Tommy Morrison vs Rocky Marciano

Discussion in 'Classic Boxing Forum' started by Agent E-45, Jun 1, 2013.



  1. janitor

    janitor VIP Member Full Member

    70,037
    24,041
    Feb 15, 2006
     
  2. FastHands(beeb)

    FastHands(beeb) Well-Known Member Full Member

    2,490
    363
    Oct 28, 2010
    Your ridiculously simplistic logic in assessing the outcome of contests, added to your childlike level of insulting posters who happen to disagree with your posts, are the major contributary factor to the dumbing down of this forum.

    Fortunately you are in a minority of one.
     
  3. choklab

    choklab cocoon of horror Full Member

    27,511
    7,386
    Dec 31, 2009
     
  4. kingfisher3

    kingfisher3 Boxing Addict Full Member

    4,715
    479
    Sep 9, 2011
    marciano by ko is my pick, but as seamus says if morrison turns up for the fight fit and ready it could be different.
     
  5. FastHands(beeb)

    FastHands(beeb) Well-Known Member Full Member

    2,490
    363
    Oct 28, 2010
    Seamus, fair enough. I think Morrison had power that whilst clearly visible against lower level opposition didn't produce many inside the distance wins against elite level opposition IN THEIR PRIMES (a bit like Frank Bruno actually). Foreman could be outboxed at that stage and Ruddock was long past prime when they fought.

    I also think Morrison had elite flaws too! You know what I'm referring to.
     
  6. heavy_hands

    heavy_hands Guest

    blablablabla...zzzzzz boy you are a bit boring, actually i never did care about your comments lol i could not learn anything from you , no offence :lol: donĀ“t get mad
     
  7. heavy_hands

    heavy_hands Guest

    really? archie moore was a 40 years old man, former mw, natural lhw, walcott was 38 and he was a cruiser, charles was a natural lhw and he was past his prime, marciano had to fight during 8 rounds to stop the worst version of joe louis ,you could argue that rocky lost against the bum La Starza :hi:
     
  8. andrewa1

    andrewa1 Boxing Addict banned Full Member

    7,005
    2,067
    Apr 8, 2013
    Pal, you've got to be one of the dumbest posters I've seen. No, he's at least bringing logical arguments to bear. You're posts don't even make sense. You're "comparing", if that's what you call it, modern boxers who have evolved with heavier HW's, and who, invariably, eventually met a bigger opponent with enough skill to overwhelm them, to someone who never had bigger, competent opponents. You talk about court, you'd be arrested with your arguments.
     
    ascended likes this.
  9. SP_Mauler

    SP_Mauler Boxing Addict Full Member

    3,152
    7
    Aug 31, 2012

    Evolved in what way? Weights? They've gotten bigger but since when is SIZE an advantage? Lennox Lewis didn't want to fight Chris Byrd but was willing to fight other giants. Holyfield meet every HW opponent who was bigger then him,Same with Byrd and Haye.

    Why can these men defeat giants but fighters of the past not? It's not becaue of their size but more their..try and guess it

    You can't teach a 260lb Argentian who Wladimir KO'd in 1round to take shots like a 215lb Chris Byrd. Wanna refute this?? Go ahead. It's impossible.

    Look if you're gonna talk don't make things up.
     
  10. janitor

    janitor VIP Member Full Member

    70,037
    24,041
    Feb 15, 2006
    Incidentally, there were some pretty good Morrison sized heavyweights around in Marciano's day.

    Sure they were no Lennox Lewis’s, but I don’t think they were necessarily any worse than Morrison.

    They didn't get to fight Marciano, because the Byrds and Toneys of the era beat them, and took the title shots in their place.

    I don't see anybody trying to argue that they would have beaten Marciano, if they had only found a way around the cuties of the era.
     
  11. tommygun711

    tommygun711 The Future Full Member

    15,756
    92
    Dec 26, 2009
    I'd say that Walcott fought the fight of his life against Marciano the first time. It would've turned into one of Walcott's greatest wins had he pulled it off. Walcott was clearly a late bloomer imo. Charles and Moore were both old but Charles clearly still had something left to give Rocky such a great fight.

    Louis definitely was past it against Rocky but he had complied some good wins against Bivins and Savold, but obviously nothing compared to his prime. He had problems pulling the trigger and getting punches off but at even then he still had a great left jab.

    I can't see how he lost to LaStarza, rocky came on strong late in the fight.
     
  12. janitor

    janitor VIP Member Full Member

    70,037
    24,041
    Feb 15, 2006

    This content is protected
    This content is protected

    This content is protected

    This content is protected


    This content is protected
     
  13. Jorodz

    Jorodz watching Gatti Ward 1... Full Member

    21,677
    49
    Sep 8, 2007
    i don't think the cut off point is arbitrary but it is certainly self serving :good :i am the best fighter in ____division's history because of the scientific advances." if true, then every passing generation is the best. which is just ridiculous to say
     
  14. tommygun711

    tommygun711 The Future Full Member

    15,756
    92
    Dec 26, 2009
    Not according to this.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PRtG6fSpy9w

    Mathis probably would have beat Tommy to a decision if he came motivated and in shape like he did against Chuvalo. Underrated fighter.
     
  15. heavy_hands

    heavy_hands Guest

    like always the classic bull**** "morrison had a glass chin and marciano would ko him" ridiculous... morrison was bigger,stronger and harder puncher than any guy that rocky ever fought. morrison did beat much bigger, stronger and harder punchers than marciano in old foreman and ruddock. i am not saying that marciano could not win, but morrison could ko him with a single left hook , hands down. MARCIANO WAS A 185 POUNDER!! NO A BIG HW MONSTER!! IT IS A H2H FANTASY MATCH NOT LEGACY
     
    ascended likes this.