they fought their smallest opponent's, they struggled.

Walcott had a very hard left hook. Archie Moore was a hard puncher who was accurate and threw a lot of punches. Marciano was knocked down by both, but came back to beat them both.

Agree that Liston and Foreman were big for their day but would about average in recent times. They would also be the most fearsome punchers around. Unlike Wilder, they threw a lot of punches, were accurate, and knew what they were doing.

[Controversial]

However people want to slice it Walcott and Moore were not in the same power league as Foreman, Shavers, Lyle, Lewis, Tyson etc. Solid hitters yes but neither known for their crushing power at HW and neither likely to be HWs today. Marciano never stood toe to toe with someone that much bigger who punched just as hard as he did, or harder. Marciano wore guys down, he hit Moore with everything he could before he dropped, same for Cockell.

[Cojimar 1946]

Liston would have beaten all of those guys. Easily. And he often weighed more than Wilder. Get off the weight thing.

Maybe but his resume doesn't back it up. We can't back him against a puncher like Ruddock with any confidence given the lack of punchers on his resume. No way to know how he reacts to getting hit.

Cleveland Williams was a big puncher. Guess we can't count Patterson since he knocked him out so fast both times. fought several other guys who weren't huge puncher but could hit and wasn't hurt. Ruddock certainly didn't have a great chin himself. Liston had much better boxing skills.

None of the guys he guys he fought would seem to be in Ruddocks league as a puncher and Williams was taken out pretty early in both fights before he had a chance to land much. The Ali and Martin fights raise some questions about Listons durability.

I think its safe to say Ruddock was fighting much bigger punchers than Liston and might have gone the distance in both Tyson fights if not for the questionable stoppage.

[HomicideHenry]

However people want to slice it Walcott and Moore were not in the same power league as Foreman, Shavers, Lyle, Lewis, Tyson etc. Solid hitters yes but neither known for their crushing power at HW and neither likely to be HWs today. Marciano never stood toe to toe with someone that much bigger who punched just as hard as he did, or harder. Marciano wore guys down, he hit Moore with everything he could before he dropped, same for Cockell.

Archie's own toughness and being on defense ought to be considered on that. Marciano still dropped him multiple times. As for Cockell, I think it was the only time that Marciano basically half assed in training camp because Cockell was perceived as a pushover only to find that the fat man was light on his feet. Still, once Marciano found his rhythm he dropped Cockell multiple times.

[Controversial]

However people want to slice it Walcott and Moore were not in the same power league as Foreman, Shavers, Lyle, Lewis, Tyson etc. Solid hitters yes but neither known for their crushing power at HW and neither likely to be HWs today. Marciano never stood toe to toe with someone that much bigger who punched just as hard as he did, or harder. Marciano wore guys down, he hit Moore with everything he could before he dropped, same for Cockell.

Archie's own toughness and being on defense ought to be considered on that. Marciano still dropped him multiple times. As for Cockell, I think it was the only time that Marciano basically half assed in training camp because Cockell was perceived as a pushover only to find that the fat man was light on his feet. Still, once Marciano found his rhythm he dropped Cockell multiple times.

Cockell was also dropped multiple times by Jimmy Slade who stopped him in 4 rounds, Slade only had around 7 stoppages in 24 wins

[HomicideHenry]

However people want to slice it Walcott and Moore were not in the same power league as Foreman, Shavers, Lyle, Lewis, Tyson etc. Solid hitters yes but neither known for their crushing power at HW and neither likely to be HWs today. Marciano never stood toe to toe with someone that much bigger who punched just as hard as he did, or harder. Marciano wore guys down, he hit Moore with everything he could before he dropped, same for Cockell.

Archie's own toughness and being on defense ought to be considered on that. Marciano still dropped him multiple times. As for Cockell, I think it was the only time that Marciano basically half assed in training camp because Cockell was perceived as a pushover only to find that the fat man was light on his feet. Still, once Marciano found his rhythm he dropped Cockell multiple times.

Cockell was also dropped multiple times by Jimmy Slade who stopped him in 4 rounds, Slade only had around 7 stoppages in 24 wins

Cockell also only lost 9 times by kayo in 81 fights. Mind you two fights later (after Slade) Cockell went 11 rounds with Randy Turpin who had a 60% kayo rate. Part of Cockell's problem was his health issues as he had thyroid problems. And of course, sometimes, it's just not your night. Prior to the Slade fight Cockell had five fights in 1951 against the likes of Lloyd Marshall and Freddie Beshore, so was quite a tough year. I'm sure that might've played a part in the loss by kayo.

That being said I will agree with you that Walcott was not in the same league of punchers as Foreman. Then again how many are? Very few. Still, that doesn't take away from the fact Walcott was a hard puncher in his own right. I'd say he was in the same league or close as Joe Louis in terms of punching power, but the source of his knockout capabilities was different from Louis as Walcott's power came from speed and timing and accuracy more than brute force kind of like Jimmy Wilde.

[Controversial]

Archie's own toughness and being on defense ought to be considered on that. Marciano still dropped him multiple times. As for Cockell, I think it was the only time that Marciano basically half assed in training camp because Cockell was perceived as a pushover only to find that the fat man was light on his feet. Still, once Marciano found his rhythm he dropped Cockell multiple times.

Cockell was also dropped multiple times by Jimmy Slade who stopped him in 4 rounds, Slade only had around 7 stoppages in 24 wins

Cockell also only lost 9 times by kayo in 81 fights. Mind you two fights later (after Slade) Cockell went 11 rounds with Randy Turpin who had a 60% kayo rate. Part of Cockell's problem was his health issues as he had thyroid problems. And of course, sometimes, it's just not your night. Prior to the Slade fight Cockell had five fights in 1951 against the likes of Lloyd Marshall and Freddie Beshore, so was quite a tough year. I'm sure that might've played a part in the loss by kayo.

That being said I will agree with you that Walcott was not in the same league of punchers as Foreman. Then again how many are? Very few. Still, that doesn't take away from the fact Walcott was a hard puncher in his own right. I'd say he was in the same league or close as Joe Louis in terms of punching power, but the source of his knockout capabilities was different from Louis as Walcott's power came from speed and timing and accuracy more than brute force kind of like Jimmy Wilde.

Lost 9 times by kayo in 14 losses. Cockell was a decent fighter but again not really a HW, as you say he had thyroid issues which forced his hand in moving to HW as he struggled to stay as a LHW. Marciano was a hard puncher but won more by wearing guys down, lots of his opponents took plenty of punishment before they crumbled. So pitted against a big decent HW who hit harder than him I think Marciano would struggle a lot more than he did against the LHWs / end of their career HWs he was fighting.

[HomicideHenry]

I figure one has to understand back then "the lighter the better" was the mindset. If someone was 190 pounds you have to figure in civilian life they were in reality 220. So a guy like Walcott was really the same size as someone like Usyk today, except back then 176+ was a heavyweight so they got as light as possible.

Nowadays it seems that people do the opposite. If weight classes weren't 196+ or 210+ (depending on the jurisdiction you're in) I reckon Usyk might've opted to fight at his cruiserweight limit for optimum speed when going up against the heavyweights.