Where do you honestly rate Rocky Marciano against other heavyweight champions?

My recent thread on the relevance of Rocky Marciano sparked a lively debate, so to follow up where would you place him alongside the greats. Whenever I am asked this question I try to pluck each champion from their respective era's and place them in our modern one with six months training under all the advantages we have today by doing that it throws up a few interesting possibilities, for instance imagine a James J. Jeffries who was ahead of his time with the advances of modern training, a Jack Johnson or a Joe Louis competing today, you have to take into account too not just their records but their character, those who were lazy trainers would not benefit much but those who were assiduous would really excel. Thus using the former as a guide where would you place Marciano if all the champs were competing today... ( shameless plug www.redemptionthelifeanddethofrocky.weebly.com )

 

I wonder how would they do in the current cruiserweight division because that's where they'd be stuck

 

rocky is in top ten, but not five. unbeaten, solid mindset but limited physical attributes for a heavyweight, six here and there defences but he still won them of course, thats a fair record as a champ but not great.

As history progresses, and more fighters like Lennox (and possibly Klitto one day) supercede him, he will drop out of the top ten.

 

49 have tried, 49 have failed. He is both dog and gorilla.

 

Probably top 15

 

all these guys beatin' each other

but no one's beatin' Rocky Marciano

 

I don't really have huge boxing knowledge but for me personally he seems either low top 5 or top 10 at the very least.

 

I would think the only reasonable thing would be to rate by the standard sizes of their own era, but really, Marciano was about 185. So, perhaps Super Middleweight if you're going to go that route. :yep

This content is protected

 

Wow, didn't know that a SMW gained about 15 IBS from the weigh in to fight night :think

 

Walcott and Charles would own the cruiser division with ease and if former cruiser Haye is a force today as long as Walcott and Charles could make the HW limit you have 2 highly skilled HWs. Vitali struggled and eventually lost to a prime Byrd. Charles, Walcott, Louis, and Marciano in their primes could of all done the same.

 

Anywhere from 3-10 is something you can make a good argument for. I have him at 4 right now but my list changes. I have it Ali, Louis, Lewis, Marciano, Frazier. My top five.

 

He could be pretty high his top 9 fights are very good Ezzard Charles x2, Walcott x2, Lastarza x2, Moore, Layne, Louis. It took him some time to step up in the level of his fights, but there are not many with such a good bunch of wins.

He could maybe be top 5, many rank Lewis in the top 5 and Tyson and Holfield are comparable wins to Louis and Charles, but then Marciano has wins over Walcott and Moore on top of that. Lewis can't put together as good of 4 fighters as Marciano on his resume, but he fought higher level fighters throughout his career.

 

In terms of legacy, I rate him pretty highly. To never have lost, even if it's against 49 tomato cans (and they weren't, just saying) is an accomplishment. He beat everyone.

In terms of H2H, I wouldn't really fancy his chance against the elite guys from the 60's onwards. Men got bigger, but kept the talent of the previous era, and the same applies in the 70's and so on.

Rocky was a great fighter (In my personal top three favourite heavyweights) but I would not like his chances at all against a Lennox Lewis, a George Foreman or a Mike Tyson for example. He was just too small.

It doesn't lessen what he achieved though, or his rightful standing in the sport.

 

agree :deal

 

with all due respect, Rocky didn't have to squueze down to 168 and make weight-his weight before he trained was well over 200lbs...and NO 168 fighter today could take his punch imo.