Rocky Marciano.

Post Reply
Trent
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 251
Joined: 23 May 2003, 23:00

Re: Rocky Marciano.

Post by Trent »

Relevant... well obviously YES! guy never lost a fight. defended his title against the best fighters of his time. The greatest ever? No. Top 20 yes of course. Not to say top 20 is bad, it is legendary. But I just think there are better fighters who fought better opposition in their prime (even though they have the losses to their record).

I sorta think asking that first question is kinda silly... I'd doubt anyone would say he isn't relevant!!!, if so I'd like to hear their argument :box:
keithmoonhangover
Cruiserweight
Posts: 16872
Joined: 16 Sep 2010, 10:42

Re: Rocky Marciano.

Post by keithmoonhangover »

I think Marciano is still relevant today and will always get mentioned with regards to 'the record'. I also think Marciano belongs in the list of all time top ten heavyweights.
Ezzard
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 11173
Joined: 12 May 2005, 09:20

Re: Rocky Marciano.

Post by Ezzard »

Okay, pre-internet…

I knew of the great champs only by what I read about them and the occasional old fight shown in highlights on TV (rare, but I never missed them).

From simply reading about the fighters, not watching them and not having the benefit of boxrec to be able to cross reference the records. I considered the heavyweight top 3 to be…

Louis
Ali
Marciano

I knew Marciano was small for a HW but I thought he could make up for it.

Time changed. Journalism changed, new writers came up with new theses. I read more books. Listened to more opinions.

Then with the internet we all got access to records and film like never before.

Rocky is a true great and his wins over Walcott, Charles and Moore are stand out victories. We all look back and see them as old past it guys but reading my uncle’s old copies of The Ring there was a real belief among the writers that Moore was a strong challenger.
raylawpc
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 4871
Joined: 21 Mar 2008, 17:21

Re: Rocky Marciano.

Post by raylawpc »

Ezzard wrote:Okay, pre-internet…

I knew of the great champs only by what I read about them and the occasional old fight shown in highlights on TV (rare, but I never missed them).

From simply reading about the fighters, not watching them and not having the benefit of boxrec to be able to cross reference the records. I considered the heavyweight top 3 to be…

Louis
Ali
Marciano

I knew Marciano was small for a HW but I thought he could make up for it.

Time changed. Journalism changed, new writers came up with new theses. I read more books. Listened to more opinions.

Then with the internet we all got access to records and film like never before.

Rocky is a true great and his wins over Walcott, Charles and Moore are stand out victories. We all look back and see them as old past it guys but reading my uncle’s old copies of The Ring there was a real belief among the writers that Moore was a strong challenger.
Excellent post!
HomicideHenry
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 18722
Joined: 08 Sep 2005, 00:43

Re: Rocky Marciano.

Post by HomicideHenry »

Its unfortunate that in Marciano's career he wasnt considered a great fighter until he defeated Archie Moore, and when he retired there was a great mourning for his departure. IMHO, he is no lower than #10 and no higher than #3 on the ATG lists. That being said, he had the ability to of fought and given any of the top ten the fight of their lives, win lose or draw. I like a quote that was once said of Marciano, that if all the champions were put into a room and they all duked it out that it would be Marciano walking out the door as the winner. He was a fighter, not a boxer, and its by that measure we should rank him as. Do I believe he could have beaten Louis and Ali? I believe he could have. But then again, so could Larry Holmes, Jack Dempsey, etc. They all had a chance and on any given night they could have done it. Marciano is no exception.
Goodnight, Irene
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 9463
Joined: 24 Sep 2007, 04:43

Re: Rocky Marciano.

Post by Goodnight, Irene »

HomicideHenry wrote:Its unfortunate that in Marciano's career he wasnt considered a great fighter until he defeated Archie Moore, and when he retired there was a great mourning for his departure. IMHO, he is no lower than #10 and no higher than #3 on the ATG lists. That being said, he had the ability to of fought and given any of the top ten the fight of their lives, win lose or draw. I like a quote that was once said of Marciano, that if all the champions were put into a room and they all duked it out that it would be Marciano walking out the door as the winner. He was a fighter, not a boxer, and its by that measure we should rank him as. Do I believe he could have beaten Louis and Ali? I believe he could have. But then again, so could Larry Holmes, Jack Dempsey, etc. They all had a chance and on any given night they could have done it. Marciano is no exception.
Im guessing his mother was the source of that quote.
HomicideHenry
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 18722
Joined: 08 Sep 2005, 00:43

Re: Rocky Marciano.

Post by HomicideHenry »

:lol: Lmao
Victorious333
Light Heavyweight
Posts: 2
Joined: 23 Mar 2012, 20:26

Re: Rocky Marciano.

Post by Victorious333 »

Marciano was an incredible fighter, with one of the strongest wills to win combined with power in both hands a great chin and recuperative power...tough man to beat even at 5"11
dalcumly
Cruiserweight
Posts: 1319
Joined: 03 Sep 2010, 08:11

Re: Rocky Marciano.

Post by dalcumly »

Visited Brockton in 2005 during a New England holiday with my wife and friends from the UK . Found George's Cafe owned by the Tartaglia family . Met Al Columbo's sister in law who was working in the cafe and an elderly gentleman who was a pal of Rocky and used to travel with him to Providence for his early fights . The cafe owner took me round to a Mr Baumans house who was the photographer for the Brockton Enterprise when Rocky was just coming through . What a library of photos !!
When speaking to Rocky's pal I was interested to learn that he thought Rocky was not even 5' 10" tall . I asked him if he thought he could have fought at a slightly heavier weight ,say 210 pounds ,but he was emphatic that this would have made him too slow .
I was also shown the Marciano family home looking over James Edgar playgound ,and at that time a local postman had bought the house with a view to making it into a sort of museum . He was doing this in association with a local artist who had painted a wall mural in another local cafe .
If there is anything further I could help you with let me know .
Controversial
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 9183
Joined: 13 Jul 2002, 18:29

Re: Rocky Marciano.

Post by Controversial »

Victorious333 wrote: Marciano was an incredible fighter, with one of the strongest wills to win combined with power in both hands a great chin and recuperative power...tough man to beat even at 5"11
dalcumly wrote: When speaking to Rocky's pal I was interested to learn that he thought Rocky was not even 5' 10" tall . I asked him if he thought he could have fought at a slightly heavier weight ,say 210 pounds ,but he was emphatic that this would have made him too slow
He doesn't look 5'10", wouldn't be surprised if shorter, especially as his reach was so short. Many people say Tyson isn't 5'11" either, I'm pretty sure his prison record had him at 5'8" and some opponents said he was shorter than 5'11" when they faced him.
dalcumly
Cruiserweight
Posts: 1319
Joined: 03 Sep 2010, 08:11

Re: Rocky Marciano.

Post by dalcumly »

I stood right next to Tyson at his medical for the fight with Lou Savarese in Glasgow in 2000 , and when he stood up straight he was the exact same height as me - 5' 10 and a half " ( but twice my width and his neck was as thick as my thigh!!!)
Controversial
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 9183
Joined: 13 Jul 2002, 18:29

Re: Rocky Marciano.

Post by Controversial »

dalcumly wrote:I stood right next to Tyson at his medical for the fight with Lou Savarese in Glasgow in 2000 , and when he stood up straight he was the exact same height as me - 5' 10 and a half " ( but twice my width and his neck was as thick as my thigh!!!)
So he is shorter than the claimed 5'11" and a half. It's always hard to judge standing next to someone, especially when the shoes/trainers you wear can make a difference. What makes me think he is shorter, apart from he looks squat and has short arms, is everyone always says he is short. Being half an inch away from 6'0" is above average and far from being short.
Post Reply