BoxRec

Decagon wrote:But how can you say that Wills clearly had a better chin than Walcott? There's only so much you can learn from Boxrec. Yes, Wills didn't lose by KO between the Jim Johnson and Jack Sharkey fights, but look who he was fighting! During the 1920s, Wills feasted on has-beens.

Sam McVey was a has-been? Or perhaps a poor-man's Mitch Green?

in 1954, some of marcianos supporters began to wonder about rockys famed one punch prowess. in his late reign, marciano continued to use the hydraulic drill rather than the atomic bomb to beat opponents.

gerry hern of the boston post wrote "the rock may never again be the fighter he was against walcott. age and a changed style may have taken away some of his superb talent for punching. perhaps, in making him a smart fighter, his management has taken away his terrific punching power. in shortening up his punches, the management may have shorted out his power."


"weve had to sacfrifice some of his power-remember how he used to bring up his right hand that we call his suzyQ punch from the floor-to tighten up his denfense." - Trainer charley goldman in 1955


"goldman gambled by tinkering with marcianos punch. the problem was marcianos stance was leaving him too wide open. so goldman decided to shorten his stance. although the change made marciano a better boxer because it tightened his defense, it also changed the way he punched. with his shortened stance, he was force to throw shorter snappier punches. he also started to put punches together more often in combination style. he continued to throw his looping rights, patented left, BUT HE DIDNT GO FOR THE HOME RUN NEARLY AS MUCH." - rock of his times biography


keene simmons sparring parnter of marciano said in 1955 " there have been some changed in him. a slugger like rocky doesnt turn into a boxer but he no longer tries to murder you with one punch the way he used to." NOTE simmons was knocked out by rocky in 1951.




looks like i proved my point nero

But you have put more time and energy into studying the nuances of his career, so I'll defer to you on this.

i have studied the nuances, thats why i rate marciano 5th

Nero3000 wrote:

sockdollanger wrote:

Nero3000 wrote: Harry Wills was about 6'3 and 220 lbs. A past-prime Langford ko'd him with a single punch.

Same with George Godfrey.

hey retard, he asked about a matchup btwn a 1911 Langford vs Marciano. That would be like a super middle vs a cruiser. If you think Marciano could be KO by a man that size than you are mistaken

Where did you see me say that?

so if that is not what you meant, why would you say he KOd Wills w/ a single punch? It certianly seemed like you were saying he could do the same to Marciano. I do appologize for calling you a retard.

Rocky Marciano is up there with the hardest punchers in history!

Joe Louis said, from http://www.geocities.com/Colosseum/Aren ... Rock3.html

""It hurt to bump into him....He hits harder than Max Schmeling...this kid is tough enough to beat anyone"...

And this is Joe Louis talking...

Nero3000 wrote:

Grimm wrote:

Nero3000 wrote:Just for the record folks. I don't know who would win in a fight between these two. I just took exception to those who claimed that Rocky was the harder puncher when the evidence clearly supports the contrary.

Sam Langford was quite possibly the most feared slugger of all time.

And Langford may be a very feard slugger but Langford fought at alot of different weights Marciano consistently knocked out heavyweights.

So Langford p4p better puncher.

But Marciano better puncher.

Another gem of discernment from Grimm. Ever heard of Gunboat Smith? Fireman Jim Flynn? Jim Barry? Harry Wills? Bill Tate? Joe Jeanette? Sam McVey?

All heavyweights pal. And all knocked out by Sam Langford.

It's obvious that you've misread my post, I never said Langford didn't knockout any heavyweights.

What I said is that he fought at alot of different weights, which means his knockouts come from other weights too.

Marciano's knockouts are all at heavyweight.

You really should learn to pay attention.

I have been paying attention, epsecailly at the start when NERO said,

"Crease, you know very little about Sam Langford",

when I stated that Rocky would beat him because he simply puched harder. (And so he does)...

Remember, langford did indeed drift up and down weights, Rocky KO'd Joe Louis and even the likes of Dempsey said that he hadn't ever seen a harder puncher than Marciano...

langfords heavyweight win resume matches up with anyones(outside of ali) in heavyweight history

BrocktonBlockbuster49 wrote:langfords heavyweight win resume matches up with anyones(outside of ali) in heavyweight history

And it doesn't look too bad compared to Ali's either.

The Great John L wrote:

BrocktonBlockbuster49 wrote:langfords heavyweight win resume matches up with anyones(outside of ali) in heavyweight history

And it doesn't look too bad compared to Ali's either.

yea ur right. however liston, foreman, frazier just puts ali over the top

BrocktonBlockbuster49 wrote:

The Great John L wrote:

BrocktonBlockbuster49 wrote:langfords heavyweight win resume matches up with anyones(outside of ali) in heavyweight history

And it doesn't look too bad compared to Ali's either.

yea ur right. however liston, foreman, frazier just puts ali over the top

I would think so as well, but wouldn't argue very hard if someone thought otherwise. Safe to say that we are much more familiar with Ali's opponents than Langford’s, especially considering many of us grew up watching Ali’s fights and therefore may be a bit predisposed to rating them as better than earlier eras.

One thing I do feel strongly about Ali’s opposition is that the guys he fought after his forced inactivity are in general a significantly better lot than those he fought in his first career.

One thing I do feel strongly about Ali’s opposition is that the guys he fought after his forced inactivity are in general a significantly better lot than those he fought in his first career.

i agree


outside of liston, ali did not have any elite opponents in the 60s.........


- williams was shot literally and figuratley

- folley was far past it

- terell is probably the best win outside of liston, terell was the WBA champ at his peak, terells probably top 50 heavyweight of all time


- chuvalo is good but nothing special

- patterson had a VERY bad back, so this takes off the quality of the win

- cooper is no world beater if he doesnt land that left hook

- 45 year old archie is probably alis best pre title oppponent

- jones,, lavorante, miteff, daniels these guys were good but not world beaters

Decagon wrote:

BrocktonBlockbuster49 wrote:langfords heavyweight win resume matches up with anyones(outside of ali) in heavyweight history

Bleh. I'd take Larry Holmes's opposition, myself.

Yeah, Holmes competition was up there as well. From Ali, Norton and Shavers, through the alphabet guys (Weaver, Williams, Smith, etc.) all the way to Tyson, Holyfield, Mercer and company. An amazing career. His spanking of Mercer was a classic display of skill and brains over youth and power. Not that Mercer was young, but he was younger than Holmes.

holmes opposition has a lot of quantity, but not so great quality. the only great heavyweight he ever beat was norton, and norton never got a rematch from there very close near dead even fight.

holmes competition defintley rates up there as it has a lot of good fighters, but it also has some god awful ones as well. i would have liked to see holmes fight more alhpa champs in the 80s or unify the titles like tyson did in the late 80s.

BrocktonBlockbuster49 wrote:holmes opposition has a lot of quantity, but not so great quality. the only great heavyweight he ever beat was norton, and norton never got a rematch from there very close near dead even fight.

holmes competition defintley rates up there as it has a lot of good fighters, but it also has some god awful ones as well. i would have liked to see holmes fight more alhpa champs in the 80s or unify the titles like tyson did in the late 80s.

BB you’re right. I missed where your quote was “Langford’s win resume”. My post about Holmes opponents was just the long list of quality fighters, without regard to outcome. And while he did fight many top fighters, many of them were losses. I still think he had a very good resume, just not up there with Ali or Langford.

The Great John L wrote:

BrocktonBlockbuster49 wrote:holmes opposition has a lot of quantity, but not so great quality. the only great heavyweight he ever beat was norton, and norton never got a rematch from there very close near dead even fight.

holmes competition defintley rates up there as it has a lot of good fighters, but it also has some god awful ones as well. i would have liked to see holmes fight more alhpa champs in the 80s or unify the titles like tyson did in the late 80s.

BB you’re right. I missed where your quote was “Langford’s win resume”. My post about Holmes opponents was just the long list of quality fighters, without regard to outcome. And while he did fight many top fighters, many of them were losses. I still think he had a very good resume, just not up there with Ali or Langford.

o ok

Decagon wrote:Okay, you're saying that Sam McVey was in his prime in the 1920s? Perhaps I should just ignore you now.

Harry Wills fought Sam McVey in the 1910s(when he was in his prime), not the 1920s(save for one bout). So maybe you should indeed stop talking to me now.

BrocktonBlockbuster49 wrote:in 1954, some of marcianos supporters began to wonder about rockys famed one punch prowess. in his late reign, marciano continued to use the hydraulic drill rather than the atomic bomb to beat opponents.

gerry hern of the boston post wrote "the rock may never again be the fighter he was against walcott. age and a changed style may have taken away some of his superb talent for punching. perhaps, in making him a smart fighter, his management has taken away his terrific punching power. in shortening up his punches, the management may have shorted out his power."


"weve had to sacfrifice some of his power-remember how he used to bring up his right hand that we call his suzyQ punch from the floor-to tighten up his denfense." - Trainer charley goldman in 1955


"goldman gambled by tinkering with marcianos punch. the problem was marcianos stance was leaving him too wide open. so goldman decided to shorten his stance. although the change made marciano a better boxer because it tightened his defense, it also changed the way he punched. with his shortened stance, he was force to throw shorter snappier punches. he also started to put punches together more often in combination style. he continued to throw his looping rights, patented left, BUT HE DIDNT GO FOR THE HOME RUN NEARLY AS MUCH." - rock of his times biography


keene simmons sparring parnter of marciano said in 1955 " there have been some changed in him. a slugger like rocky doesnt turn into a boxer but he no longer tries to murder you with one punch the way he used to." NOTE simmons was knocked out by rocky in 1951.




looks like i proved my point nero

Indeed. Interesting stuff.

sockdollanger wrote:

Nero3000 wrote:

sockdollanger wrote:hey retard, he asked about a matchup btwn a 1911 Langford vs Marciano. That would be like a super middle vs a cruiser. If you think Marciano could be KO by a man that size than you are mistaken

Where did you see me say that?

so if that is not what you meant, why would you say he KOd Wills w/ a single punch? It certianly seemed like you were saying he could do the same to Marciano. I do appologize for calling you a retard.

My arguement isn't about who would win. Mine is about who was the harder hitter. I still feel that Langford is.

No problem about the retard-thing. I work with retarded kids so I have quite a bit of affection for them and their simple ways

Crease wrote:Rocky Marciano is up there with the hardest punchers in history!

Who said he wasn't?

Grimm wrote:

Nero3000 wrote:

Grimm wrote: And Langford may be a very feard slugger but Langford fought at alot of different weights Marciano consistently knocked out heavyweights.

So Langford p4p better puncher.

But Marciano better puncher.

Another gem of discernment from Grimm. Ever heard of Gunboat Smith? Fireman Jim Flynn? Jim Barry? Harry Wills? Bill Tate? Joe Jeanette? Sam McVey?

All heavyweights pal. And all knocked out by Sam Langford.

It's obvious that you've misread my post, I never said Langford didn't knockout any heavyweights.

What I said is that he fought at alot of different weights, which means his knockouts come from other weights too.

Marciano's knockouts are all at heavyweight.

You really should learn to pay attention.

You said that Marciano consistently knocked out heavyweights. My point is- SO DID SAM LANGFORD...and I submitted for you those names as exhibit A.

BrocktonBlockbuster49 wrote:langfords heavyweight win resume matches up with anyones(outside of ali) in heavyweight history

THANK YOU! A voice of reason from the other camp always makes me feel that there's hope for sanity in this world.

BrocktonBlockbuster49 wrote:

One thing I do feel strongly about Ali’s opposition is that the guys he fought after his forced inactivity are in general a significantly better lot than those he fought in his first career.

i agree


outside of liston, ali did not have any elite opponents in the 60s.........


- williams was shot literally and figuratley

- folley was far past it

- terell is probably the best win outside of liston, terell was the WBA champ at his peak, terells probably top 50 heavyweight of all time


- chuvalo is good but nothing special

- patterson had a VERY bad back, so this takes off the quality of the win

Just out of curiosity, why would Floyd take that fight? Fighting a prime Clay with a bad back seems like a death wish.

Interesting matchup. Could be similar to Marciano-Charles. Marciano by KO in the late rounds, after losing the first half of the fight.

Not sure I agree with that statement. Lets see, Toney is a 37 year old fat middleweight and he can beat, or at least hold his own with any HW today. I know Langford started out in the 130's, but I beleive that most of his early fights were fought at WW, so there isn't much diffeence between Lanfords rise and Toneys rise. And you can also add Roy Jones who probably could have beaten a few other modern ranked HW's in addition to Ruiz.

There is a big difference between Toney and Jones moving up five weight classes to heavyweight and Langford, if using modern weight classes for comparison, moving up NINE weight classes. If Jones and Toney fought in Langfords era they probably would have had to keep fighting each other for lack of compitition.