Fantasy Fight Cliches

RR vs Mayweather?? You might as well mention David v Goliath. I never stressed that point.

How come it's not a good point? That's a part of his make up and you don't think it's a good point to mention. Power and ability to take punishment is Foremans make up but let's not mention it it's repetitive.

Disputable decision? LaStarza? No dispute Rocky won the record proves this. If you want present something that shows otherwise go ahead..

 

Well if Mayweather also 'always finds a way to win', doesn't that mean he, always, finds a way to win?

The point I'm making above is that always finding a way to win against the competition you did face, doesn't bear mentioning against fighters he didn't face.

Who is to say he always finds a way to win even with the competition drastically ramped up?

That's a cop-out. You can treat Whitaker-Chavez or Williams-Lara the same way and it would have the same amount of credibility if you hadn't watched the fights in question.

There was plenty of argument the decision should've gone the other way. So was Marciano's way to win sneaking over to the judges table and making sure he got the nod?

Realistically, LaStarza could've gotten the victory without too much controversy.

 

That's you're point not my point.

Joe Louis;They don't come any smarter
Ezzard Charles; Skill wise they don't come any better
Walcott; They don't come any slicker
Moore; Defensively he's great

Behind on score cards and needs a KO to win. Gets it.
Bloody nose and has one round to score a KO. Gets it.
Knocked down in two fights. Gets up to win.
When he takes a absolutely battering. He still keeps up his relentless attack.

Marciano got the win and beat him in the rematch also.

I see you're attacking Marcianos credibility("So was Marciano's way to win sneaking over to the judges table and making sure he got the nod?") and you want me to take you serious? That comment alone makes me think you've got an agenda towards Marciano.

Marciano won. No Dispute.

 

I don't understand what you're inferring with 'always finds a way to win' then. Or rather why it should be mentioned in H2H match-ups [over and over]

Does it mean he always wins? Why not measure his strengths against the strengths of his hypothetical opponent instead?

If Ali had Marciano's competition you could say the same thing about him always finding a way to win (and you can bet he would have). That doesn't change who he was as a fighter.

There are just straight-up better things to say than just asserting that he always found a way to win.

I'm not surprised you failed to address the comparison I made between Williams-Lara, but no I'm not taking away from Marciano. He proved he was a better fighter than LaStarza. No-one can dispute that.

What I am doing is trying to get across to you how pointless 'always found a way to win' is. When the fight in question could, by all accounts, have gone either way. I'm not even saying it should have. Just that it could.

Marciano's worth doesn't hinge on his undefeated record. So you don't need to be so quick to dismiss that. But if it works for you to plant your fingers in your ears and pretend that an official win is unquestionable, so be it. Don't expect people to take 'always finding a way to win' as seriously though.

http://news.google.co.uk/newspapers...AJ&pg=4784,4017896&dq=marciano+lastarza&hl=en

Here's your dispute by the way.

 

Ali had his own competition he could have displayed that against.

He won the fight and I don't care about the other fights. They're not Rocky Marciano. However he did it he won.

Finding a way to win is part of his make up as a fighter just like his stamina. Understand. If you to tell me about another fighter who has overcome the odds more then once to remain unbeaten then go ahead,I can't think of any. Can you name me one fighter who needed a KO to win a fight AND had one round to KO an opponent in a championship fights or some sorts?

Can you name one of his fights where he didn't find a way to win and was defeated? Impossible. Can you say that for any other HW champion ever? No.

So why is it pointless to talk about a feat not matched in the HW division before or since in over 100years?

 

Being tall means you're big

http://boxrec.com/list_bouts.php?human_id=20917&cat=boxer

6'6 yet no heavier than 190 lbs.

 

i agree here, , tommy morrison is ridiculously underrated and lewis got stopped twice by a single shot by 2 average fighters. so he has glass chin too. morrison took the shots from ruddock and then he destroyed him in much worse fashion than tyson did ever.(i know i know ruddock was super ruddock when he faced tyson but he was a shot when he faced morrison lmao)

 

1. That the 220 pound heavyweight always beats the 197 pound heavyweight.
2. That Duran is overated. He is and always be as good as we make him out to be.
3. That Liston was a bum because he lost twice to Ali.
4. That Aaron Pryor is a bum that need the "black bottle" to win.
5. That the Rope-A-Dope was a good plan or pre-planed. It was a lack of defense and Foreman's great skill at cutting the ring. Ali couldn't go anywhere else...if he tried to box while George was fresh he would have most certainly KO'ed.

6. That fighters had no skills until Joe Louis ignoring the fact that the great modern fighters where trained by trainer who studied the old fighters...like Mike Tyson and Cus D'Amato.

 

That Marciano only fought old men.

That fighter "A" beat and knocked out better fighters than fighter "B" did, so fighter "A" must punch harder than fighter "B"

 

Had he fought inferior competition, he would have.

So most of the people who actually see it say it was close but went the wrong way. But for you it's fine enough to say that he definitely won and it's not worth discussing? :huh

They could have scored it the other way. That wasn't up to Marciano, if the judge or the referee had it in LaStarza's favour (as by all accounts, they should have) there goes 'always finds a way to win'.

Now you get to tell me what it means.

Marciano's will to win is not in question here. What is in question is the worth of saying 'always finds a way to win'.

Why mention it when you're talking about fighters that are so much better than anyone he faced?

Does it mean he'll find a way to win against George Foreman or Lennox Lewis, because he found a way to win against Walcott?

Is it just a prettied way up of saying he isn't going to quit?

 

Inferior based on what?? This will be good.

Have you seen it or are you believing everything you read??? The fight was in NY,LaStarza was a NY boy back then hometown boys always got the nod. His style was ridiculed up until the day he won the championship.

Well..he isn't going to quit. His career proved he ALWAYS finds a way to win. 49 and "0". Like I said match his feats with another HW career it's impossible.

 

Are you really asking me to compare the competition of Ali and Marciano?

Firstly I'd like to point out that in semantics aside, you've only read that he won the fight.

So why didn't he win in this fight? The referee and judges had it close if I recall correctly. Shouldn't they have been able to slip LaStarza the decision

Why is it that I can't find a newspaper report in favour of Marciano?

I've provided a source (from a Pittsburgh newspaper. Not New York). How about yours?

Against the competition he fought.

Now why does this apply against opponents* he didn't fight, and what's the worth of bringing it up?

*Opponents much more formidable than anyone he faced.

 

He lost to Frazier. Ali said Marciano was better then Frazier. Argument over.

check the record.

Why bring up Foreman power when he couldn't knock out anyone in the 90s? Why bring up Ali footwork when he couldn't do it against Lyle,Norton? Why bring up Joe Louis Ring IQ when he was almost beaten by Billy Conn? Why say David Tua had tremendous power when he couldn't KO anyone above journeymen level?

Because that's what we witnessed..

 

Well, skippy. Let's forget for a second, that the comparison was between their competition and not them as a fighter

He said that before he fought Frazier, a man who he was relentlessly mocking and teasing at the time to sell fights.

He also never officially fought Marciano.

But let's play your game, Archie Moore said Patterson was a harder puncher than Marciano.

Now do we have a problem with taking quotes at face value? :nut

Now that we remember that the comparison was between their competition and not them as a fighter

Liston, Frazier, Foreman are the best three wins in heavyweight history.

It's not close either.

I don't even want to bother with comparing depth, because it's simply beyond question. Ali had a much longer career and met so many more top contenders that it shouldn't really be in question by anyone that's not some sort of bizarre fistic hipster.

The same record where Whitaker-Chavez is a draw?

Yeah, nah. Spare me.

Perhaps because they are statements of quality which will actually count in an H2H matchup.

Marciano had great power/stamina/chin what have you =/= he always found a way to win. Unless you're matching him up with someone he did in fact win against.

You're conflating things that aren't the same.

 

He said that after he fought Frazier..get ya sh1t right.

You offer nothing to this argument. Rock PROVED he always found a way to win. You can't dispute it son. 49 and "0".

You've never seen LaStarza/Marciano 1 so why are you comparing the two or even commenting on it as towards it was a dubious bout. If it was fishy the town athletic state commission would have looked into LIKE THEY DID ON NUMEROUS PREVIOUS BOUTS.

You've already hinted at something fishy on Marciano I don't take you serious.

No. The principle is the same. We judge on what we see. He always found a way to win,the disadvantages he faced and near impossible task of KO'ing a ATG in one round to win his HW belt has never done before or since. His record and achievements are unparalled. Get it??? They haven't since or before been replicated. Sorta like George Foreman power.