|
|
|
#2 |
|
Diamond Dog
East Side VIP
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 63,255
vCash: 1000 |
Probably to much wear and tare, probably to hard to stay in the necessary Marciano condition. He also began to have back trouble later in his career, didn't he?
So probably not. |
|
|
|
#3 |
|
Contender
ESB Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 1,268
vCash: 1000 |
49-0 is good enough...Rocky's style of fighting doesn't translate to a long career...Marciano got out of the fight game while he still had his powers...he didn't make a fool of himself with a comeback...
|
|
|
|
#4 |
|
THROW SOME THUNDAAAH!!!!
East Side Guru
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Washington D.C.
Posts: 5,273
vCash: 75 |
Nah, Marciano got in the game late and his already banged up body was lucky to hold up as long as it did.
Dempsey was fighting professionally since he was 19. I don't think Rocky would have lost to Tunney twice though. If he had lost his drive as much as Dempsey did during his celebrity years, he would have just hung them up. Marciano strikes me as an "all or nothing" kind of guy who wouldn't have fought on if he wasn't completely commited. |
|
|
|
#6 |
|
Belt holder
ESB Addict
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: London
Posts: 3,105
vCash: 1000 |
It's impossible to know how good some of Dempsey's early opponents were. Even in regards to accurate record-keeping and compiling record books, things had come a long way from 1914 to 1949.
We don't even know when Dempsey actually started fighting professionally. Maybe 1911, maybe later, maybe earlier. It's impossible to know much at all about his opponents, or how many fights Dempsey had. Dempsey started out away from the cities where there were men keeping busy reporting and recording prize-fighting. The level of Marciano's opponents is far more easily established. |
|
|
|
#7 | ||
|
Champion
East Side Guru
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 6,700
vCash: 1000 |
Quote:
Quote:
In Tunney versus Marciano threads, I've taken the position that Gene from the Heeney fight would have decisioned Rocky over the championship distance. Meehan was a miserable bastard over the four round limit. He got the better of Langford after taking Fulton that abbreviated distance in back to back matches. (These three bouts were immediately following his last match with Jack.) Willie also beat Jeff Clark over four rounds. A peak 25 year old Wills failed to stop Fat Boy over that distance (although, like Jack, Harry was able to at least deck the sailor). He drew with prime Miske over four. Marciano definitely does not go 5-0 in a quintet of four round bouts with Willie, let alone 3-0 in Meehan's San Francisco. Willie heard the bell for round 20 four times in his career, and actually stopped Walter Coffey before that final round ended. Marciano would run out of time for producing a stoppage under a four round limit rule set. |
||
|
|
|
#8 | |
|
Champion
East Side Guru
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 7,121
vCash: 500 |
Quote:
did not FIGHT FOR THREE YEARS, when he foolishly without a warm-up bout ,without his mentor Jack Kearns, fougfht Tunney in 1926 . ? THREE years in Hollywood screwing the slent screen sirens and without a tune-up made JacK Dempsey , Jack Dempsey in name only...Tell me M what HW in history could not fight for three years, and without ONE tune-up fight,at the worn age of 32 beat the razor-sharp underated Gene Tunney ? Can you picture Rocky Marciano retire from boxing for three years and nary a warm-up bout beating a Gene Tunney ? I have posted this before and wish not to reheat any arguements but when Marciano [who I loved and saw ringside] was champion, their was a poll of boxing writers and ex fighters who saw Dempsey before Tunney, and Marciano,then in his prime. The question was "who would have won between Jack Dempsey and Rocky Marciano, in their primes" ? Dempsey was the pick by almost unanimous choice to beat Marciano, because of Dempsey's great speed on the attack, two handed punching and equal toughness...And I concur with the vast majority...If Jack Dempsey in his prime would lose, it would be to a great boxer who could avoid trench warfare.... |
|
|
|
|
#9 | |
|
THROW SOME THUNDAAAH!!!!
East Side Guru
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Washington D.C.
Posts: 5,273
vCash: 75 |
Quote:
-Yeah, I addressed all that in the post you quoted and explained my position. |
|
|
|
|
#10 | |
|
Undisputed Champion
East Side VIP
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: London,England
Posts: 10,633
vCash: 1000 |
Quote:
Very true. He was smart enough to know exactly when to get out. He could n't have maintained his edge for too much longer. Maybe a year or two. |
|
|
|
|
#11 | |
|
♧ OG Kally ♤
East Side VIP
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: from parts unknown
Posts: 10,657
vCash: 1200 |
Quote:
I think the 3 year Hollywood layoff badly damages Rocky's chances against Tunney no matter how hard he trained (which would certainly involved Spartan-like dedication to supreme conditioning), even though he'd still do notably better than Dempsey & actually make it a tough fight even if the cards were wide, I see there being enough close rounds for it to not be called an easy nights work for Gene. Peak Marciano however would've given Tunney a 50/50 trilogy I think though, whereas Dempsey would always be made to look a fool. |
|
|
|
|
#12 |
|
Belt holder
ESB Addict
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: London
Posts: 3,105
vCash: 1000 |
If we take just Dempsey's known fights from 1914 - '27 (and there are probably a few missing in that time period anyway), and have Marciano do the exact same schedule, he's going to have to fight until an older age.
Marciano turned professional age 23 1/2, and last fought soon after turning 32. On Dempsey's schedule if he turns pro at 23 1/2, he'd be about 36 1/2 against Sharkey and Tunney II. Also, we have no idea how he'd do against most of Dempsey's opponents, who we just don't have much info on. Let's not forget that Marciano had two controversial points wins in his own 49-0 career. And three of Dempsey's recorded defeats, and several of his fights, were limited to 4 rounds, a distance over which Marciano may well have proved more susceptible to spoilers. |
|
|
|
#14 | |
|
Undisputed Champion
East Side VIP
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Boston, Ma
Posts: 12,959
vCash: 1000 |
Quote:
Marciano fought 6'2 213lb Joe Louis, who even at age 37, had far better fundamental skills and a much better left jab than any of those big men. 1951 Joe Louis beats all 4 of those men in shut out unanimous decisions. Fulton was ok, but he couldn't take a punch, and was nowhere near as skilled as joe louis. Him beating a midget 5'6 Sam Langford who was way over the hill doesn't mean he could handle a prime Rocky Marciano. Willard a monster? he was 37 years old, hadn't fought in 4 years. He looks terrible on film. A clumsy big oaf. Carl Morris? Your kidding right? He was a big joke Luis Firpo? One of the most unskilled fighters ever captured on film, most amatuers would beat him. He has a good punch, and that's it |
|
|
|
|
#15 | |
|
Undisputed Champion
East Side VIP
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Boston, Ma
Posts: 12,959
vCash: 1000 |
Quote:
|
|
|
![]() |
| Bookmarks |
| Thread Tools | |
|
|