Rocky Marciano chops down either Klitschko.cfang wrote: ↑30 Oct 2020, 18:12 He kinda is and isn't. People overate him due to his legendary image and the 49-0. If ali had retired in 68 hed be like 29-0 with more defences and better opponents.
Hes underated as looking at the facts there's so many things against him but the big thing is people underate his style. He was no mindless slugger
Putting him in the ring with 250lb modern heavys is frankly unfair. The rocky of 1952 couldn't beat lennox lewis or the k's. Just soooo much smaller. However if he lived in their era he may be either a cut s middle or a bulked up 210 lb heavy. The later is a different proposition but we never saw that version so can't rank.
Is Rocky Marciano overrated?
Re: Is Rocky Marciano overrated?
Re: Is Rocky Marciano overrated?
As many have said, some overrate him based on 49-0, some underrate him because of the fighters he faced.
Arguably, his career was well managed so that he avoided the "great names" until near the end of his career when he was in his prime, and his "great" opponents were fading. Louis was 37 and had come out of retirement; Moore was just short of his 39th birthday; Walcott was 38 and 39 for their two fights.
However, to my knowledge, he never actually "ducked" anyone, and it's not his fault that the opposition was limited, you can only compete against the guys who around at the same time as you.
Although he wasn't the most skilled or naturally talented of fighters, he was tough, durable, and had the heart of a lion. The fact is, he's one of only 10 men to retire, as a World Champ, with a perfect record of winning every fight (11 if you count the WBU), and to my mind that's a pretty impressive stat.
Arguably, his career was well managed so that he avoided the "great names" until near the end of his career when he was in his prime, and his "great" opponents were fading. Louis was 37 and had come out of retirement; Moore was just short of his 39th birthday; Walcott was 38 and 39 for their two fights.
However, to my knowledge, he never actually "ducked" anyone, and it's not his fault that the opposition was limited, you can only compete against the guys who around at the same time as you.
Although he wasn't the most skilled or naturally talented of fighters, he was tough, durable, and had the heart of a lion. The fact is, he's one of only 10 men to retire, as a World Champ, with a perfect record of winning every fight (11 if you count the WBU), and to my mind that's a pretty impressive stat.
Re: Is Rocky Marciano overrated?
Vitali could have survived til the bell.Duran1970 wrote: ↑30 Oct 2020, 20:42Rocky Marciano chops down either Klitschko.cfang wrote: ↑30 Oct 2020, 18:12 He kinda is and isn't. People overate him due to his legendary image and the 49-0. If ali had retired in 68 hed be like 29-0 with more defences and better opponents.
Hes underated as looking at the facts there's so many things against him but the big thing is people underate his style. He was no mindless slugger
Putting him in the ring with 250lb modern heavys is frankly unfair. The rocky of 1952 couldn't beat lennox lewis or the k's. Just soooo much smaller. However if he lived in their era he may be either a cut s middle or a bulked up 210 lb heavy. The later is a different proposition but we never saw that version so can't rank.
-
Controversial
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 9152
- Joined: 13 Jul 2002, 18:29
Re: Is Rocky Marciano overrated?
You can only judge someone on their era. Marciano was upcoming when guys like Charles and Walcott were on the slide, you can only beat who is in front of you. But people blur the lines and then start comparing him to HWs from other eras which is unfair. Considering his lack of size and natural ability he done remarkably well against guys on paper you would think would still have easily beaten him.