BoxRec

The Conn of the first Louis fight, could he do it?

He certainly could, but I don't think he would. Rock was more relentless in his attack and the strength difference would be more important. Joe undressed guys with skills as much as power and he wasn't the reckless type.

I think Billy would make him look foolish at times and it would be competitive. But I got Marciano by stoppage in about 11.

Conn has a chance at getting the points victory. But could he cope with the unceasing pressure of Marcinao? No, I don't think he would... He would be swarmed and ko'd.

This is the type of fight where I think Marciano has to be the favorite but I'd lay some $ on Conn. Marciano was relentless, but Louis was also much faster as well as a killer punch and the fact that Conn was able to hang in there, take some big shots, and stay in there until very late vs the best HW who ever lived tells me that he could use his vast speed advantage and vast trickery to outbox Marciano over the long haul. Let's remember, Charles and Walcott were well into their boxing careers and had old legs by the time they fought Rocky. Conn had some of the best legs in all of boxing history above middleweight.

People also forget Conn completly outclassed a string of very tough heavyweights across a wide spectrum of styles . . the rough and tumble brawler (Gus Dorazio) the slicksters (Bob Pastor, Lee Savold) and boxer punchers (Gunnar Barlund).

dempseyfire wrote:Charles and Walcott were well into their boxing careers and had old legs by the time they fought Rocky.

Prime. Prime. Prime. Prime. Prime. Prime. Prime. Prime. Prime. Prime. Prime.
Prime. Prime. Prime. Prime. Prime. Prime. Prime. Prime. Prime. Prime. Prime.
Prime. Prime. Prime. Prime. Prime. Prime. Prime. Prime. Prime. Prime. Prime.

THEY WERE IN THEIR PRIME!!!!
as was Archie Moore when he fought him.

When are you gonna start getting it?

Crease wrote:

dempseyfire wrote:Charles and Walcott were well into their boxing careers and had old legs by the time they fought Rocky.

Prime. Prime. Prime. Prime. Prime. Prime. Prime. Prime. Prime. Prime. Prime.
Prime. Prime. Prime. Prime. Prime. Prime. Prime. Prime. Prime. Prime. Prime.
Prime. Prime. Prime. Prime. Prime. Prime. Prime. Prime. Prime. Prime. Prime.

THEY WERE IN THEIR PRIME!!!!
as was Archie Moore when he fought him.

When are you gonna start getting it?

No, they wern't. Welcome to reality. Even the biggest Rocky supporters I've seen on boxing boards don't make a ridiculous statement like Charles was in his prime . . that's laughable.

dempseyfire wrote:This is the type of fight where I think Marciano has to be the favorite but I'd lay some $ on Conn. Marciano was relentless, but Louis was also much faster as well as a killer punch and the fact that Conn was able to hang in there, take some big shots, and stay in there until very late vs the best HW who ever lived tells me that he could use his vast speed advantage and vast trickery to outbox Marciano over the long haul. Let's remember, Charles and Walcott were well into their boxing careers and had old legs by the time they fought Rocky. Conn had some of the best legs in all of boxing history above middleweight.

People also forget Conn completly outclassed a string of very tough heavyweights across a wide spectrum of styles . . the rough and tumble brawler (Gus Dorazio) the slicksters (Bob Pastor, Lee Savold) and boxer punchers (Gunnar Barlund).

Nice work. I really have this theory that people will lean toward picking an all-time great in one weightclass over a guy who wasn't natural to the division if they have any doubt.

Just a theory, but Marciano-Conn is a good test-case of that, IMO.

Crease wrote:

dempseyfire wrote:Charles and Walcott were well into their boxing careers and had old legs by the time they fought Rocky.

Prime. Prime. Prime. Prime. Prime. Prime. Prime. Prime. Prime. Prime. Prime.
Prime. Prime. Prime. Prime. Prime. Prime. Prime. Prime. Prime. Prime. Prime.
Prime. Prime. Prime. Prime. Prime. Prime. Prime. Prime. Prime. Prime. Prime.

THEY WERE IN THEIR PRIME!!!!
as was Archie Moore when he fought him.

When are you gonna start getting it?

Bro, said with no malice, or intent to offend or embarrass --- but please stop. Please. It's not worth the odd minute it takes you to write it up. The Charles case especially.

Crease wrote:

dempseyfire wrote:Charles and Walcott were well into their boxing careers and had old legs by the time they fought Rocky.

Prime. Prime. Prime. Prime. Prime. Prime. Prime. Prime. Prime. Prime. Prime.
Prime. Prime. Prime. Prime. Prime. Prime. Prime. Prime. Prime. Prime. Prime.
Prime. Prime. Prime. Prime. Prime. Prime. Prime. Prime. Prime. Prime. Prime.

THEY WERE IN THEIR PRIME!!!!
as was Archie Moore when he fought him.

When are you gonna start getting it?

Charles was a Light Heavyweight in his prime. I get it, you love the Rock. No need to invent things to make him look better. In one thread Archie Moore was a big Heavyweight and now Charles & Walcott were in their primes?

You forgot to bring up when Marciano slaughtered a prime Joe Louis. That had to be his greatest win.

...i think only a guy with a good punch could hold off marciano for long and billy...the superior all around fighter of the two but too smsall just didn't have that kind of power and rocky would fll all over the ring few times but eventually wear him down.

..the idea that charles was in his prime when he fought marciano is ridiculous.

Some of youse guys need a better sense of humor.

dempseyfire wrote:This is the type of fight where I think Marciano has to be the favorite but I'd lay some $ on Conn. Marciano was relentless, but Louis was also much faster as well as a killer punch and the fact that Conn was able to hang in there, take some big shots, and stay in there until very late vs the best HW who ever lived tells me that he could use his vast speed advantage and vast trickery to outbox Marciano over the long haul. Let's remember, Charles and Walcott were well into their boxing careers and had old legs by the time they fought Rocky. Conn had some of the best legs in all of boxing history above middleweight.

People also forget Conn completly outclassed a string of very tough heavyweights across a wide spectrum of styles . . the rough and tumble brawler (Gus Dorazio) the slicksters (Bob Pastor, Lee Savold) and boxer punchers (Gunnar Barlund).

Good analysis.

Except I doubt Louis was the best HW who ever lived.

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:Charles was a Light Heavyweight in his prime. I get it, you love the Rock. No need to invent things to make him look better. In one thread Archie Moore was a big Heavyweight

Congratulations you FAILED again.

The point I was making is that Archie Moore had the POWER of a big heavyweight.

Crease wrote:

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:Charles was a Light Heavyweight in his prime. I get it, you love the Rock. No need to invent things to make him look better. In one thread Archie Moore was a big Heavyweight

Congratulations you FAILED again.

The point I was making is that Archie Moore had the POWER of a big heavyweight.

You responded to Dempsey saying Marciano never faced a man of Norton's size and athleticism with check Archie Moore's record. He didn't mention power at all. Forgive me for responding to what you write as opposed to those tiny little thoughts swimming around in your sad little mind. Evidently you have confused Marciano and Moore during your futile attempts at thinking. Bravo!

Nobody has failed in this thread but you. And in an all time pathetic manner.

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:You responded to Dempsey saying Marciano never faced a man of Norton's size and athleticism with check Archie Moore's record. He didn't mention power at all.

Well, ad you taken the time to check the Norton vs Marciano thread:
http://boxrec.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=138646
As I seen you had posted on it, I assumed that you would have noticed me stating, and I quote:

Crease wrote:And if you want to talk about "prime, big athletic HW" I suggest you check Archie Morre's record, see how many men he knocked out, then come back to me.

Hence: I did mention Archie Moore's power. Archie was a formidable foe at Heavyweight as well as Light Heavy and he had the power to a big Heavyweight.

Crease wrote:

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:You responded to Dempsey saying Marciano never faced a man of Norton's size and athleticism with check Archie Moore's record. He didn't mention power at all.

Well, ad you taken the time to check the Norton vs Marciano thread:
http://boxrec.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=138646
As I seen you had posted on it, I assumed that you would have noticed me stating, and I quote:

Crease wrote:And if you want to talk about "prime, big athletic HW" I suggest you check Archie Morre's record, see how many men he knocked out, then come back to me.

Hence: I did mention Archie Moore's power. Archie was a formidable foe at Heavyweight as well as Light Heavy and he had the power to a big Heavyweight.

Dempsey said Marciano never faced a fighter as big and athletic as Norton with that type of jab. Your response about Moore's opponents was completely irrelevant. Just like your posts in here have been.

And I said HE didn't mention power. You're perpetually confused.

This would be a fantastic fight. I think Jaclem gets this one right (though, he’s never diplomatic on Marciano)…