BoxRec

Posted: **26 Sep 2009, 18:45**

yancey wrote: No, I'll do poetry this time....

Roses are red,

Violets are blue,

Sonny kicks Rocky's

Ass in two.

D

Ah, nice comeback. Utter nonsensical babbling when presented with facts.

Let me interject this:

Rocky's right was better than Leotis Martin

If you can't win an argument then don't be startin'.

Posted: **26 Sep 2009, 18:51**

Goodnight, Irene wrote:Marciano, for my liking, has only a fairly slim chance against Liston --- the shot is there, though, & who better to expose long-odds against them than perhaps the toughest nut of them all? Still, I do favour Liston fairly heavily. His long, bruising jab would damage Marciano something awful, irrespective of who you believe would win.

On the other hand, I give Marciano virtually no shot against the peak Louis. I mean, when you go down the list of attributes, & one guy has the advantage in almost every department, you're gonna tell me you'll turn around & pick the other guy!?

Height, weight, reach, handspeed, combinations, offensive arsenal, punch-variety, punching accuracy, tactical adaptability, ring generalship, finishing prowess --- Joe, Joe, & more Joe.

About the only edges I can honestly find in Marciano's favour (off the top of my head) were chin, heart, raw power, endurance. Of those, his lead over Louis in power, heart, & endurance are not by a whole lot. That's three of the four where the disparity is not great. Not too many areas, on the other hand, where Louis has the advantage, & it's not by much.

Still, I think we should bear in mind the essential point PunchOutSB was making --- Marciano was a great, great champion, &, with that, I can heartily agree. A fight with Holyfield would've been splendid viewing.

Rocky was a great champion, but some of the things he did in the ring disturbed me. See Marciano-Cockell.

I would give him practically no shot against prime Sonny Liston and I agree with what you say about prime Louis against Marciano.

Posted: **26 Sep 2009, 18:53**

Hey PunchOutSB,

How do see Rocky doing against prime George Foreman?

Posted: **26 Sep 2009, 18:59**

yancey wrote:Hey PunchOut,

How do see Rocky doing against prime George Foreman?

Rocky would have been too small for Big George, but it would have been a heck of a fight. If Rocky could take George's punch there would be the very real chance of Rocky wearing Big George down, so take it for what its worth. The thing with heavyweights is this, they have gotten so much bigger over time that head to head guys like Lewis would probably beat them all, though his "greatness" is less.

Guys like Dempsey, Rocky, Corbett, even a bigger old timer like Johnson would be too small for the bigger more modern heavyweights, though they would be rated higher on an all time list. Thats why a lot of all time lists are made keeping these things in mind, rather than based on mythical head to head matchups.

Posted: **26 Sep 2009, 19:02**

Sorry for the double post, but for the record I rate Rocky as one of the very best heavyweights of all time. He almost always gave away physical advantages in his fights, but despite this he never tasted defeat. Even with the Foreman comments above, I would never count Rocky out of any match, against any other heavyweight because he possesed the ULTIMATE equalizer: the heart of a true champion and the drive and desire to win of a true legend!

Posted: **26 Sep 2009, 19:17**

Controversial wrote:Its obvious to even a blind aarvark that Holyfield should have retired years ago. So because Qawi and Marciano had similar styles that proves Marciano would beat Holyfield? Ha ha ha genius. I can do the Ali shuffle, doesn't mean Im Muhammed Ali though.

You are criticing Holyfield was BEATING Qawi. A world champion in his 12th fight by beating a decent fighter. I can't see how he can be critized for that?

- More obvious than you and your alt picking imaginary fights with me?

There is no proof that Rocky or Mr. Field could even beat me. This is a forum where boxing discussion is supposed to take place. You getting cyber papercuts over imaginary things you claim I said is a terrible weakness to have. Get your mum to reread all the posts of mine, and she won't be able to find me criticize Mr. Field for fighting or beating Qawi. I understand context and history, however, and you don't.

Nor has anyone bothered to explain when Mr. Field's prime was. We know when Rocky's prime was. At the end of the day, while Mr. Field is a brave warrior, Rocky was a class above and I'm not alone. Need a different skill set and better talent to beat Rocky, and Mr. Field not in that class.

Posted: **26 Sep 2009, 19:59**

punchoutsb wrote:
dempseyfire wrote:A 'prime Louis wouldn't have fared much better?"

Ridiculous comment.
"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." - Joe Louis.

It's called humbleness . . .something lacking in fighters today. Tyson also said he'd have 'no chance' vs a prime Holmes out of respect for Larry but I'm sure in reality he disagrees.

Posted: **26 Sep 2009, 20:15**

dempseyfire wrote:
punchoutsb wrote:
dempseyfire wrote:A 'prime Louis wouldn't have fared much better?"

Ridiculous comment.
"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." - Joe Louis.

It's called humbleness . . .something lacking in fighters today. Tyson also said he'd have 'no chance' vs a prime Holmes out of respect for Larry but I'm sure in reality he disagrees.

I knew someone would bring up the humbleness aspect. Taking this in context with the other feelings of Louis, I believe he meant it. He and Rocky both had a gret deal of respect for each other. I'm sure Rocky would still be speaking of Louis' greatness were he still alive. They were both class acts. I just feel that Rocky would have won if they had both met in their primes.

Posted: **26 Sep 2009, 20:29**

dempseyfire wrote:
punchoutsb wrote:
dempseyfire wrote:A 'prime Louis wouldn't have fared much better?"

Ridiculous comment.
"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." - Joe Louis.

It's called humbleness . . .something lacking in fighters today. Tyson also said he'd have 'no chance' vs a prime Holmes out of respect for Larry but I'm sure in reality he disagrees.

You got it.

Respect, humbleness.....great virtues.

In fact, Frazier said he couldn't beat the Rock. Another case of respect, but in reality '69 Joe would beat down Marciano in a hellacious fight of attrition.

Posted: **26 Sep 2009, 20:39**

yancey wrote:You got it.

Respect, humbleness.....great virtues.

In fact, Frazier said he couldn't beat the Rock. Another case of respect, but in reality Joe would beat down Marciano in around 11.

You pull all these stupid predictions out of nowhere. Rocky was never stopped! How can you predict he would be stopped when he was never even hurt in his career. He spent a total of seven seconds on the canvas in 49 fights. Frazier also was telling the truth when he said he couldn't beat Rocky.

Posted: **26 Sep 2009, 23:09**

In which aspects do you feel Marciano has the advantage over Louis, PunchOut?

Yancey, have to disagree strongly. I go back-&-forth on who would win between Marciano & Frazier (Frazier quicker hands, Marciano more raw power, Marciano cuts, Frazier swells, etc, etc.), but I cannot envision either, "beating the other down." Whoever wins endures terrible punishment to do so, & probably winds up looking no better than their victim.

You truly see Frazier pummeling him?

Posted: **27 Sep 2009, 00:17**

Goodnight, Irene wrote:In which aspects do you feel Marciano has the advantage over Louis, PunchOut?

Both were incredible fighters. I never take anything from Louis, whom I rank as one of the very best to ever enter the ring!

As for advantages: I really believe that Rocky hit harder. Rocky had a better chin. Now Louis chin was very good as well, but he was put on the canvas more than once over the course of his career, as well as being stopped. I won't say Louis had the tendency to go down early, but he was knocked down early in a couple of his fights, by guys who didn't hit half as hard as Rocky did. Louis showed his tremendous heart and dedication by rising to win those matches; but I think Rocky had more heart. Louis had speed, better technique, more well rounded skills. But as any fighter who ever fought Rocky can attest to, skills and technique were thrown out the window when you fought Rocky, because he FORCED you to fight his fight. Louis himself talked about this.

I don't think Rocky has an easy time with Louis; no one would. But I do think Rocky would wear him down and stop him late.

Posted: **27 Sep 2009, 11:58**

BroughtonRulesRefuge wrote:
Controversial wrote:Its obvious to even a blind aarvark that Holyfield should have retired years ago. So because Qawi and Marciano had similar styles that proves Marciano would beat Holyfield? Ha ha ha genius. I can do the Ali shuffle, doesn't mean Im Muhammed Ali though.

You are criticing Holyfield was BEATING Qawi. A world champion in his 12th fight by beating a decent fighter. I can't see how he can be critized for that?
- More obvious than you and your alt picking imaginary fights with me?

There is no proof that Rocky or Mr. Field could even beat me. This is a forum where boxing discussion is supposed to take place. You getting cyber papercuts over imaginary things you claim I said is a terrible weakness to have. Get your mum to reread all the posts of mine, and she won't be able to find me criticize Mr. Field for fighting or beating Qawi. I understand context and history, however, and you don't.

Nor has anyone bothered to explain when Mr. Field's prime was. We know when Rocky's prime was. At the end of the day, while Mr. Field is a brave warrior, Rocky was a class above and I'm not alone. Need a different skill set and better talent to beat Rocky, and Mr. Field not in that class.

I have no clue what you are rambling on about? What does 'your alt picking imaginary fights' mean?

You quite blatantly tried to diminish Holyfields efforts against Qawi by suggesting he could only scrape by with a 15 round SD win against a past it fighter. When reminded that Holyfield was a novice pro with only 11 fights, and had never been past 8 rounds, your response what Holyfield had a glittering amateur career so he wasn't a novice !! Thats the most ridiculous comment I have heard so far.

Here is what you said if you have forgotten.... "Mr. Field only 11-0 against a bloated LH stump on his last legs? Last I checked he was a storied Olympian with a chestful of medals from his 160-14 ama record before he was 11-0, not exactly a blushing virgin, he. Oh, and he never "beat" Qawi, he scored a technical split over him in a fight he almost keeled over in"......If thats not criticising someone I don't know what is?

Holyfield should have retired years ago, after the draw against Lewis (which Holyfield lost). Its hard to pick his prime years because he fought so irregularly. Im not saying Holyfield is the greatest heavyweight ever but he would have been too good for Marciano.

Posted: **27 Sep 2009, 12:24**

Controversial wrote: Holyfield should have retired years ago, after the draw against Lewis (which Holyfield lost). Its hard to pick his prime years because he fought so irregularly. Im not saying Holyfield is the greatest heavyweight ever but he would have been too good for Marciano.

- I'll just let your faint praise damn Mr. Field rather than counter a subject you don't know enough to credibly talk about.

Posted: **27 Sep 2009, 12:27**

BroughtonRulesRefuge wrote:
Controversial wrote: Holyfield should have retired years ago, after the draw against Lewis (which Holyfield lost). Its hard to pick his prime years because he fought so irregularly. Im not saying Holyfield is the greatest heavyweight ever but he would have been too good for Marciano.
- I'll just let your faint praise damn Mr. Field rather than counter a subject you don't know enough to credibly talk about.

Sound to me you can't back your weak argument up and have quit. Never mind. Go back to your 'learn all about boxing in 10 minutes' book. Ta ta.

Posted: **27 Sep 2009, 15:55**

Goodnight, Irene wrote:In which aspects do you feel Marciano has the advantage over Louis, PunchOut?

Yancey, have to disagree strongly. I go back-&-forth on who would win between Marciano & Frazier (Frazier quicker hands, Marciano more raw power, Marciano cuts, Frazier swells, etc, etc.), but I cannot envision either, "beating the other down." Whoever wins endures terrible punishment to do so, & probably winds up looking no better than their victim.

You truly see Frazier pummeling him?

GI,

"beat down" is probably too strong a phrase and too easy to misconstrue in this case. I definitely feel '69-'70 Frazier
wins a hellacious war of attrition with any version of Marciano. Exception being, of course, is if Rocky was to get out of the gate with a great punch like the one of the 13th round of the first Walcott fight. I see a real war for the first three or four rounds (see the 1st round, Quarry-Frazier I) with the bigger, faster, just as relentless and as busy swarmer gaining the upper hand and taking control. Both men get lots of punishment, have no doubts about that, but I see Marciano's face being absolutely hideous (see Chuvalo's face after his dance with Joe) at the end and a stoppage ensuing
somewhere around 10-12. It would be no surprise to see both men down at some point, but I have a lot of confidence that prime Frazier prevails. The Frazier of '69 and '70 does not have to lose to ANY heavyweight up to that point, that is how great I feel he was.

Before someone gets their panties in a bunch, I am NOT putting Quarry and Chuvalo in Marciano's league in the above paragraph. (though I do think both a Quarry-Marciano and Chuvalo-Marciano fight would be damn interesting)

As far as "raw power" goes, I really think Rocky Marciano was in truth much more of an accumulation puncher then one punch knockout guy. That perfect right hand he threw on Walcott was great, but take a look at some of his fights like the Cockell match.

There was a post by someone earlier on this thread asserting that Rocky fought in a weak era and that he would not have been the champ in the '60s and '70s. Rocky was a great champ and fine man, but I agree with the assertion.
(in my book, Ellis cannot be counted as the true HW champ thru lineage)

Posted: **27 Sep 2009, 16:04**

marciano all the way mate would have steamed through holyfield heavyweight or any other weight the rock wouldnt quit like tyson if things werent goin his way got stronger as fight went on couldnt see evan feilds being able to deal with the pressure

Posted: **27 Sep 2009, 17:47**

yancey wrote:
Goodnight, Irene wrote:In which aspects do you feel Marciano has the advantage over Louis, PunchOut?

Yancey, have to disagree strongly. I go back-&-forth on who would win between Marciano & Frazier (Frazier quicker hands, Marciano more raw power, Marciano cuts, Frazier swells, etc, etc.), but I cannot envision either, "beating the other down." Whoever wins endures terrible punishment to do so, & probably winds up looking no better than their victim.

You truly see Frazier pummeling him?
As far as "raw power" goes, I really think Rocky Marciano was in truth much more of an accumulation puncher then one punch knockout guy. That perfect right hand he threw on Walcott was great, but take a look at some of his fights like the Cockell match.

There was a post by someone earlier on this thread asserting that Rocky fought in a weak era and that he would not have been the champ in the '60s and '70s. Rocky was a great champ and fine man, but I agree with the assertion.
(in my book, Ellis cannot be counted as the true HW champ thru lineage)

I agree with you. What made Marciano such a handful was his almost superhuman stamina and punch resistance. Yes he was as strong as an ox but I don't believe he had one punch ko power as much as some people think he did, he mainly wore fighters down. Fighters like Tyson, Shavers, Foreman and even Bruno hit harder on a single punch basis.

Marciano's wins over Charles, Moore and Cockell were pure beat downs, punch after punch after punch. Yes he one punched Walcott twice however it must be remembered that Walcott had been ko'ed several times in his career.

Marciano's high tally of ko's were built up against some very poor opposition. The times in his career when he did fight world class opposition he was more often than not taken the distance or stopped them mid to late rounds.

Posted: **27 Sep 2009, 18:46**

"GI,

"beat down" is probably too strong a phrase and too easy to misconstrue in this case. I definitely feel '69-'70 Frazier
wins a hellacious war of attrition with any version of Marciano. Exception being, of course, is if Rocky was to get out of the gate with a great punch like the one of the 13th round of the first Walcott fight. I see a real war for the first three or four rounds (see the 1st round, Quarry-Frazier I) with the bigger, faster, just as relentless and as busy swarmer gaining the upper hand and taking control. Both men get lots of punishment, have no doubts about that, but I see Marciano's face being absolutely hideous (see Chuvalo's face after his dance with Joe) at the end and a stoppage ensuing
somewhere around 10-12. It would be no surprise to see both men down at some point, but I have a lot of confidence that prime Frazier prevails. The Frazier of '69 and '70 does not have to lose to ANY heavyweight up to that point, that is how great I feel he was.

Before someone gets their panties in a bunch, I am NOT putting Quarry and Chuvalo in Marciano's league in the above paragraph. (though I do think both a Quarry-Marciano and Chuvalo-Marciano fight would be damn interesting)

As far as "raw power" goes, I really think Rocky Marciano was in truth much more of an accumulation puncher then one punch knockout guy. That perfect right hand he threw on Walcott was great, but take a look at some of his fights like the Cockell match.

There was a post by someone earlier on this thread asserting that Rocky fought in a weak era and that he would not have been the champ in the '60s and '70s. Rocky was a great champ and fine man, but I agree with the assertion.
(in my book, Ellis cannot be counted as the true HW champ thru lineage)" - Yancey

Thanks for elucidating. I agree heartily about Marciano being a wear-down volume puncher, & I don't class him in Foreman or Liston's league for a solitary shot, but I do rank his raw power above Frazier's. Perhaps not by a whole lot, but above, nevertheless. Of course, Frazier's gloves were quicker.

On the point of Marciano making champion during the golden era, you wouldn't fancy his chances against Spinks? Not against a post-Manila (or even slightly pre-Manila) Ali? What kind of odds would you actually give him against the Frazier of circa-1970, straight-up?

I see a brief reign in the 70's for Marciano, if he comes along at the right time.

Posted: **27 Sep 2009, 19:33**

Goodnight, Irene wrote:"

Thanks for elucidating. I agree heartily about Marciano being a wear-down volume puncher, & I don't class him in Foreman or Liston's league for a solitary shot, but I do rank his raw power above Frazier's. Perhaps not by a whole lot, but above, nevertheless. Of course, Frazier's gloves were quicker.

On the point of Marciano making champion during the golden era, you wouldn't fancy his chances against Spinks? Not against a post-Manila (or even slightly pre-Manila) Ali? What kind of odds would you actually give him against the Frazier of circa-1970, straight-up?

I see a brief reign in the 70's for Marciano, if he comes along at the right time.

I think its very hard to judge Marciano against future fighters due to his size. Whatever anyone says about him he was very small for a heavyweight and to give 2 or 3 stone away against world class fighters like Ali or Foreman is asking a lot. If he bulked up that surely would effect his stamina and he might not be as durable.

Yes of course against a declining Ali he would stand a chance as Ali was never a big puncher so his size wouldn't be so much of an issue. Marciano was a bigger puncher than Frazier with his right hand which would be a big factor in the fight. I could still see Ali cutting him up or outpointing him, but I could also see him giving Ali hell.

Marciano struggled against good boxers. LaStarza, Charles and Walcott gave him fits and by all accounts Lowry did as well.

A fight against Frazier would be boxing heaven. I would tend to sway towards Frazier due to his naturally bigger size and that Marciano was dropped by Walcott and Moore by left hooks. What a fight it would be though.

Posted: **27 Sep 2009, 19:40**

Marciano vs Frazier would be awesome. I lean towards
Frazier. But what an exciting fight.

Dempsey vs Marciano is also and exciting fight in my minds
eye as well.

I think Cooper, Qawi, Chuvalo, Quarry and Toney would also make
for exciting fights against Marciano.

Posted: **27 Sep 2009, 20:51**

Goodnight, Irene wrote:"GI,

"beat down" is probably too strong a phrase and too easy to misconstrue in this case. I definitely feel '69-'70 Frazier
wins a hellacious war of attrition with any version of Marciano. Exception being, of course, is if Rocky was to get out of the gate with a great punch like the one of the 13th round of the first Walcott fight. I see a real war for the first three or four rounds (see the 1st round, Quarry-Frazier I) with the bigger, faster, just as relentless and as busy swarmer gaining the upper hand and taking control. Both men get lots of punishment, have no doubts about that, but I see Marciano's face being absolutely hideous (see Chuvalo's face after his dance with Joe) at the end and a stoppage ensuing
somewhere around 10-12. It would be no surprise to see both men down at some point, but I have a lot of confidence that prime Frazier prevails. The Frazier of '69 and '70 does not have to lose to ANY heavyweight up to that point, that is how great I feel he was.

Before someone gets their panties in a bunch, I am NOT putting Quarry and Chuvalo in Marciano's league in the above paragraph. (though I do think both a Quarry-Marciano and Chuvalo-Marciano fight would be damn interesting)

As far as "raw power" goes, I really think Rocky Marciano was in truth much more of an accumulation puncher then one punch knockout guy. That perfect right hand he threw on Walcott was great, but take a look at some of his fights like the Cockell match.

There was a post by someone earlier on this thread asserting that Rocky fought in a weak era and that he would not have been the champ in the '60s and '70s. Rocky was a great champ and fine man, but I agree with the assertion.
(in my book, Ellis cannot be counted as the true HW champ thru lineage)" - Yancey

Thanks for elucidating. I agree heartily about Marciano being a wear-down volume puncher, & I don't class him in Foreman or Liston's league for a solitary shot, but I do rank his raw power above Frazier's. Perhaps not by a whole lot, but above, nevertheless. Of course, Frazier's gloves were quicker.

On the point of Marciano making champion during the golden era, you wouldn't fancy his chances against Spinks? Not against a post-Manila (or even slightly pre-Manila) Ali? What kind of odds would you actually give him against the Frazier of circa-1970, straight-up?

I see a brief reign in the 70's for Marciano, if he comes along at the right time.

Forgot about Leon Spinks.

Yes, the Rock should certainly be able to handle him. How many fight did Leon actually have before meeting Ali? Something like 9 or 10 as I recall. Wonder whatever happened to Leon?

As far as most of the other champs of the '60s and '70s, surely a prime Rocky would have a better chance if the other guy was past his prime. All a matter of timing, and from that standpoint I guess Rocky would have a small window of opportunity here and there in the '60s and '70s. Haven't thought much about Patterson-Marciano, but on first thought I've got to believe Rocky takes him out.

In thinking about these things, I tend to think what happens prime vs prime. When you think that way, I do not see Rocky being able to prevail against Liston, Ali, Frazier, Foreman or Holmes.

If prime Frazier was matched up against prime Rocky, I would guess that Joe would open as a slight favorite, then the fans that bet with their heart would bring it back to even money, but when fight time approached Joe would become a stronger favorite.

When Ali-Frazier I was announced the fight started out as even money as I recall, then went to 7-5 Joe and on fight night had gone to nearly 2-1 Joe.

Posted: **27 Sep 2009, 22:41**

Yancey...

"Forgot about Leon Spinks. Yes, the Rock should certainly be able to handle him. How many fight did Leon actually have before meeting Ali? Something like 9 or 10 as I recall. Wonder whatever happened to Leon..."

Moved to Cruiser.

"...As far as most of the other champs of the '60s and '70s, surely a prime Rocky would have a better chance if the other guy was past his prime..."

Well, of course. That's true of everyone, though, isn't it? I'm sure a peak Louis' chances would improve if he were facing a post-peak Ali, & vice-versa, yes?

"...All a matter of timing, and from that standpoint I guess Rocky would have a small window of opportunity here and there in the '60s and '70s. Haven't thought much about Patterson-Marciano, but on first thought I've got to believe Rocky takes him out..."

IMO, there is definitely a distinction to be made in his chances of making champ between the 60's & 70's --- namely, they improve quite a bit in the 60's. You had Johansson & Patterson who, between them, open a two-year timespan for Marciano (if, as you say, we take him from his peak direct to the era in question) to crush both, which he likely would. His chances against the ageing Liston who took the title & sat on it wouldn't be great, but they'd be better than against a peak Liston. He might pull it off against this lazier version who lost to Clay. I'd give him a decent shot against the peak Ali because of styles (as I would Frazier), &, post-Ali, you have Ellis, who we agree is easy pickings. Compare that with the 70's, where Marciano's odds lengthen quite a bit, IMO.

"...In thinking about these things, I tend to think what happens prime vs prime. When you think that way, I do not see Rocky being able to prevail against Liston, Ali, Frazier, Foreman or Holmes..."

Of course, we all do. However, the question was whether he would make champ, specifically, in the 70's. Ali wasn't in his prime in the 70's, & didn't become titleist until late-74, which is why the match takes place where it does. The idea was a peak Marciano against the 70's titleists --- at whichever point in their career they were whilst holding the belt.

"...If prime Frazier was matched up against prime Rocky, I would guess that Joe would open as a slight favorite, then the fans that bet with their heart would bring it back to even money, but when fight time approached Joe would become a stronger favorite.

When Ali-Frazier I was announced the fight started out as even money as I recall, then went to 7-5 Joe and on fight night had gone to nearly 2-1 Joe."

Sorry, "odds" was a poor choice of words. To clarify, what I was seeking from you was along the lines of this --- do you think a Frazier victory is 70-30, 55-45, 80-20 likelihood, not actual betting numbers.

Posted: **28 Sep 2009, 08:47**

Thinking in terms of percentages, my gut feeling would put Joe at nearly 80% against Rocky. Put it this way, if that fight had come off, I would have been pretty surprised if Rocky pulled it off against the buzzsaw Frazier was in '69-'70. That Frazier was a beast.

The one exception to this is if Marciano was able to come with a nearly perfect punch early. Otherwise, Frazier prevails in a tremendous war of attrition. Strong possibility that neither man would be quite the same afterwards.

btw, Frazier's raw power gets a little underestimated, imo. Not in the concussive class, but Bob Foster and Doug Jones were pretty impressed.

p.s. Joe's chin also get a little underestimated also, imo. For example, that was a pretty damn good uppercut Ramos hit Frazier with in '68 and Frazier quickly got back on track. I know, Ramos tailed off pretty badly in his career, but that was a good shot from a big man at an oncoming target, which amplifies the effect. Haven't seen the Bonavena-Frazier I fight in a while, but if memory serves one of those knockdowns was from as much push as punch.

Posted: **28 Sep 2009, 18:07**

I think too many people act like Joe didn't throw a punch until the fifth round of fights. It did take him a bit to get his motor running. But taking a few rds to catch up to Muhammad Ali and getting caught early by George Foreman doesn't mean that any puncher can jump on him early.

Marciano was tough as nails, that would be a war, much closer than the drubbing Frazier would give Dempsey. They would both be bloodied, but I think Frazier had faster hands and a better chin. That enables him to stop Rock in 11 or 12.

As for the thread title, Evander would brutalize Marciano.

BoxRec

Evander Holyfield vs Rocky Marciano, primes....

Re: Evander Holyfield vs Rocky Marciano, primes....

Re: Evander Holyfield vs Rocky Marciano, primes....

Re: Evander Holyfield vs Rocky Marciano, primes....

Re: Evander Holyfield vs Rocky Marciano, primes....

Re: Evander Holyfield vs Rocky Marciano, primes....

Re: Evander Holyfield vs Rocky Marciano, primes....

Re: Evander Holyfield vs Rocky Marciano, primes....

Re: Evander Holyfield vs Rocky Marciano, primes....

Re: Evander Holyfield vs Rocky Marciano, primes....

Re: Evander Holyfield vs Rocky Marciano, primes....

Re: Evander Holyfield vs Rocky Marciano, primes....

Re: Evander Holyfield vs Rocky Marciano, primes....

Re: Evander Holyfield vs Rocky Marciano, primes....

Re: Evander Holyfield vs Rocky Marciano, primes....

Re: Evander Holyfield vs Rocky Marciano, primes....

Re: Evander Holyfield vs Rocky Marciano, primes....

Re: Evander Holyfield vs Rocky Marciano, primes....

Re: Evander Holyfield vs Rocky Marciano, primes....

Re: Evander Holyfield vs Rocky Marciano, primes....

Re: Evander Holyfield vs Rocky Marciano, primes....

Re: Evander Holyfield vs Rocky Marciano, primes....

Re: Evander Holyfield vs Rocky Marciano, primes....

Re: Evander Holyfield vs Rocky Marciano, primes....

Re: Evander Holyfield vs Rocky Marciano, primes....

Re: Evander Holyfield vs Rocky Marciano, primes....