BoxRec

Posted: **28 Jun 2006, 10:53**

Decagon wrote:So, you've seen about five or six minutes of Liston in his prime, outside of the Ali fights? Check out some of his other stuff, and get back to me.

And we don’t want to evaluate any ATG’s on just a few minutes of film, do we? 8)

Posted: **28 Jun 2006, 13:19**

Okies....watched some of Liston's fights from off two tapes:

1.) HBO's GREATEST PUNCHERS: THE HEAVYWEIGHTS

2.) SONNY LISTON: LIFE AND DEATH OF A CHAMPION

As well as some downloads off the computer.

I seen his fights with Machen and Williams, and in all honesty, I am still not impressed. Williams for one was an untested Heavyweight, though he had power and was denied shots, was better than some think---but the styles were too similar, and Sonny had the edge in experience against better opposition and edge in power---so was a gimme he'd win neways.

The Machen fight, was kinda a surprise---BUT---Machen lost to even mediocre skilled Ingemar Johansson by KO---and Machen, though shut out of title contention for years---never really was able to handle the real punchers. Had great skill and was tough in his own right---but he couldn't take real power.

His record shows that---so two wins over an untested Heavyweight, who never lived up to his potential---and a Heavyweight who never got the chance, with a questionable chin against real hitters. Out of Liston's whole record I would say the Machen and Valdes fights were his best wins...period, outside of Patterson.

He just doesn't impress me none. Had one helluva jab yes, had great power, yes. An ATG? Not in my eyes, not even close.

Posted: **28 Jun 2006, 13:29**

IrishRufusMurphy wrote:Okies, we are going to suppose on a few things:

#1- A prime Marciano vs A prime Liston

#2- As was everyone's opinion, along with my own, that Marciano would have beaten every other Heavyweight listed other than Liston---let's figure Liston's record compared to Marciano's 49-0 record with the "wins" we believed he would have won if he had not retired---and see how they would have faired in a boxing match circa 1960.

#3- What puzzles me is how all of you said that Marciano would have beaten Patterson, the division's second fastest HW, and Johansson, RING magazines #99 GREATEST PUNCHER who beat such men as Cooper, Machen, Patterson, London with relative ease. But when he would face Liston, who did hit hard but outside of that jab had no skills, he would lose?

***********************************************************

#1 Being Analyzed

A prime Rocky Marciano was when he beaten Ezzard Charles for the second time in 1954 to the time he destroyed Archie Moore in his last title defense in 1955. Though you can say that is an awfully short "prime" span, you have to figure also, before he even got skilled at bobbing and weaving Marciano blew away Savold, Louis, Matthews---all ranked contenders and was death in rematches---it wasn't his punching power that beat Charles the first time, as it went the distance---it was everything else he had. Though maybe it was 1953 that he was in his prime as it just took one punch to put Jersey Joe Walcott into retirement.

Or maybe you could even take Joe Louis' word for it when Marciano blew him out in 1951 that "This kid can beat anybody out there." And mind you Louis was ranked #1 at the time.

Liston's peak was from about 1958 to 1963, as he beaten such men as Machen, Williams, Valdes, Folley, Westphal, Harris and of course Patterson. Can these men, in all seriousness, beat the men Marciano did? Could Harris have beaten LaStarza? Could Folley have beaten Charles? Could Westphal have beaten Louis? Could Valdes have beaten Walcott? Etc etc.

Liston was all about intimidation, and most of his opponents were scared before the bell even rang. Marciano was never scared of his opponents, that's round one won right there. Liston used that jab to set up his bag right hand---Marciano fought from a crouch and that pisses off even the most skilled boxers as it is hard to land a solid shot---round two won again for Marciano. Liston was a plodder, even in his best, he stalked his opponents and was slow---Marciano was on top of his opponent from round one, and unlike Liston waiting for the big shot---Marciano threw punches in bunches and in his prime hit harder than Liston---round four won there again for Marciano. Liston when he faced Ali was supposed to have only trained as if the championship bout was a four rounder, Liston believed he didn't need to train too hard to win---Marciano on the other hand was the most conditioned champion in history---Marciano would of had the stamina and endurance, as to where Liston wouldnt.

Need I really explain farther? Liston couldn't handle the pressure, and that's what Marciano was all about. Marciano would win by KO in the mid to late rounds.

**********************************************************

#2 Being Analyzed

Let's say Marciano had beaten all those men I listed before, including Patterson and Johansson. In the end, irregardless if you think Marciano was on the down-side, the "Rock" would have beaten far more skilled and better fighters than what Liston had---experience plus an indominable will and toughness and phenomenal conditioning, not to mention a higher KO rate than even George Foreman's overall career....

Let's take a step back...if Marciano continued on, and as we all agreed, he would beat everybody listed---with Liston being the question mark. Marciano's record would be 58-0 (52)---roughly a KO percentage of nearly 96%, rather than his overall "true" KO percentage of 88% in his 49 fights that he did have.

Liston's KO percentage from his pro debut to 1963 was around 80%.

Considering all of the factors, and let's even say that Marciano's abilities had slowed down a bit due to his age---and judging how George Foreman's KO percentage dropped to 87% from 98% in his comeback---you have to figure if Marciano's abilities did slow down in the 4yrs from 1956 to 1960 (supposed date that if him and Liston did meet up), Marciano would still have a KO percentage above 90%. **

** Considering Foreman lost a little over 10% after 10yrs inactivity in his KO prowess, figuring if Marciano's abilities did go on the downside in four years---he would not even have lost 5% of his power.

It would be a competitive fight, more than the two men facing off in their primes, but in the end---let's face it Marciano is all aces on the probabilities, Liston would more than likely lose in the later rounds, and by KO.

***********************************************************

#3 Being Analyzed-

If you all could say that Marciano could beat the 2nd fastest Heavyweight in Floyd Patterson, in my opinion who had faster hands than even Ali, just not foot speed---and could take down Johansson, who was possibly just as powerful a fighter as Liston, being 22-0 with 14 KO's (over 70%) when he defeated Patterson for the title, minus the "skills" of Liston---how could you possibly say with a straight face that Marciano couldn't beat Liston?

Is it because Patterson had a questionable chin? You have to figure everytime Patterson got knocked down in most of his fights, he got up to WIN his fights---unlike Liston who would just cave in if he hit the canvas. Is it because Patterson didn't have power? Liston had power, but that didn't help him beat Ali when there was so much pressure on Liston from round one, as Marciano would be.

Is it because Johansson never lived up to his hype? After he lost the title he did considerably well beating Brian London and winning the Euro title, hell even before Patterson he beaten Cooper and Machen, the latter whom Patterson ducked for years, by KO! No the man didn't have ability in skills, but he was tough and he had awesome power.

I can say the same about Liston. The man never lived up to the hype. His greatest win was over a man with an iffy chin (Patterson). He was a plodder. Used intimidation to win. Was slow---don't believe me, ask Larry Merchant who once did an interview with one of Liston's trainers, who said they had to pay the sparring partners to make Liston look good!

The man was more "myth" and rumors than actual ability, people heard of his past and hyped him up to be this monster of a man---hell even Muhammad Ali once commented how he was afraid that Liston was such a "giant" of a man---but when he got face to face with Liston, that the man was much shorter than he was. You see Liston was more about psychology and playing a bad ass than really being one.

There's no question in my mind that even the Heavyweights of today would probably school Liston---Klitschko's all of em, would make Liston look like a fool, that is if none of them bought into his hype. It's like how Buster Douglas broke Tyson's "invincibility"---and if you really think about it, was Tyson really as great as he was? Or did he just come in the right time, when there was nothing but a bunch of poofs?

That's where I class Liston. Sure he had a punch, no question, but I know of alot of fighters who did---but that didn't make them great.

Any thoughts? I would be glad to debate this.

Wow. Where to begin.
You selectively pick out 3 of Liston's opponents and say they would have lost 3 of Marciano's.(Charles would have beaten Folley, LaStarza would beat Harris, Louis would beat Westphal)
However, you could just as easily pick 3 of Listons opponents and do the same thing. For example, Patterson would beat La Starza, Williams would beat Cockell, and Machen would beat Buonvino.

Liston would have trouble landing a solid shot against Marciano? Are you serious? Marciano wasn't a difficult guy to hit. This would not be a problem for Liston. On the other hand Marciano may have a lot of trouble getting to Liston since Liston would have a 17 inch reach advantage and a very good jab.

The Knockout % stats listed are extremely misleading. Because George Foreman's % was only 10% lower you think Marciano's power wouldn't decline ? Foreman's opponents in his 2nd career were mostly tomato cans. He wasn't nearly the fighter that he was in his earlier career. And Marciano wouldn't be nearly the same fighter at the age of 37 as he was when he was 32.
As for Liston's 80% being low, well you yourself said his prime was 1959-1963. In that period he knocked out 12 of 13 opponents for 93%.

It was mentioned that since we predicted that Patterson and Johannson would lose to Marciano that it doesn't make since that Liston would beat Marciano. Well, I (and many others I'm sure) feel that Marciano would have had a lot of trouble with Patterson and Johannson in the late 1950's and that Liston was much better than Patterson and Johannson. It logically follows that we would think that Liston would probably crush Marciano in 1960.
Liston would have walked through any of the others guys listed from the original that Marciano would have fought.

You say that Liston was slow, well if he was so slow why was he able to catch Patterson so easily on both occasions?

The heavyweights of today would school Liston? :(
Klitschko was specifically mentioned.
That is just ridiculaus. Liston would be head and shoulders above any of today's heavyweights. Klitschko would be lucky to by the 3rd round against Liston.

Liston outside of his jab, had no skills?
That is just silly. He may not have been a great technician, but he knew what he was doing in there.

There are two main flaws with the idea that Marciano would have beaten Liston in 1960.
1. Marciano would have declined much more than you think. With very few exceptions, most fighters decline a considerable amount from the ages of 32 and 37. As others have mentioned fighters of Marciano's style decline even more so.
2. You are severley underrating Liston. He wasn't the best heavyweight of all time, but he would have given anyone except for a prime Ali a tough fight.

As for prime vs prime, that would probably be a great fight. It is certainly arguable that Marciano would pull it out, but it certainly woudn't be a cakewalk.

Posted: **28 Jun 2006, 14:16**

You say that Liston was slow, well if he was so slow why was he able to catch Patterson so easily on both occasions?

Same could be said for Jim Jefferies when he beat Gentleman Jim Corbett, Patterson just made the wrong move into trade shots with Liston too often---besides be reminded that Patterson had an iffy chin neways.

There are two main flaws with the idea that Marciano would have beaten Liston in 1960.
1. Marciano would have declined much more than you think. With very few exceptions, most fighters decline a considerable amount from the ages of 32 and 37. As others have mentioned fighters of Marciano's style decline even more so.
2. You are severley underrating Liston. He wasn't the best heavyweight of all time, but he would have given anyone except for a prime Ali a tough fight.

Yes but most fighters of today are fighting competively into their late 30's against high level competition---alot of the ATG fighters fought against great opposition into their late 30's to early 40's. Some argue that a swarming style would burn someone out in their mid 30's, but Marciano was far more conditioned than the likes of Frazier, Liston and virtually any other Heavyweight champion before or since---which I believe would have carried his abilities into his later years.

As far as Liston giving every Heavyweight champion BUT Ali a hard time is a scoff. Liston would do nothing with Foreman, Dempsey, Louis in their primes. Liston was a plodder, and I would hope after so many years as a fighter that he did pick up some things---his skills were basic, outside of that jab---and he knew how to pick shots---but outside of that what did he have?

Liston would have trouble landing a solid shot against Marciano? Are you serious? Marciano wasn't a difficult guy to hit. This would not be a problem for Liston. On the other hand Marciano may have a lot of trouble getting to Liston since Liston would have a 17 inch reach advantage and a very good jab.

Watch Marciano's fights carefully...when guys were throwing punches at him, it sometimes looked that he was being hit solidly---but in fact most of those shots barely hit the top of his head. Ask Ali for their computer fight, when at 46, he said the Rock was alot harder to hit with a jab than he looked. Though that was merely an exhibition---that truly says something, considering the long bout of inactivity, and Ali was undefeated as champion and had beat Liston---and even commented that as powerful a man the Rock was at 46 he could hardly imagine what it must have been like to have fought the man in his prime.

Yes I do admit that a 1960 Marciano vs Liston of 1960, would be a hard match for the Rock---and be his most brutal ever---but conditioning, experience, a hard style, always pressuring his opponents, his toughness, etc, even at an advanced age---I could see Marciano winning a decision or a late round stoppage, a Liston upset is not entirely unthinkable.

Posted: **28 Jun 2006, 14:25**

If anything at all....let's do this ok?

THis prolly wouldn't solve anything or change anybody's minds whatsoever...BUT...I think BoxRec.com has a "computer" fight thing, I seen advertised once.

Why not have these matches:

1.) Marciano vs Liston (overall careers)

2.) Marciano (advanced age/inactivity) vs Liston

Have it a best 4 out of 5...whoever wins this "computer fight" which would be more advanced than Murray Woroner's NCR14 computer, then we could "settle" or debate more on the subject.

Posted: **28 Jun 2006, 17:05**

marciano would have been so shot by 1960 at age 37 he wouldnt be able to beat any top contenders let alone a sonny liston. marciano was already declining in 1955. by 1956, marciano wasnt training with the same intensity anymore, he was aging, and swarmers never last that long anyway.

trust me, a 37 year old SHOT marciano would have had absolute no chance against liston in 1960. prime for prime different story but argueing marciano could between liston in 1960 at age 37 is ridiculous

i feel marciano was at his peak in 51-52 because he had more one punch power than in mid 1950s where goldman took that away by changing marcianos style. marciano was younger too

Posted: **28 Jun 2006, 23:25**

Have to give Brocktonblockbuster49 some credit here. He is being realistic about his favorite fighter. It's not always easy to block out our likes and dislikes toward a fighter when we are judging them.

Posted: **29 Jun 2006, 02:24**

I have a two questions:

1. Anyone think that Marciano would steamroll pass Patterson?

2. Even though he wasn't textbook, how can you not like Marciano? He had heart, power, an impressive chin, and alot of intangibles.

Posted: **29 Jun 2006, 08:40**

Well Gsn, Id say he is very well liked over here in the Boxers of the past side of town.
Someone brought up the idea of a Marciano sticky a few months ago.
Not a bad idea .

Posted: **29 Jun 2006, 10:23**

I dont think he would steam roll Patterson like Liston did but I think he would KO him in the middle rounds.

Posted: **29 Jun 2006, 21:19**

patterson does not match up well vs rocky. prime marciano knocks patterson out early cause patterson would try to brawl with him and thats suicide vs rocky. patterson doesnt have the chin to take rockys punches and isnt strong enough to handle rockys pressure

patterson vs a 1956 marciano? much better fight since marciano would be on the downcline and pattersons speed would give him major problems. i still see this version of rocky stopping patterson mid-late rounds

Posted: **01 Jul 2006, 00:45**

Everybody says Liston would have been too powerful and way too strong for Marciano...well here is some statistics:

Marciano's Biggest Opponents

Johnny Shkor- 6'5" 225lbs
Pat Connolly- 6'5" 213lbs
Jerry Jackson- 254lbs
Bill Wilson- 6'2" 229lbs

Marciano bombed out alot of these men with the greatest of ease.

People always say how Marciano couldn never handle a "real" opponent, the only thing I can possibly come up with is, even in his early professional career with no professional guidance that he beat the following:

Eddie Ross- 26-0 (23). Marciano was only 4-0, knocking out Ross in the 1st.
Bobby Quinn- 15-1 (14). Marciano was only 3-0, he managed to knock out Quinn in the 3rd.

This leads me to believe, that even at his worst, Marciano could handle himself very well against a far more capable opponent---as in his younger years proved that he could as well.

Maybe what really puts Marciano in my mind as boxing's greatest Heavyweight champion---is this small quote from Joe Louis, who for many years I considered to be the number one man:

"I had a bad weakness I kept hid throughout my career. I didn't like to be crowded, and Marciano always crowded his opponents. That's why I say I could NEVER have beaten him."

That quote is eerily similar to champion Jefferies, after his loss to Jack Johnson, that he could never have beaten Johnson, let alone reached him, in a thousand years.

I could go on and on about Marciano, but nothing would really ever change my mind, no matter how many things people could throw at me, in my mind Marciano could be beaten to a pulp for 12, 13, 14 rounds...and it would only take one single punch, to change it all around.

He had an indominable will, and even if he was passed his best, he would go full tilt and train harder than even his own opponent, irregardless if that was a prime Liston or Ali---and would have gave them a run for their money, and most definately would have kept moving forward and stay on top of his man---until either he saw an opening to land that one punch he needed, or they themselves gave in.

As Sonny Liston said:

"This man was one of the greatest champions ever. He refused to accept defeat. And nobody beat him."

Posted: **01 Jul 2006, 08:23**

I dont think that comparing the sizes of those four fighters mentioned by Rufus Murphy has much to do with Marciano beating Liston.
In fact I would bet that a prime Liston could ko all four of those guys in the same night. Im not kidding. One after the other.
Marciano was an all time great and a credit to boxing.
However , he could be hit, he could be cut, and he could be knocked down.
No need to dig through the archives for evidence of this. Its true of most every fighter. Sonnys style was not good for Rocky. I have Liston stopping him.

Posted: **01 Jul 2006, 11:12**

expug wrote:...Marciano was an all time great and a credit to boxing.
However , he could be hit, he could be cut, and he could be knocked down.

I think this is true of just about any fighter -- certainly Liston who was dropped by journeyman LH Marty Marshal. Not sure what point you are trying to make with this statement.

Posted: **01 Jul 2006, 13:33**

the best comparison of marcianos opponents to make to liston is old joe louis, since louis was around the same size as liston 6'2 214lb, and had a excellent jab.

look irusmurhpy, say what u want about prime for prime. but no way does a 1960 SHOT MARCIANO beat a peak sonny liston.

marciano was past his prime by the time he retired in 1956,

Posted: **01 Jul 2006, 13:53**

The Great John L wrote:
expug wrote:...Marciano was an all time great and a credit to boxing.
However , he could be hit, he could be cut, and he could be knocked down.
I think this is true of just about any fighter -- certainly Liston who was dropped by journeyman LH Marty Marshal. Not sure what point you are trying to make with this statement.

That hes not unbeatable .And I said just what you said two sentences later.That its true of any fighter.
Including Rocky.

Posted: **01 Jul 2006, 21:21**

give me some idea as to HOW...Marciano was passed his prime when he retired?

give me all ur evidence

Posted: **01 Jul 2006, 22:02**

I don't believe in the whole thing of "the stink of the gym". Or that his back was injured. Or anything at all relating to his physical shape or mental well being.

All those close to Marciano said, he only wanted to retire because of Al Weil and his money grubbing ways---mind you, even if Rocky was to change managers, he would have lost all his money to Weil. As Weil back then had great control in the IBC, that at one time was the biggest and most powerful organization in boxing at that time.

Lack of opponents I disagree with as well, alot of those fighters were really great and if they were in the division today would probably become champions or again be leading contenders.

As Marciano once said, in an article to Collier's magazine (1955):

"But don't you think somebody might lick you?" I get asked. "Don't you ever worry about it?" I don't want to seem like I'm bragging, but I don't think anybody in the world can lick me. I've never been defeated in 47 fights as a pro, and right now I hope maybe to hold the title, four or five more years and retire undefeated (be around 1960). At the same time, once in a while, maybe seven or eight times when I'm building up to a fight, the thought comes to me on the road or while I'm resting: "Suppose this guy licks me? What will happen to my plans?"
That's as far as it gets. I never believe it can happen, really. It's just one of those things that come to your mind.

So there you go...ur theory is blown that Marciano was tired of the gym "stink". He planned in his mind to reign til 1960.

Posted: **01 Jul 2006, 22:11**

irusmurphy sorry but ur off on marciano. he was aging and slowing down by the time he retired in 1956. just check out the don cockell fight, rocky really shows signs of aging in that fight. even in the moore fight in one of rockys best preformances, he looks slightly slower(handspeed), hes a lot more winded, and he doesnt have the one punch power he used to back in 51-52 cause of change of style. though i will say marciano put on quite an impressive defensive preformance vs moore. marciano showed in the cockell fight signs of decline but he got himself in gear for one last great preformance against moore.

fact is rocky was not training for his fights in 1955 like he used too. he was totally losing one of his biggest assets, dedication and work ethic.

no way rocky makes it to 1960, rocky was a swarmer in the grind of frazier and dempsey. both frazier and dempsey were past there prime before age 30 and both retired at age 32. marciano would have really started to decline, especially since he wasnt training with same intesnity anymore and he was getting up there in age.

marciano probably would have had 1-2 good fights left in him in 1956, enough to beat floyd patterson and then another contender but after that he would really be declining and be ripe for the taking

Posted: **01 Jul 2006, 22:16**

my fathers opinion is marcianos peak was 1951 joe louis fight, interesting opinion but he stands by it.

he believes marciano was a better fighter before goldman changed up his style taking away some of marcianos one punch power(which is why in marcianos mid 50s fights u see a lot more grinding his guy down than his 1-2 punch KOs in the early 1950s)

Posted: **01 Jul 2006, 22:19**

Brockton, While your here, I dont mean to change the subject but how are things at Petronnelis? gimme an update please.

Posted: **01 Jul 2006, 22:20**

just remember marciano was almost 33 when he retired, that is not the prime age for a swarmer style like a marciano, they never last that long

swarmers fight with a lot more wear and tear every fight and really drain themselves out(as well as there opponents) which is why they dont last that long.

Posted: **01 Jul 2006, 22:43**

#1- Wasn't Don Cockell really a set up, before Rocky faced another more experienced fighter? Marciano I believe prolly didn't train as hard for Cockell than he would for let's say a Nino Valdes or a Charles. That only makes sense.

#2- How can you really say he was on the decline with Moore? Moore after his loss to Marciano won another 49 fights, holding on to his title for almost another decade. Moore was one of the best fighters of any weight, and if Marciano (in my opinion) could win the last four of that 9 round fight relatively easy against a man like Moore, he wasn't washed up. As far as him being winded, you have to figure, Marciano didn't want to face Moore originally, Moore talked himself into that fight---so like with Don Cockell, I think Marciano only trained hard enough to where he believed he could win.

#3- Yes alot of swarmers burn out in their 30's. But at the same time, look at the records of fighters from the old bare-knuckle/early gloved days, fighting 20-30-45 round fights or more. Those men fought in a similar style back then, and they fought a helluva lot more times, over a longer period of time, than most of the champions in the last 50 years and more. Marciano trained like an old-bare knuckle boxer, to get to that fine condition, so I don't believe he would have burned out as fast as such fighters like Frazier---nobody in this century really has had a training regimen like Marciano, he was hard to tire.

#4- Louis said he never could have beaten him, even at his best, yet people rate Joe Louis to be the greatest of all time.

#5- Who out there really could have beaten Marciano, irregardless if he went on or not? Not until Liston I don't imagine could have really stood a definate chance with the Rock.

#6- You say Charlie Goldman ruined Rocky's one punch abilities. If that is the case---then ask Roland LaStarza who simply said of their second fight, whom I believe Goldman trained Rocky for that fight:

"In defense. It was harder to get at him...Rocky fools you. He doesn't take as much punishment as it seems. He looks easy to hit inside, but he isn't."

If anything Charlie Goldman did Rocky a better service, as in their first fight, was extremely close call for Rocky---and in the rematch, was a life and death struggle for LaStarza. Joe Louis said the same thing, as had Moore and Walcott and even Muhammad Ali, as he commented on how hard it was to land a jab on even a 46 year old Marciano.

So the idea of changing his style was declining his abilities is bullshit, if anything it enhanched his abilities and helped him to further protect himself.

**********************************************************

For being his #1 fan, and for being your favorite fighter, to me it sounds like you are trying to find an excuse to take away Marciano's place among the top two greatest Heavyweights that ever lived. You do the man a serious discredit to his abilities.

Mind you NONE of those other swarmers never had the training abilities and dedication as Marciano---so don't class Marciano with Frazier or Dempsey, as even Dempsey says that Marciano was greater than him, and that Frazier said that Marciano was only second to Louis---I would rather take the word of the men who fought him, and from the man himself, than from any other source.

On the decline? Didn't care any more? HOW DARE YOU.

Posted: **01 Jul 2006, 22:51**

ur telling me i am trying to discredit marciano? i been on this forum for over a year and if any poster here believes i try to discredit marciano, please speak up. in fact, the posters here will tell u its the exact opposite!

i never said goldman hurt marciano in fact he was a huge asset to marcianos development. i just think when goldman tightened up marcianos stance and shortened his punches in 1954 enabling him to have better defense, that he took some of marcianos one punch power away(in fact goldman admitted this himself in "rock of his times") .

Posted: **01 Jul 2006, 22:52**

expug wrote:Brockton, While your here, I dont mean to change the subject but how are things at Petronnelis? gimme an update please.

actually back in early june i moved to texas for the summer with my best friend, however unfortunetly just 2 days ago i was kicked out by his doushebag mother and sent back to boston(where i am right now).

now im looking forward to returning to petronellis gym next week

BoxRec

Rocky Marciano: What If?