Page 10 of 16
Re: Rocky Marciano small heavyweight
Posted: 26 Jun 2013, 06:24
by p4p1
polecateddy wrote:p4p1 wrote:Are we really comparing boxing to a sport where wrestling is involved to make a comparison about size. It's apples and oranges, Melvin Manhoef could destroy Cain Velasquez standing with his ungodly power though.
Just watch the video. Tell me then you would confidently predict global domination for Rocky today :)
I wouldn't but today he would comfortably make LHW possibly SMW if he really pushed it and I could see him being dominant there because of the power/strength and fitness advantage he would have.
Re: Rocky Marciano small heavyweight
Posted: 26 Jun 2013, 06:26
by p4p1
Though I am confident in saying that he could probably breakdown and KO most guys from CW - HW over 12 rounds.
Re: Rocky Marciano small heavyweight
Posted: 26 Jun 2013, 06:43
by SamWise72
I don't think a single person here has predicted global domination for Rocky. I believe he would win vs Lebedev, because I believe he hit just as hard, and had a better chin and more desire. Most world champs have more skill than Rocky, for sure, and even in period, opponents would throw more punches early on than him, but he would bore forward, running that engine, going through their attacks and working away, throwing big levers. It's not even that he had a massive punch output, be he hit very hard, worked very hard to get in range with those short arms and threw haymaker after haymaker, and that he seemed to get stronger as the fight went on, not weaker.
Re: Rocky Marciano small heavyweight
Posted: 26 Jun 2013, 06:46
by loaded_gloves
I can't believe so many of us are entertaining this idiot.
We know 180 wasted 245lb. 205 can beat 260lbs. We know 215 can beat 330lbs easily & widely. And yet in Eddy's world as soon as you drop below 190 it's a apparently different 'kind' of weight. Even when their is evidence to the contrary, he's still right.
Carl Thompson with all his failings, his losses, is better than Rocky Marciano. Given his life or death with Chris Eubank, it is unimaginable how foolish Jersey Joe, Ezzard and Archie would have made Carel Thompson look.
This is a degrading thread. Eddy is the village idiot, he should be pitied, not engaged in serious dialogue.
Stop it, all of you, for all our benefit.
Re: Rocky Marciano small heavyweight
Posted: 26 Jun 2013, 07:03
by polecateddy
loaded_gloves wrote:I can't believe so many of us are entertaining this idiot.
We know 180 wasted 245lb. 205 can beat 260lbs. We know 215 can beat 330lbs easily & widely. And yet in Eddy's world as soon as you drop below 190 it's a apparently different 'kind' of weight. Even when their is evidence to the contrary, he's still right.
Carl Thompson with all his failings, his losses, is better than Rocky Marciano. Given his life or death with Chris Eubank, it is unimaginable how foolish Jersey Joe, Ezzard and Archie would have made Carel Thompson look.
This is a degrading thread. Eddy is the village idiot, he should be pitied, not engaged in serious dialogue.
Stop it, all of you, for all our benefit.
So you watched the video of Marciano v Moore, and you were mightily impressed by his skill and punch-out were you. Cos from where I'm sitting both looked pretty ordinary to me. Do you not agree that Lebedev is punching faster, with better defensive skill ...AND better punch output? Count some punches ...prove me wrong! Lol
Re: Rocky Marciano small heavyweight
Posted: 26 Jun 2013, 07:14
by loaded_gloves
I'm hugely impressed by Rocky, absolutely.
Are you impressed by Vitali's 'skill'? If he was in black and white, wearing short cloth trunks you'd dismiss him as some nineteenth century amateur who would be humiliated by our advance modern skilled heavyweights.
And yet Vitali, with his turn-of-the-century style, is actually the current boss - and by a long, long way.
This is probably lost on you as you think Lebedev has better defence than Marciano, when he ate so many punches his head swoll up to a melon.
This is a dialogue with the utterly insane.
Re: Rocky Marciano small heavyweight
Posted: 26 Jun 2013, 07:17
by polecateddy
That's my point, you can't actually be bothered to objectively watch the films and compare the two fighters. What do you imagine G Jones would have done to Rocky? Had a field day perhaps! :)
Re: Rocky Marciano small heavyweight
Posted: 26 Jun 2013, 07:27
by Ezzard
Polecat
Even back in the day some considered Rocky crude and wide open. He wasn’t. he had a better defence than given credit for but even so…it wouldn’t be the first time he was given that label.
But Ezzard Charles was a gold standard fighter. One of the greatest boxers to ever lace up a glove. Surely he beats Carl Thompson? I think even Carl himself would admit to that.
Re: Rocky Marciano small heavyweight
Posted: 26 Jun 2013, 07:33
by polecateddy
Ezzard wrote:Polecat
Even back in the day some considered Rocky crude and wide open. He wasn’t. he had a better defence than given credit for but even so…it wouldn’t be the first time he was given that label.
But Ezzard Charles was a gold standard fighter. One of the greatest boxers to ever lace up a glove. Surely he beats Carl Thompson? I think even Carl himself would admit to that.
I'm kind of tired of this now. I've said what I wanted to say. If you think Rocky is all that watching the video it's your issue.
Re: Rocky Marciano small heavyweight
Posted: 26 Jun 2013, 07:49
by SamWise72
My honest appraisal of the two fights is that they were both good, but that in Marciano vs Moore, you are seeing a man who is hitting a LOT harder (Rocky) approaching a man who is both more elusive and more accurate than either of Lebedev or Jones. Marciano is expending similar effort to Jones and Lebedev, but throwing slightly less punches, because dammit, Moore was a great counterpuncher and hard to land on cleanly. I also see both Jones and Lebedev exhausted after what were admittedly 11 tough rounds, but can you see either Moore or Marciano being that tired at that point? Can you imagine either of them failing to put the battered and half blind Lebedev away cleanly and several rounds earlier? Can you imagine either of them huffing and blowing and potshotting like Jones is in the 11th? Or the other way, can you see Jones now being able to fight another 4 rounds against the Rocky who is still pulling like a train in the championship rounds against Charles?
Re: Rocky Marciano small heavyweight
Posted: 26 Jun 2013, 09:05
by Ezzard
polecateddy wrote:Ezzard wrote:Polecat
Even back in the day some considered Rocky crude and wide open. He wasn’t. he had a better defence than given credit for but even so…it wouldn’t be the first time he was given that label.
But Ezzard Charles was a gold standard fighter. One of the greatest boxers to ever lace up a glove. Surely he beats Carl Thompson? I think even Carl himself would admit to that.
I'm kind of tired of this now. I've said what I wanted to say. If you think Rocky is all that watching the video it's your issue.
Please...just the bit about Ezzard Charles...then I'll leave you alone...promise...
I do think size is an issue. Not the only one, but it has a big impact.
Re: Rocky Marciano small heavyweight
Posted: 26 Jun 2013, 09:10
by polecateddy
Ezzard wrote:polecateddy wrote:Ezzard wrote:Polecat
Even back in the day some considered Rocky crude and wide open. He wasn’t. he had a better defence than given credit for but even so…it wouldn’t be the first time he was given that label.
But Ezzard Charles was a gold standard fighter. One of the greatest boxers to ever lace up a glove. Surely he beats Carl Thompson? I think even Carl himself would admit to that.
I'm kind of tired of this now. I've said what I wanted to say. If you think Rocky is all that watching the video it's your issue.
Please...just the bit about Ezzard Charles...then I'll leave you alone...promise...
I do think size is an issue. Not the only one, but it has a big impact.
Nah, I'm going to leave Ezzard. Don't know much about him to be honest. I will leave you all to it.
Re: Rocky Marciano small heavyweight
Posted: 26 Jun 2013, 09:13
by Ezzard
Fair enough...
Re: Rocky Marciano small heavyweight
Posted: 26 Jun 2013, 09:33
by loaded_gloves
Polecat doesn't know much about Ezzard Charles. There's a surprise.
Re: Rocky Marciano small heavyweight
Posted: 26 Jun 2013, 10:06
by SaadOffTheDeck
polecateddy wrote:Ezzard wrote:Polecat
Even back in the day some considered Rocky crude and wide open. He wasn’t. he had a better defence than given credit for but even so…it wouldn’t be the first time he was given that label.
But Ezzard Charles was a gold standard fighter. One of the greatest boxers to ever lace up a glove. Surely he beats Carl Thompson? I think even Carl himself would admit to that.
I'm kind of tired of this now. I've said what I wanted to say. If you think Rocky is all that watching the video it's your issue.
Re: Rocky Marciano small heavyweight
Posted: 26 Jun 2013, 10:06
by SaadOffTheDeck
loaded_gloves wrote:Polecat doesn't know much about Ezzard Charles. There's a surprise.
That would be more than Rubin Williams. Appalling stuff.
Re: Rocky Marciano small heavyweight
Posted: 26 Jun 2013, 17:19
by polecateddy
loaded_gloves wrote:Polecat doesn't know much about Ezzard Charles. There's a surprise.
I'm sure I've read some magazine boxing articles about him over the years, but to be honest he rarely features. Anyway, it's past your bedtime old-timer ...just follow the nurse :)
Re: Rocky Marciano small heavyweight
Posted: 26 Jun 2013, 19:58
by The Great John L
polecateddy wrote:Just for fun. Fight one, Rocky v Moore. Fight two, Lebedev v G. Jones.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_pPfPUQopfg
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OQV3iKIvKBU
I'm sorry, but Rocky looks a bit crude and he really isn't throwing more punches than you'd see in an average cruiserweight title fight. For my money Lebedev has a similar style to Rocky, but when you compare the two Lebedev is punching faster and showing better skills. I don't see how Rocky hits any harder than the Russian really.
One thing that the Jones-Lebedev fight proves conclusively is what happened to the people who used to count votes in the Soviet Union. Obviously, they're all now employed by the Russian punchstat company.
Re: Rocky Marciano small heavyweight
Posted: 27 Jun 2013, 05:16
by SamWise72
polecateddy wrote:loaded_gloves wrote:Polecat doesn't know much about Ezzard Charles. There's a surprise.
I'm sure I've read some magazine boxing articles about him over the years, but to be honest he rarely features. Anyway, it's past your bedtime old-timer ...just follow the nurse :)
He's one of the fighters that many consider to be top 5 pound for pound all time. There's lots of footage on Youtube, and you haven't watched them. Perhaps it's that sort of thing that makes people think that your opinion that pre-90's boxers were all rubbish might be invalid?
Re: Rocky Marciano small heavyweight
Posted: 27 Jun 2013, 05:31
by polecateddy
SamWise72 wrote:polecateddy wrote:loaded_gloves wrote:Polecat doesn't know much about Ezzard Charles. There's a surprise.
I'm sure I've read some magazine boxing articles about him over the years, but to be honest he rarely features. Anyway, it's past your bedtime old-timer ...just follow the nurse :)
He's one of the fighters that many consider to be top 5 pound for pound all time. There's lots of footage on Youtube, and you haven't watched them. Perhaps it's that sort of thing that makes people think that your opinion that pre-90's boxers were all rubbish might be invalid?
Third big assumption. Never said a thing about pre-1990 fighters being inferior. I think once you get to the Fraizer/Ali era the line gets more blurred as to who is better.
Re: Rocky Marciano small heavyweight
Posted: 27 Jun 2013, 05:48
by SamWise72
Yeah, so once we get to the era of the fighters you've watched, then you think they might be good enough. I'm done.
Re: Rocky Marciano small heavyweight
Posted: 27 Jun 2013, 16:27
by kaiserbill
Rocky comes across as quite a smart man, once you get past the accent and slow, measured cadence of his speech.
My father met him in the 60's, and was enthralled by these same qualities, his quiet understatedness.
And my father was certainly not an easy man to impress.
Can't really disagree with anything he's saying...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RFUJ3KDjrlI
Re: Rocky Marciano small heavyweight
Posted: 28 Jun 2013, 06:36
by JC
kaiserbill wrote:The same logic can be applied to almost any heavyweight of yesteryear.
Ali would be a small heavyweight today.
He fought his first 15 fights in what would be the Cruiserweight division today.
He came in at 188lbs for his 9th pro fight, a weight in Marciano's category.
Marciano fought big or tall men, as did Ali.
The difference is that the really big heavyweights of yesteryear were generally slow and ponderous. This is not the case today in many instances.
It's not really fair to compare heavyweights of different eras, due to size, diet, modern scientific training methods and supplements.
Many great heavyweights of yesteryear would be modern day cruiserweights. They also were trimmer generally in those days, due to fighting more often, and because title fights were longer (15 rounds). Also, the sugar and fat saturated fast food culture had not yet happened, leading to the massive obesity levels we see around us every single day.
They were all greats if they dominated in their era.
Good post
Re: Rocky Marciano small heavyweight
Posted: 28 Jun 2013, 07:23
by SamWise72
Marciano comes across really well in that interview, very considered, clearly knowing his stuff, and not setting off on flights of fancy. What would we give to have him as part of a commentary team now? Of course, Ali answered the questions about his chin in style, later.
Re: Rocky Marciano small heavyweight
Posted: 28 Jun 2013, 12:35
by Controversial
orbtastic wrote:Controversial wrote:orbtastic wrote: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.
I still can't work out how a blown up middleweight, in the twilight of his career, took Thompson 12 rounds and also decked him? Especially as Eubank was at least 20lbs heavier than he was against Calzaghe in his previous fight and had never fought at cruiserweight before. Also Calzaghe dropped Eubank yet the much bigger and harder punching Thompson couldn't?
I think calling him a blown-up middleweight is highly disingenuous
You obviously missed the intended sarcasm I was using. I was trying to allude to the fact that size doesn't always equate to success, the fact that Eubank was at the heaviest of his career by some margin and was still highly competitive against a much larger, stronger and hard hitting opponent, an opponent being named as being someone who would beat Marciano. In other words Marciano shouldn't be dismissed because he was naturally heavier, stronger, fitter and hit much harder than Eubank could.