BoxRec

Kaaspeer wrote:Be a bit realistic. Rigondeaux may be more skilled than Arthur Abraham, but Arthur Abraham would beat him with pure size. It's the same case here, Wilder would be far too big for Marciano.

Wilder is an amateur next to a prime Marciano. Judging by your comment Mike White should have destroyed WBO light heavyweight champ Michael Moorer . . .

drunkenpiper36 wrote:In one corner, you have a battle tested all time great who has gone 15 rounds and fought in wars with other hall of famers... In the other, you have young stallion with olympic pedigree, all the physical advantages imaginable and an unproven yet very busy and active record.

Well, when you put it that way, I'm not sure whether I'd pick Muhammad Ali or David Price.

dempseyfire wrote: Wilder is an amateur next to a prime Marciano. Judging by your comment Mike White should have destroyed WBO light heavyweight champ Michael Moorer . . .

wilder only had 20 fights before the olympic trials.
he's a good athlete and is being brought along at a smart pace for him,
but his opponents really don't earn him his high ranking.
he should have to beat at the very least a chisora, thompson, or jennings
to earn the ranking he has. blasphemy to mention him in the same sentence
as the rock until he beats at least one of the abc belt holders.

ok this guy Kaaspeer is a Wlad fanboy and hates Wilder....Wilder would crush Rock with ease.. I cant wait to Wlad has to face Wilder and Wilder lands that right on that soft chin of Wlad

Todays athletes are bigger, faster and stronger than ever. You can only rank a fighter based on the opponents he faced in his particular era and Marciano was the best of his era, but leave it at that. It may be blasphemous to say, but a heavy ranked 15 in todays world would probably beat Marciano.

marvelous marv wrote:Todays athletes are bigger, faster and stronger than ever. You can only rank a fighter based on the opponents he faced in his particular era and Marciano was the best of his era, but leave it at that. It may be blasphemous to say, but a heavy ranked 15 in todays world would probably beat Marciano.

Not so sure about that. Today's heavies are crap. While I understand your logic, you should check out the thread "Art of Switching" just recently posted. That may change your mind.

greenmonkey wrote:ok this guy Kaaspeer is a Wlad fanboy and hates Wilder....Wilder would crush Rock with ease.. I cant wait to Wlad has to face Wilder and Wilder lands that right on that soft chin of Wlad

They'd need a long stretcher to get Widler out of the ring after Rock was done with him.

Bigger gloves, headgear, smaller guy = Wilder on queer street.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F2QjTroBo4U

marvelous marv wrote:Todays athletes are bigger, faster and stronger than ever. You can only rank a fighter based on the opponents he faced in his particular era and Marciano was the best of his era, but leave it at that. It may be blasphemous to say, but a heavy ranked 15 in todays world would probably beat Marciano.

they are also on steroids and epo and hgh, etc. there are lots of reasons why i never compare
from one generation to the next, head to head. what kind of a boxer would wilder have become
in the old days under those economic conditions and diet and training, etc, and what would the
greats of the past become in this era? you just can't compare them. ali had an MD for a cutman,
ferdie pacheco, who used to inject novocaine into ali's hands just before and even DURING fights.
luis resto crushed antihistamines into aaron pryor's water and gave it to him in the later rounds.
amphetamines were rampant in the 70's. now, guys get caught taking over the counter appetite
suppressants leading up to a fight and get titles taken away, and people taking steoids and epo
and hgh can usually beat the tests. people can only compete against the guys in their eras put
in front of them, the same way i wouldn't try to put wilt chamberlain or bill russell in today's era,
or put the olympic long jumpers or sprinters or pole vaulter of the 50's and 60's with today's.

either way, thompson is 6'5", fury is 6'9", klits 6'6" and 6'7", price 6'8", helenius 6'7", wilder 6'7".
even bowe and lewis and holyfield don't seem like big heavies anymore, especially after valuev.
the big guys from the 50's, 60's, and 70's had no athleticism whatsoever. primo carnera had NO skill,
and he wouldn't even be big today. lots of these big guys today can actually move and box.
that's why i say wilder need to accomplish something in his own era to be mentioned in the same
sentence as the greats of the past. he didn't live back then, and nobody can say what he would have
been back then, and those guys aren't around today, and nobody knows what they would become today.
not a fair comparison.

sucracristo wrote: primo carnera.....and he wouldn't even be big today.

A shade under 6'6 and 260 pounds IN SHAPE is always big.

I wonder if the size will continue to increase? In thirty years, Valuev size heavyweights being common!?

I would imagine the athletics forums are free of spam heads telling us how Emil Zatopek would have shown Mo Farrah a clean pair of heels. And how those old cinder tracks made tougher runners than today's nancy lot. But apparently according to the wise old timers on here boxing doesn't conform to any sporting laws of progression, in fact it's the only known 'inverse' progressing sport where any fighter from the black and white era would enter today's sport like a hot knife through butter.

sucracristo wrote:

marvelous marv wrote:Todays athletes are bigger, faster and stronger than ever. You can only rank a fighter based on the opponents he faced in his particular era and Marciano was the best of his era, but leave it at that. It may be blasphemous to say, but a heavy ranked 15 in todays world would probably beat Marciano.

they are also on steroids and epo and hgh, etc. there are lots of reasons why i never compare
from one generation to the next, head to head. what kind of a boxer would wilder have become
in the old days under those economic conditions and diet and training, etc, and what would the
greats of the past become in this era? you just can't compare them. ali had an MD for a cutman,
ferdie pacheco, who used to inject novocaine into ali's hands just before and even DURING fights.
luis resto crushed antihistamines into aaron pryor's water and gave it to him in the later rounds.
amphetamines were rampant in the 70's. now, guys get caught taking over the counter appetite
suppressants leading up to a fight and get titles taken away, and people taking steoids and epo
and hgh can usually beat the tests. people can only compete against the guys in their eras put
in front of them, the same way i wouldn't try to put wilt chamberlain or bill russell in today's era,
or put the olympic long jumpers or sprinters or pole vaulter of the 50's and 60's with today's.

either way, thompson is 6'5", fury is 6'9", klits 6'6" and 6'7", price 6'8", helenius 6'7", wilder 6'7".
even bowe and lewis and holyfield don't seem like big heavies anymore, especially after valuev.
the big guys from the 50's, 60's, and 70's had no athleticism whatsoever. primo carnera had NO skill,
and he wouldn't even be big today. lots of these big guys today can actually move and box.
that's why i say wilder need to accomplish something in his own era to be mentioned in the same
sentence as the greats of the past. he didn't live back then, and nobody can say what he would have
been back then, and those guys aren't around today, and nobody knows what they would become today.
not a fair comparison.

Ali had no athletisicm! Are you crazy. The guy used to fight at a pace that most of the big lumps today could only dream of. There's a trade of with size. Really big men don't have the same stamina as a well put together guy of around 6'3" - 6'4". Wlad is a good mover for his size, but it would have been like a tank trying to shoot a fly out of the air against Ali, he'd have been continuously disoriented by Ali's movement and foot speed.

I will admit that Marciano would have struggled against someone so much bigger than him, but he hit incredibly hard for a man of his size, and had an incredible ability to absorb punishment without flinching.

We really haven't seen Wilder take a serious dig yet, and I suspect that the way he is being moved, that perhaps his management know he doesn't have a very good chin.

sucracristo wrote:they are also on steroids and epo and hgh, etc. there are lots of reasons why i never compare
from one generation to the next, head to head. what kind of a boxer would wilder have become
in the old days under those economic conditions and diet and training, etc, and what would the
greats of the past become in this era? you just can't compare them. ali had an MD for a cutman,
ferdie pacheco, who used to inject novocaine into ali's hands just before and even DURING fights.
luis resto crushed antihistamines into aaron pryor's water and gave it to him in the later rounds.
amphetamines were rampant in the 70's. now, guys get caught taking over the counter appetite
suppressants leading up to a fight and get titles taken away, and people taking steoids and epo
and hgh can usually beat the tests. people can only compete against the guys in their eras put
in front of them, the same way i wouldn't try to put wilt chamberlain or bill russell in today's era,
or put the olympic long jumpers or sprinters or pole vaulter of the 50's and 60's with today's.

either way, thompson is 6'5", fury is 6'9", klits 6'6" and 6'7", price 6'8", helenius 6'7", wilder 6'7".
even bowe and lewis and holyfield don't seem like big heavies anymore, especially after valuev.
the big guys from the 50's, 60's, and 70's had no athleticism whatsoever. primo carnera had NO skill,
and he wouldn't even be big today. lots of these big guys today can actually move and box.
that's why i say wilder need to accomplish something in his own era to be mentioned in the same
sentence as the greats of the past. he didn't live back then, and nobody can say what he would have
been back then, and those guys aren't around today, and nobody knows what they would become today.
not a fair comparison.

This is the sort of post I wanna post myself or see someone else post everytime someone makes some silly ass ATG thread. People have no idea how hard it really would be to compare different eras. Its more of a science fiction discussion than a lil kid my daddy would beat up your daddy type discussion that people make it into. Not to mention hardly anyone knows about the guys "the greats" beat that weren't other greats or have seen that many of their fights to make such a judgment.

jamesmcdonnell wrote: Ali had no athletisicm! Are you crazy.

ali was not a big heavyweight even in his era, so you may as well be arguing with the wall.
i never said what you are arguing with. i specifically said "the big guys from".

greenmonkey wrote:ok this guy Kaaspeer is a Wlad fanboy and hates Wilder....Wilder would crush Rock with ease.. I cant wait to Wlad has to face Wilder and Wilder lands that right on that soft chin of Wlad

actually kaaspeer has acused wlad of ducking wilder and said that wilder has a good Chance of KOing wlad:

"31 wins, 31 by KO, most in the first round. Yeah, his first 30 opponents were horrible, but you really can't call Malik Scott a bad boxer, and Wilder destroyed him in the first round. If, and I say if, Wilder beats Stiverne by a 1st or 2nd round KO... And considering that Wladimir is getting old... Could we soon see Wilder as the number 1 heavyweight in the world as he gets used to quickly disposing of opponents on a higher level?

Wladimir got a fragile jaw and at this age and considering Wilder's reach and speed, I think there is a chance of Wladimir getting knocked out."

Imagine how good a fight this would be. Two hard-hitting opponents, both facing their first good opponent. One is bigger, one has fought at a slightly higher level.

Kaaspeer wrote:Imagine how good a fight this would be. Two hard-hitting opponents, both facing their first good opponent. One is bigger, one has fought at a slightly higher level.

Wait a minute...please PLEASE tell me you aren't saying this in regards to Marciano

punchoutsb wrote:

Kaaspeer wrote:Imagine how good a fight this would be. Two hard-hitting opponents, both facing their first good opponent. One is bigger, one has fought at a slightly higher level.

Wait a minute...please PLEASE tell me you aren't saying this in regards to Marciano

I'm sorry, but Marciano's wins against shot Joe Louis and shot Ezzard Charles means as equally little to me as Calzaghe's win against shot RJJ.

Kaaspeer wrote:

punchoutsb wrote:

Kaaspeer wrote:Imagine how good a fight this would be. Two hard-hitting opponents, both facing their first good opponent. One is bigger, one has fought at a slightly higher level.

Wait a minute...please PLEASE tell me you aren't saying this in regards to Marciano

I'm sorry, but Marciano's wins against shot Joe Louis and shot Ezzard Charles means as equally little to me as Calzaghe's win against shot RJJ.

Yes for my money Marciano was a tough, well conditioned fighter - perhaps even slightly ahead of his time when it came to hard training - who greatly benefitted from fighting ageing fighters on the downhill spiral. He had to deal with the veterans rather than young, dangerous up and comers. A right place, right time scenario.

Kaaspeer wrote:

punchoutsb wrote:

Kaaspeer wrote:Imagine how good a fight this would be. Two hard-hitting opponents, both facing their first good opponent. One is bigger, one has fought at a slightly higher level.

Wait a minute...please PLEASE tell me you aren't saying this in regards to Marciano

I'm sorry, but Marciano's wins against shot Joe Louis and shot Ezzard Charles means as equally little to me as Calzaghe's win against shot RJJ.

To you, yes. But you're not very bright it seems so there's that...

So you rank Louis, Walcott, Charles the same as Scott, Liakhovich, and Firtha???

Wilder KO 2.

People seem very divided on this fight. I wish it could have happened, but we got no time machines :(