I was watching a fight show once and they asked these few boxing analysts whom they thought was the greatest Heavyweight Champion of all time and they said if Rocky BalBoa was a real man he would be.
Now would u call a champion with a record of 76 fights with 27 losses the greatest champion of all, even though he did regain the title?
I dunno...but it didnt sound convincing to me
Rocky BalBoa
Most of Ezzard's losses came well after he should have retired. Financial trouble kept him in the ring long after he should have quit, and he had to come back for the same reason when he had nothing left. He fought more total fights than any other heavyweight champion, and even though he was an excellent heavyweight he was really a light heavyweight. the greatest. He was even past his prime when he fought Marciano; otherwise he would have won. In my opinion he was perhaps the greatest all arund fighter to ever hold the heavyweight title. I do NOT mean he was the greatest heavyweight champion ...too small to compete with heavier fighters of recent years. He was too light to compete with the heavyweights of the era in which he fought, but he beat them anyway. He fought too often and gave away too much weight and it caught up with him, but even then if he had been able to retire when he should have, hnis record would be much better. This is just one example of why boxing is not a good statistical sport. How many losses would Marciano have if he fought 122 times?