BoxRec

First off, Holyfield would present a formidable opponent for anybody at Cruiserweight - I want to pay him his dues before voicing my opinion here.

The result: A Marciano late stoppage.

Marciano beat Ezzard Charles (who I believe was a better boxer that Evander) and Archie Moore (who I believe was a more powerful puncher) so looking at that, with both those bases covered, I can only see a Rocky victory.

Yeah Charles & Moore were certainly at their best when they fought Marciano.

Crease wrote:
Marciano beat Ezzard Charles (who I believe was a better boxer that Evander) and Archie Moore (who I believe was a more powerful puncher) so looking at that, with both those bases covered, I can only see a Rocky victory.

As an around fighter surely a young and prime Holyfield was a more dangerous opponent than Moore or Charles were when they fought Marciano?

Holyfield combined good boxing ability, good power and a granite chin (a better chin than Charles or Moore) and was undoubtedly in better physical shape and condition than Charles or Moore was when they fought Rocky.

Personally I think Holyfield's better all round game and naturally larger size and weight would've been too much for Marciano and possibly a Holyfield win by late cuts stoppage on or by decision.

keithmoonhangover wrote:
He would run up to 50 miles a day

punch a self-made canvas bag weighing 300 pounds filled with rocks.

Oh come on man, do you seriously believe these stories?

Most professional long distance runners would struggle to run 50 miles a day without serious training. It would probably take Marciano 8-10+ hours to run that distance (assuming he could), he wouldn't have time or the ability to do anything else afterwards.

Also how could any human being punch rocks? I don't care who they are, they would smash their hands to pieces in no time at all. His hands were made of bone like everyone else, not steel.

I think Marciano takes a very close unaminous decision over Holyfield; too much of a work rate

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:Yeah Charles & Moore were certainly at their best when they fought Marciano.

Not at their best but not at all shot and still great fighters, especially Moore who'd been bulldozing through a very tough crop of heavyweights in his late 30s. The Moore who fought Rocky is even money in my book vs Holyfield. And hell watching how Ezzard fought Harold Johnson down to the wire right before facing Marciano, that version of Charles would've given Evander hell as well.

As for the training methods, I've NEVER heard that Marciano punched a "bag of rocks" . . that's one of the most ridiculous stories I've ever heard. Part of me thinks keith must be taking the pi$$ on that one . . in any case, it is true that Marciano ran 6 miles every day of the year except the week of a fight. Holidays, days after fights . . it didn't matter. Such obsessive dedication actually contributed to his body breaking down at a relatively young age, hence his retirement.

I never said they were shot and I'm sure you would have Duane Bobick in a 50/50 fight with Holyfield. I'd favor prime Heavyweight Charles over either one of them. Moore would be in an uphill climb with Holyfield, he might out-box Rock earlier in his career.

keithmoonhangover wrote:

Controversial wrote:

keithmoonhangover wrote:Holyfield got all he could handle from Dwight Muhammad Qawi in the first fight. It's a war and a very good fight that could go either way, but I think Marciano wins by late stoppage after being dropped at least once on the way.

Your forgetting Holyfield was practically a novice when he fought Qawi, he first true test. You could argue that Marciano got all he could handle against Lastarza in their first fight.

I'm not forgetting anything.

You seem to have forgotten how good Qawi was when Holyfield beat him. That version of Qawi was arguably as good as anyone Marciano ever beat at the time he beat them.

hhaehre wrote:

keithmoonhangover wrote:

keithmoonhangover wrote:Holyfield got all he could handle from Dwight Muhammad Qawi in the first fight. It's a war and a very good fight that could go either way, but I think Marciano wins by late stoppage after being dropped at least once on the way.

Your forgetting Holyfield was practically a novice when he fought Qawi, he first true test. You could argue that Marciano got all he could handle against Lastarza in their first fight.

I'm not forgetting anything.

You seem to have forgotten how good Qawi was when Holyfield beat him. That version of Qawi was arguably as good as anyone Marciano ever beat at the time he beat them.[/quote]

That's as ridiculous as claiming that Marciano punched bags of rocks . . .

dempseyfire wrote:

hhaehre wrote:

keithmoonhangover wrote:
I'm not forgetting anything.

You seem to have forgotten how good Qawi was when Holyfield beat him. That version of Qawi was arguably as good as anyone Marciano ever beat at the time he beat them.

That's as ridiculous as claiming that Marciano punched bags of rocks . . .

I said arguably. The only 3 that would be in with a shot vs. prime cruiser Qawi are Charles, Walcott and Moore. Charles and Moore were both past their primes and Walcott would only be a slight favorite imo. Do you not agree that Qawi would be competitive vs. the Charles, Walcott and Moore that fought Marciano?

No, I don't (if you mean by 'competitive' as ever having a realistic chance of winning during the fight).

Qawi was a natural light HW who was very good at that weight (I wouldn't even call him a 'great' light heavyweight in the all-time sense; he was a fan favorite with his aggressive style mixed with skill but he wasn't that hard to hit and his short arms ensured he had uphill battles with longer stick and movers; I also think he caught MSM when he was ready to be taken after numerous life and death wars)
He had success in a brand new cruiser division devoid of much talent. where his notable win was over a washed-up Leon Spinks before losing to a relative novice in Holyfield. With his always come-forward style but lack of a big punch above 175 he would've been carved up like turkey vs Walcott, Charles, and Moore. I consider the versions of Moore and Walcott Rocky faced to not be at their peak but 'near-peak' and Charles still had enough in the tank to be great (considering at his peak he was one of the greatest lb for lb fighters of all time, a step down is still way above most).

At their respective stages Qawi would've been carved up although I'm sure he could've had a few moments here and there before he got knocked out. Even beyond those 3 I wouldn't pick Qawi over Roland LaStarza or Harry Kid Matthews either (the latter, by the way, is one of the most under-rated fighters I can think of; SUPERB boxer-puncher)

Qawi was a monster hurdle for such a young fighter, that makes it one of the most impressive wins in Boxing history. Dwight was also a bit past his best. He was better at Light Heavyweight and I don;t think he is beating Charles, Moore, Walcott or Matthews(agreed on him being underrated) at any point in his career. I do think he could beat laStarza.

dempseyfire wrote:No, I don't (if you mean by 'competitive' as ever having a realistic chance of winning during the fight).

Qawi was a natural light HW who was very good at that weight (I wouldn't even call him a 'great' light heavyweight in the all-time sense; he was a fan favorite with his aggressive style mixed with skill but he wasn't that hard to hit and his short arms ensured he had uphill battles with longer stick and movers; I also think he caught MSM when he was ready to be taken after numerous life and death wars)
He had success in a brand new cruiser division devoid of much talent. where his notable win was over a washed-up Leon Spinks before losing to a relative novice in Holyfield. With his always come-forward style but lack of a big punch above 175 he would've been carved up like turkey vs Walcott, Charles, and Moore. I consider the versions of Moore and Walcott Rocky faced to not be at their peak but 'near-peak' and Charles still had enough in the tank to be great (considering at his peak he was one of the greatest lb for lb fighters of all time, a step down is still way above most).

At their respective stages Qawi would've been carved up although I'm sure he could've had a few moments here and there before he got knocked out. Even beyond those 3 I wouldn't pick Qawi over Roland LaStarza or Harry Kid Matthews either (the latter, by the way, is one of the most under-rated fighters I can think of; SUPERB boxer-puncher)

I'll grant you Mathews but LaStarza would have been made to order for Qawi. As far as reach and size goes, Qawi would have given up nothing to the rock and it's not like the Moore, Charles, Wlacott trio never lost to a short stocky fighter. I think Moore would have been to clever for Qawi and Charles probably had enough left to win. Walcott is a toss up, he certainly has losses to lesser fighters than Qawi.

hhaehre wrote:

dempseyfire wrote:No, I don't (if you mean by 'competitive' as ever having a realistic chance of winning during the fight).

Qawi was a natural light HW who was very good at that weight (I wouldn't even call him a 'great' light heavyweight in the all-time sense; he was a fan favorite with his aggressive style mixed with skill but he wasn't that hard to hit and his short arms ensured he had uphill battles with longer stick and movers; I also think he caught MSM when he was ready to be taken after numerous life and death wars)
He had success in a brand new cruiser division devoid of much talent. where his notable win was over a washed-up Leon Spinks before losing to a relative novice in Holyfield. With his always come-forward style but lack of a big punch above 175 he would've been carved up like turkey vs Walcott, Charles, and Moore. I consider the versions of Moore and Walcott Rocky faced to not be at their peak but 'near-peak' and Charles still had enough in the tank to be great (considering at his peak he was one of the greatest lb for lb fighters of all time, a step down is still way above most).

At their respective stages Qawi would've been carved up although I'm sure he could've had a few moments here and there before he got knocked out. Even beyond those 3 I wouldn't pick Qawi over Roland LaStarza or Harry Kid Matthews either (the latter, by the way, is one of the most under-rated fighters I can think of; SUPERB boxer-puncher)

I'll grant you Mathews but LaStarza would have been made to order for Qawi. As far as reach and size goes, Qawi would have given up nothing to the rock and it's not like the Moore, Charles, Wlacott trio never lost to a short stocky fighter. I think Moore would have been to clever for Qawi and Charles probably had enough left to win. Walcott is a toss up, he certainly has losses to lesser fighters than Qawi.

To look at Walcott's record and see that he lost to some lesser-calibre guys when he was a part-time fighter barely making ends meet is not going to cut it. By the early 40s Walcott had gotten proper management was able to devote enough time to training and the results spoke for themselves. Walcott would've boxed the crap out of Qawi.

LaStarza? Maybe Qawi gets it, but a guy with the toughness and skills of Roland isn't "made to
order" for anyone. That fight is definitely the closest of the 5 fighters I listed though. .LaStarza was a little protected but many do feel he deserved the W vs Marciano in their first fight.

When discussing height and reach, I'm also talking about body strength/power. Marciano had short arms as well but he had freakish power and strength for an 185 lber. Qawi on the other hand had very good, but not great, power at and strength at 175. When he moved up to 190 the KO ratio took a nose-dive and he started going the distance with guys who were not world-class fighters. Even the Spinks fight . . he hit Leon with everything but the kitchen sink and Spinks took his bombs straight for over 5 rounds (I don't even recall Spinks going down in that fight, but I could be wrong).
So if you have the short height and reach COMBINED with a lack of game-changing power and strength, that becomes a major liability vs guys who are not only bigger and stronger than you but are master boxers like Moore, Charles, Walcott, and Matthews. Marciano made up for it with one-punch knockout power combined with awkward, relentless aggression.

I love Qawi, he's a one of my fav fighters, but anyone who thinks he was in his prime at cruiser needs to up the dosage.

dempseyfire wrote:

zojo, wrote:If the cruiser limit was what it was when Holyfield was champ (190 lbs.)
I see a weight drained Holyfield being stopped by Marciano in the 14th.

If the cruiser limit is what it is now, (200 lbs.)
I see Holyfield winning by decision.

Evander was never drained at 190; if so why did he hire nutrition/strength training experts to get above 200? He went up to HW for the money plain and simple.

That said Marciano beats him at any weight. Too much activity and pressure with a crippling body attack for Evander, who over a long fight would simply get hit too much.

He was hospitalized for dehydration after the Qawi match. The guy is an ectomorph whether at cruiser or heavyweight.

He was dehydrated from the fight, not cutting weight.

Recycle wrote:Can't believe pple think modern fighters can hang with the old real fighters so much overrating rocky ko Holyfield r6

its called nostalgia. nothing bad about it.
no side effects apart from ... melancholy.