Posted: 24 Oct 2005, 20:54
um kikibalt i havent talked abotu braddock this whole fight and no ive only seen just abotu every big fight louis ever had.
Actually I was 100% correct in all the facts I listed. The only thing that would be "inaccurate" would be my opinion since it differs than yours. Facts are facts, opinions are opinions. The fact of the matter is we could debate how boxers of different eras would face off against each other to no end and no matter what anyone says, the conclusion will always be an opinion. The point is to have an intellectual conversation and put out interesting information regarding the boxers which might show how they would match up. If you disagree, I have no problem with that. Just state the facts relevant to your opinion instead of saying something like, "You're wrong and stupid; I'm right and smart." It is very easy to separate the facts I list from the opinions I share. I never say that what I think is going to be 100% right all the time. No one is and no one can be. The reason there is a forum is so people can debate these issues, not so everyone can agree that "The Rock" or whoever was the next messiah.BrocktonBlockbuster49 wrote:
did u guys read that post??? he was completey innacurate in most of his evidence and he even went as far to say rocky wouldnt stand a chance against holmes competition.
am i the only one here that defends marciano when people make post like these??? i mean i know if someone did this to johnson, or holmes everyone would be all over this poster.
i am sick of defending him time and time again, some people like this poster will never comprehend what i say so why bother???
Who said Rocky had no defense? I didn't.BrocktonBlockbuster49 wrote:i think its funny when unintelligent posters say rocky had no defense, because they saw the rocky movies and think he is exactley like balboa.
Marciano had good head movement. He slithered along and parried jabs very well.
Study the first Walcott fight and observe how many Fast/accurate Walcott jabs he avoids.
The Rock was doing this all throughout the fight. Quick leans to his right and push away with his right hand to the left to avoid the fast jab
The fighters Holmes fought may not have been as highly regarded historically, but posed a greater threat than the over-the-hill challengers Marciano faced off against. These fighters were closer to their primes when they fought Holmes, which is something to take into account.
An entirely different way to look at it would be that almost any of Holmes' competition would crush Rocky, who in essense was a small, cut prone heavyweight with the reach of a ten year old girl. I respect Rocky Marciano historically, especially given his perfect record, but he was a limited fighter even in his day when he was defending his title against light heavyweights and the contenders of years prior.
Marciano had a great punch against other small heavyweights, but to think he could have competed against Holmes or any of Holmes' major competition is laughable. If you do not want to match them up since they are different eras, Holmes still had the better title run and fought the alive competition.
Marciano had a close fight with an old Joe Louis, a come from behind win in a losing war with Jersey Joe Walcott (who took five tries to win the title), two close bouts with a totally washed up Ezzard Charles, a couple grueling fights with Don Cockell and Roland LaStarza (who many believed beat Marciano in 1950), and a dance with 43-year old light heavyweight champ Archie Moore where he had to climb off the canvas. His only other title defense was his one round return bout with Walcott, who was petrified of getting in the ring again after getting KO'd cold by Marciano eight months before.
Holmes, on the other hand, went on to defeat four future world champions during his title reign and would go on at the advanced age of 40-plus to get the better of WBC champ Oliver McCall and Brian Nielson before getting jobbed by terrible judging from the officials. Don't discredit his victory over 18-0 Ray Mercer either, who was coming off a spectacular stoppage of Tommy Morrison and remained a top contender for years after his loss to Holmes.
Somehow I don't see Rocky Marciano proving just how great he really was during his prime by beating top contenders at the age of 40 and over like Holmes did.
Ah, unifying the belts. Interesting people always bring that up. Remember that Holmes was the WBC champ before he got stripped for not rematching against Tim Witherspoon. He was then awarded the newly created IBF title. Who was the WBA champion? Oh yeah, Mike Weaver, someone Holmes already defeated. Then the WBA title changed hands every couple months since none of the fighters were good enough to hold the championship.
So we have the WBC title that he didn't unify since he was stripped of it and the WBA. Again, to unify the WBA title, he either would have just faced Mike Weaver again (who he stopped in 12) or one of the other five fighters who held the title from 1982 to 1986.
He was considered THE champion; there was no reason to go face someone who basically received his stolen belt or to go face the other boxers who fought for a different championship since they weren't good enough to compete with Larry.
did u see the fight?? it wasnt close, marciano was clealy in comman. u had it in rounds 5-1-1 marciano. most people seemed to have it around 5-2 in rounds for marciano. louis won a couple rounds at most. and he was never in position to win.Marciano had a close fight with an old Joe Louis
first of all ezzard was 32 and not washed up. he was coming off 11 wins out of his last 13 fights. in the first marciano fight, charles got himself in the best shape in years coming in a rock solid 185lb and showed amazing speed and skill in early rounds before marciano took over and won the decision. it was close but a clear win for rocky in one of the most gruelling heavy fights of all time.two close bouts with a totally washed up Ezzard Charles
Somehow I don't see Rocky Marciano proving just how great he really was during his prime by beating top contenders at the age of 40 and over like Holmes did.
marciano was still green and not yet fully trained by goldman yet when he fought the 37-0 lastarza. marciano knocked lastarza down in the fight. anyways u saw what a peak marciano did to a very good lastarza.Roland LaStarza (who many believed beat Marciano in 1950),
did he ever show he had problems hitting guys because of reach??reach of a ten year old girl.
but posed a greater threat than the over-the-hill challengers Marciano faced off against. These fighters were closer to their primes when they fought Holmes, which is something to take into account.
Marciano had a great punch against other small heavyweights, but to think he could have competed against Holmes or any of Holmes' major competition is laughable
gruelling???a couple grueling fights with Don Cockell and Roland LaStarza
Rory McCloskey wrote:BB... whats the story of carmine vingo... how did he get a fight with the great marciano at age 23. I heard somewhere what u just said, that vingo put up a hell of a fight before getting laid out by the much better rocky. I heard vingo never fully recovered. and in 1961 marciano said it was the toughest fight of his championship career.
do you have any pics of vingo or the fight? and anything you can add/confirm would be great.
Connelly was 8-5, Jerry Jackson 2-1, Wilson was stopped on a cut in the first round and was beaten by a light heavyweight in his previous fight, and Skhorr was 29-18. Sorry, Joe Louis was not a big heavyweight. He did not weigh in the 210's until he came back from serving 4 years in the US Army and was never the same fighter again. The only reason Vingo is ever mentioned with Rocky's name was because he was put in a coma. He was hardly a big hitter with 7 KOs in 16 wins. To think Marciano, all 5'10.5" and 192.5 lbs (at his heaviest weight) with a 67" reach could defeat the 6'7" 240 lb Klitschko, who has an 81" reach is ridiculous. Klitschko has made a career out of fighting guys between 207 and 263. Marciano is a GREAT cruiserweight. When I try to think how he would match up against todays era, thats how I do it, against the cruiserweights. We are dealing with an entirely different super heavyweight division these days. And Ezzard Charles? He went 11-4 in his last 15 before facing Marciano. He lost to Harold Johnson, Nino Valdes, and Rex Layne along with a disputable loss to Walcott in their 4th fight. Johnson was a very good light heavy but not the calibre of Charles. Nino was a big guy but not a great heavyweight. Rex Layne? He had just stopped Rex Layne. Charles was among the best light heavyweights of all time and an underrated heavyweight champion, but he was an old 32 by the time he faced Marciano. Charles had a run of 24-0 before losing to Walcott the first time for goodness sakes. Charles just aged like all great fighters do. And Archie Moore was not in his prime at age 42. He was a ducked and overlooked fighter during his prime who unfortunately did not get a title shot until he was 39. Moore for all intents and purposes was the same fighter a year later when he fought Floyd Patterson and was KO'd in five rounds easily. He looked old. Cockell was not a heavyweight. He went 10-3 in the big mans division. He spent 6 years as a middleweight to light heavyweight before moving up to spend his final 4 years at heavy. Your Marciano bias clouds your judgment too much. Marciano was ahead 5-2 twice and 4-3 before he KO'd Louis and those scores were very much in line with the action that was going on. And the entire point about the LaStarza I victory was written in my first post on this subject. People like you would not be so enamored with Marciano if he had not had the benefit of the scoring in that fight. What if the ref gave LaStarza the edge? Then we'd have a 48-1 Marciano who spent very little time at the top of his division. The only reason that he retired undefeated at 32 was because he had chronic back problems and his wife often begged him to retire. Without the back problems, Marciano would have gone on to face Floyd Patterson and possibly a young Sonny Liston if he would not have assaulted a police officer and been sent to prison. Remember that Patterson ducked Liston for a long time before they fought, something I doubt Marciano would have done.BrocktonBlockbuster49 wrote:did u see the fight?? it wasnt close, marciano was clealy in comman. u had it in rounds 5-1-1 marciano. most people seemed to have it around 5-2 in rounds for marciano. louis won a couple rounds at most. and he was never in position to win.Marciano had a close fight with an old Joe Louis
first of all ezzard was 32 and not washed up. he was coming off 11 wins out of his last 13 fights. in the first marciano fight, charles got himself in the best shape in years coming in a rock solid 185lb and showed amazing speed and skill in early rounds before marciano took over and won the decision. it was close but a clear win for rocky in one of the most gruelling heavy fights of all time.two close bouts with a totally washed up Ezzard Charles
nat fleischer said "no other fighter in the world could have lasted 15 rounds against ezzard charles that night, let alone win the decision."
other writers even went as far to mention it was the best fight of charles career.
once again, a classic person who hasnt seen the 2nd fight. the fight wasnt close. marciano won practically every round. the scores at the time of the knockout had marciano winning every round. besides the horrendous cut, the fight wasnt close. marciano knocked charles down 3 times in a fight where charles didnt have the same spark he had in the first fight. he was overweight and a little slower.
charles went on to lose his last 13 of 23 fights becuase marciano ruined him.
Somehow I don't see Rocky Marciano proving just how great he really was during his prime by beating top contenders at the age of 40 and over like Holmes did.
roland lastarza- age 26 rocky marciano gave lastarza a terrible beating breaking bones in his arms, and giving him huge hematoes all over his arms. he needed 6 surguries to replace the damage.
don cockell- age 26- british champ 5'11 210lbs, a very tough englishman who gave it everything he had. cockell was even vomitting in his corner between rounds thats how much he wanted it.
rex layne- 22 years old 34-1 top contender and highly touted fighter who beat walcott, and knocked out bob satterfield. marciaon knocked out layne with one punch.
harry kid mathews- 29 years old 80-5 when he fought marciano. he was a very good boxer and top contender. marciano needed two left hooks to dispose of him.
marciano was still green and not yet fully trained by goldman yet when he fought the 37-0 lastarza. marciano knocked lastarza down in the fight. anyways u saw what a peak marciano did to a very good lastarza.Roland LaStarza (who many believed beat Marciano in 1950),
did he ever show he had problems hitting guys because of reach??reach of a ten year old girl.
but posed a greater threat than the over-the-hill challengers Marciano faced off against. These fighters were closer to their primes when they fought Holmes, which is something to take into account.
i see u do not follow walcotts career and record closely. he was a late bloomer and very much in his prime when he fought marciano in the first fight coming off the two best wins of his career, despite being 38.
moore despite being 42 was also at his best, he was a freak of nature. he was 45-1 in his last 46 fights before he fought marciano and his age hadnt caught up with him.
Marciano had a great punch against other small heavyweights, but to think he could have competed against Holmes or any of Holmes' major competition is laughable
its been proven a 185lb marciano punches over 1000 PSI, and this was taken in the late stages of rocks career, which is better than almost all the big modern day heavies. only 250lb wlad punches 1100 PSI, so wlad cant punch harder than marciano despite outweighing him by 75lbs.
now imagine marcianos punch rate, wlad doesnt throw a lot of bombs. marciano throws many more punches and thats what makes him so devastating.
marciano knocked out many big heavyeeights
pat connelly 6'5 213lb - marciano KO 1 one punch
jerry jackson 6'4 254lb- marciano KO 1 one punch
big bill wilson 6'3 229lb - marciano TKO 1
Johnny Skhorr 6'3 220lbs- Marciano TKO 6
Carmine Vingo 6'4 200lb - hard hitter and the fight was a brutal slugfest for 6 rounds until marciano knocked vingo into a coma and nearly killed him
joe louis 6'2 213lb - marciano KO 8.
gruelling???a couple grueling fights with Don Cockell and Roland LaStarza![]()
u havnt seen those fights then, marciano won every round but the 2nd round agaisnt cockell giving him a huge beating, and marciano was ahead on points and gave lastarza a huge beating.
Where is your proof? Or is this only your opinion? I have NEVER seen any listing of the amount of PSI Marciano can hit. I love how people feel they can just state "facts" and not ever give evidence on where they found the information. And if your response is "they tested it," who is they?BrocktonBlockbuster49 wrote: its been proven a 185lb marciano punches over 1000 PSI, and this was taken in the late stages of rocks career, which is better than almost all the big modern day heavies. only 250lb wlad punches 1100 PSI, so wlad cant punch harder than marciano despite outweighing him by 75lbs.
See! "its been proven"Decagon wrote:BrocktonBlockbuster49 gets his facts from Rocky IV.
BrocktonBlockbuster49 wrote:i am going to bed, i will show u proof in the morning.
- it might change some of u marciano haters minds
I never said I hated Marciano. I think he was an entertaining fighter. I just don't think he could stop bullets with his mind and devour the entire planet with a single thought like you. Your obsession with Marciano is ... disburbing.BrocktonBlockbuster49 wrote:i am going to bed, i will show u proof in the morning.
- it might change some of u marciano haters minds
- u will find i hadnvt posted about marciano in a while, most of my posts were about other fighters and topics, i simply only chime in on marciano now when i feel people arnt giving him his due
You are obviously a clueless, biased little man so I will respond only one more time to your Marciano love fest. Like I said, I HAVE Marciano-Charles I. I have seen it several times. Charles does not look like he did in the Louis fight or the second Walcott fight. He looks AGED and WEATHERED. Walcott was indeed over the hill when he faced Marciano. Just because he accomplished his most significant feat at an advanced age does not make him all of a sudden in his prime. His best performance was in '47 at the age of 33 against Louis in their first fight. He deserved the decision but was robbed. After that fight, his only big wins were a KO over light heavyweight Harold Johnson and a KO over Ezzard Charles. As great as the victory over Charles was, Charles bested him in the rematch but was screwed by the judges. Walcott went 7-7 from the first Louis fight to the second Marciano fight. Hardly that of a prime fighter. If he was in his prime, he would not have retired after losing to Marciano in the rematch. And for Moore being in his prime in his 40s, my oh my. You obviously are not involved in boxing other than watching. Do what I do and actually cover events and talk to fighters and you'll learn that every single one of them tells you they can't do what they used to do when they were in their twenties or even early thirties. If they do, they retract the statement as soon as they lose.BrocktonBlockbuster49 wrote:Evn where do u rate marciano on an all time heavyweight list????
- its funny how u think walcott was over the hill when facts prove otherwise, same with moore
- if u watched charles-marciano I, uwould see charles in early rounds was as fast and sharp as he as ever been AT HEAVYWEIGHT. charles peak was at light-H
Walcott went 7-7 from the first Louis fight to the second Marciano fight.
BrocktonBlockbuster49 wrote:i find it hilarious u call me 100% bias, even thouh i back up all my arguements with facts and quotes while u base urs soely on opinion.
Thanks for helping me make you look stupid. Although you edited your post, just so you are sure, here are the 14 fights (7-7) in order:BrocktonBlockbuster49 wrote:Walcott went 7-7 from the first Louis fight to the second Marciano fight.
actually 7-5 genuis. and 4 of those losses were to all time greats louis, marciano, charles.