Marciano Frazier wrote:it seemed to me your remarks in that paragraph were overly narrow and limiting, and I thought you probably typed them in haste.
Now we're being presumptuous, too... good qualities.
Let's not go down the "pointless-hostility-and-insults" track here.
Marciano Frazier wrote:You said "The only thing I can say for Marciano is his right hand is harder, and he's not a slow starter like Joe." I thought(and still think) that this was a narrow and inaccurate statement, and so I responded by expanding on it. I contend that not only did Marciano have a harder right hand than Frazier, he was a harder hitter, period, had a larger two-handed array of power punches than Frazier did, and was(as best their careers evidenced) more durable with(if anything) even better stamina.
but I disagree about Rocky's chin, and I don't think the difference in their stamina is that great. More on the chin question later.
Well, it is my opinion that Rocky hits harder with the right hand, not the left, and that unlike Frazier he was consistent for 15 rounds; he didn't need 5-6 to warm up like Joe did. I count those as Rocky's only significant advantages over Frazier. I don't agree that he had better stamina, or a better chin. I'm so sorry if you disagree, but that doesn't make my comments "narrow" and "limited."
Yes it does, if I'm right. Besides which, let us look at this in context: you had just made an extended list of advantages for Frazier in which you went into small and trivial points like a slight reach advantage over Marciano(when, as I've discussed previously, this is hardly relevant) when you wrote that the "only thing" you saw for Marciano was "better right hand power" and not being a slow starter- that is to say, from the context, I didn't get the impression you were only talking about "significant" advantages, but rather advantages in general. And in that instance, it is
very hard to argue that Marciano doesn't even have very slight advantages equivalent to the kind you listed for Frazier in the previous paragraph.
It goes without saying that a fighter with two fisted power is going to have a larger-array of power punches.
You
didn't say that Marciano had two-fisted power, but rather you said he had "better right hand power." You may have
meant to imply he had two-fisted power, but the statement you made does not actually indicate that- it would be equally true, for example, that Ingemar Johansson had "better right hand power" than Frazier, but it certainly wouldn't then "go without saying" that he had two-fisted power and a large array of power punches.
As for the left hook, well, no, I don't agree that Rocky hit harder with his left hook, "period", I believe that Rocky had a very good left hook, maybe even close to the level of Frazier's left hook... but I don't believe, for example, that Frazier couldn't knock out Matthews with a hard left hook or two, as Rocky did.
You're misunderstanding me here. I didn't say that Marciano had a harder left hook than Frazier, but rather that he was a "harder hitter, period," which, I suppose, was a little bit ambiguous on my part as well, since it could be taken to indicate that Marciano hit harder than Frazier with each and every specific type of punch. What I meant, though, was not that Marciano hit harder than Frazier with some specific type of punch or set of punches, but rather that he just plain hit harder. If each guy threw and landed the very hardest punch he was capable of throwing, Marciano's would do the more damage; Marciano's SuzieQ overhand right was more powerful than anything Frazier threw. This is evidenced by the way that Marciano was capable of nailing an elite-level opponent with a single right to the jaw and immediately and decisively ending a fight. Marciano had high-level one-punch knockout power, and Frazier did not.
I don't agree that Marciano has better stamina than Frazier did, certainly not a lot more stamina. They were both capable of throwing a lot of punches consistently throughout a fight. I think it would be valid to say Rocky had better stamina in the sense that he was busier in the early rounds, unlike Frazier, and that while Frazier would be busy and active and at his best for 2/3 of a fight, Rocky was for the whole fight... but we already touched on that. My point is that, in Frazier's good rounds, for the last 2/3 of a fight, Frazier does not let up, and can throw as much in those rounds as Rocky can, if not more. If Frazier got a little gassed in some of the later rounds against Ali, well, Marciano never fought Ali. Maybe if Frazier is fighting Archie Moore and an old Joe Louis he doesn't get quite as gassed as he did there. He didn't get tired against Quarry or Bonavena.
It isn't the Louis or Moore fight which really shows the degree of stamina Marciano had. Rather it's the first Charles fight. This fight went 15 rounds of grueling action without the two fighters ever having to be broken from a clinch, and Marciano was still going like a buzzsaw and exceeded 90 punches thrown in the 15th round!
Now, Frazier was an exceptionally hardworking and dedicated champion. The kind of "blood, sweat and tears" work ethic he had is seldom seen in boxing anymore. However, his training programs were neither as long or as rigorous as Marciano's. The longest training-camp stay of Frazier's entire career was eight weeks, for the Thrilla in Manila; Marciano more than once spent significantly longer, and for opponents not nearly so formidable as Ali. What's more, even when he wasn't in camp preparing for a fight, Marciano trained as hard as most fighters do when they are; according to his uncle, Charlie Piccento, Marciano ran "every morning even if he doesn’t have a fight…five or six miles. Been doing it for six years, every day. Even does six or seven miles on Christmas morning."
What's more, although Frazier does throw a comparable punch output to Marciano, I think you'll agree on examination of the film that a higher percentage of Frazier's punches are just "stay-busy" shots he's throwing to maintain the pace and pressure, and isn't really committing to- Marciano throws just about every shot with real force on it, which is always more tiring(and is a major reason why power punchers who throw everything hard tend to slow down as a fight progresses, ala Shavers and Foreman).
The point of all this is that, although both of these men showed incredible stamina at the absolute pinnacle of the sport, when it all comes down to it, Marciano probably had even better stamina than Frazier did, based on the evidences I discussed above.
Marciano Frazier wrote:I didn't say you said they weren't live underdogs, rather I provided the other side of the picture. Yes, I can conceivably see Frazier beating Walcott and Charles more easily than Marciano did, but since that had already been said, and since I am taking the other side in this exchange, I included the point that they would also, in my estimation, be very live underdogs and have the potential to upset Frazier.
Yes, they could potentially have beaten Frazier, as they could have potentially beaten Marciano... they both came close in their fights with Rocky.
Agreed, although it should be noted that Charles was only close to "beating" Marciano because of a bizarre stroke of luck(and even that freakish one-in-a-million injury was likely caused by an elbow) and other than that, Marciano beat him decisively both times.
Marciano Frazier wrote:We have one guy whose best power punch is the short left hook, whose most effective work is.......
And the condescension continues.
Where in that text are you seeing condescension? If I were speaking in condescension, I would: A. dismiss your opinions offhand without bothering to debate your arguments, B. take the ad hominem route and argue that your opinions were founded on bias or prejudice, C. declare myself more qualified or intelligent than you, and/or D. attack your knowledgeability or intelligence. I have not done any of those things, but rather I've taken your opinions point by point, described where I disagree, presented opinions of my own and presented arguments drawing on facts and anecdotal evidence to support those opinions- generally, that's how one engages in discourse with an equal, rather than condescending to them.
I) I did not say that Walcott and Ali had the same style. I said, in comparison to Rocky's other opponents, Walcott is closest. It's like comparing Rocky and Frazier, Rocky and Frazier were different in many ways, but there are a lot of similarities and you can see some parallels. Still, no one is going to confuse Rocky for Frazier in terms of style.
Actually, I think LaStarza or Charles could be argued to have styles closer to Ali's than Walcott. May go into that a little later.
I never claimed you said that Walcott and Ali had the same style, but rather I argued that your assertion that if Walcott could land on Marciano "so easily"(which is an exaggeration), Ali could, too, was a flawed and invalid argument and that, in fact, Walcott's success in the fight(as evidenced by the film) came mainly from types of punches and modes of fighting Ali hardly ever used to effect.
III) Marciano-Walcott II, on the other hand, is the one Marciano title fight that I haven't seen, outside of clips of the knockout punch. So I won't go there. Not much to go on, either, as its a one round fight.
You can see the complete fight on YouTube. This time around, Walcott seems to enter the ring with the intent of staying away and fighting a stick-and-move style. He fights defensively and throws about a dozen jabs, but never connects cleanly or seems able to keep Marciano off of him, and then the knockout comes when Marciano slips a jab, comes in and throws a hook that sets Walcott up before dropping him with an uppercut.
IV) I didn't compare Louis and Ali's jabs. I said that Marciano was being hit by Louis' jab and admitted it himself, in response to your comments about Rocky being very difficult to hit with a jab. What I did say was that I believed Ali, with his longer reach, with his faster jab would be able to land his jab on Marciano more than Louis could. I didn't say anything about them having the same type of jab.
Yes, but my point was, again, that Louis landing jabs wouldn't necessarily mean it followed that Ali would land them, since this is, afterall, a discussion about Marciano vs. Ali. Besides which, I think if you examine the film closely, or already have done so(now am I non-presumptuous enough?), you will/did find it apparent that even Louis isn't landing the jab cleanly with any regularity at any time in the fight. Even still, Louis does have the most success of anyone with the jab against Marciano. In the third through fifth rounds, you can see he's throwing off Marciano's offense by drilling the jab down the middle as Rocky's coming in and staving off his rushes and swings.
Now, it is true that Walcott landed his best shots from mid-range, which was not the way Ali fought-and I never said that it was- but as to Walcott's jab, though it didn't always land cleanly; when he used his jab Rocky threw less, got inside less. I would say there were times where Walcott's jab didn't land well, but, for the most part, when he used his jab consistently he was able to land many jabs, and he was able to keep Rocky outside with his jab.
I suppose he lands many in the sense that they make contact with his body, but the jabs that actually connect with Marciano's face are very few and far between. For the most part, he's slipping them, he's parrying them, and they're glancing off his shoulders and the hard part of his head.
You're suggesting that Walcott would throw the jab and miss everything, which is untrue. He might miss one, land one, miss one, then land a couple, etc. Point is, when he used it consistently, he was able to land enough of them, and he was able to keep Marciano outside with it, and Marciano's offense was limited when Walcott used movement and worked his jab, and it was effective.
Remember, here, that in the 7th-8th rounds, Marciano was suffering from severely impaired vision due to cut ointments in his eyes. Aside from a few stretches in that area, I don't believe there are any significant stretches which Walcott controls from the outside with the jab. He has some momentary success moving on the outside, but there aren't any rounds where Marciano just can't get inside. Without his infighting and midrange skills, I have little doubt Walcott would not have made it nearly so far or been ahead before the knockout.
And as for Ali, he would probably be more effective with his jab than Walcott was. Ali was two inches taller than Walcott, with a longer reach, faster hands, and he would use the jab more often than Walcott, and Ali's jab would likely land more consistently than Walcott's. But Walcott's jab was relatively effective against Marciano. He held Marciano at bay with it in a few of those rounds.
Which? Aside from the 7th-8th, I don't see where Walcott is "holding Marciano at bay" with the jab- the first three rounds, almost all his success comes from relatively short and mid-distance punching. Marciano seems to be turning the tide in the fourth through sixth and does some punishing body work, but is set back by the cut ointments in his eyes and spends most of the seventh and eighth rounds sort of poking around with his own rather short jab to try and get a feel for where Walcott is, and yes, Walcott has success with the jab in
those rounds- but it is a special circumstance and hardly reflects on any hypothetical situation here. The ninth through 11th rounds, they're exchanging at close and midrange again, and Walcott's success is coming from middle distance potshotting. I'll review the 12th round again, because I believe it may exemplify a bit of what you're talking about- but, again, Walcott's best success comes almost entirely from pot-shotting and countering inside the long-range, and his jabs and straight rights don't land nearly so well as a whole throughout the fight. One can see a similar outcome in the rematch, where Walcott is trying specifically to utilize a stick-and-move gameplan and it completely fails.
And sometimes Frazier was a bit hard to hit with the jab, at least in comparison to some of Ali's other opponents, that doesn't mean Ali didn't land it. When you say that Ali's offense would not be at its most effective against Marciano, I think that could be true, and his offense wasn't at its most effective against Frazier. That doesn't mean it wasn't effective. And Marciano never met someone that big, that fast or that good, who could take punches like Ali. If Ali's offensive abilities might be limited by some of Marciano's qualities, one could say the same for Marciano, he would also have many difficulties with Ali, as you admit yourself. And its not as if Ali never met big punchers before, or good short fighters, or fighters with good stamina. I still think the case could be made that Frazier could possibly be tougher for Ali than Marciano could be.
I agree with this paragraph.
But back to the Walcott comparison, I think the source of this is that in regards to Walcott's ability to land on Marciano, I used the word "easily" in the first post that you were addressing, and that I shouldn't have said. Walcott did land on Marciano, but not particularly easily. So I will take that one back. That is one thing I shouldn't have said.
Good. It is nice to see more people recognize that Marciano wasn't Rocky Balboa.
