Rocky Marciano's so called punching power

atsch:rofl Here we go with the blood vessels nonsense again. You people are a joke.

 

Okay I made an error, I gave you the credit of being able to engage in a debate It won't happen again.

 

What happened ,did you get banned from the lounge? Bye , we won't be engaging again.

 

You rumbled him, too?

 

What mcvey states is absolutely true.

Walcott who fought both men twice and was koed by both men stated the following...Louis was a rhythm puncher, one punch would follow another and another but shot for shot Marciano hit harder. Marciano as was Louis and Dempsey were devastating ko punchers because they understood the science of throwing punches with full body weight behind them. With this ability they could ko any man at any weight. There is way too much emphasis on weight and size on these boards. You should be looking at skill, leverage, basic boxing techniques, balance....true boxing abilities that are the bedrock of all time great fighters.

 

Guys, Walcott was asked that question on the spot on the TV program
"The Way it Was" .. Walcott was trying to be polite and a statesman of sorts so he gave both a compliment ... I interoperated what he said was that Louis was a more fluid combination puncher while Rocky was a load up with every punch hitter, not that Rocky hit harder but tried to kill w every shot .. I in no way think Rocky hit harder than Louis ... he might have but Louis destroyed much bigger, stronger men than Rocky ever fought .. Walcott also fought a faded Louis and a prime Rocky ...

 

Walcott stated after his comparison....shot for shot Marciano hit harder. Walcott felt Louis ko blows as he did from Rocky. His comments as a seasoned pro and former hwt champion have to be given significant weight.

 

been watching rockys fights, he sure could hit, he was knocking guys out the way tyson was knocking fighters, i think if rocky was fighting in modern era he would have been publicised as tyson, as an unstoppable machine, his power is immense.

 

Marciano like Louis and Dempsey could put their body weight behind their punches. All were very hard punchers capable of knocking out anyone at any time.

 

Marciano was the definition of the term "heavy hands". He could move guys with glancing blows. When he touched a guy he usually left a mark.

 

You don't even need Walcott's testimony.

Watching the actual knockouts, you can see Louis put Joe away with a combination of punches and Marciano put him out cold with one shot. We rarely get examples that perfectly comparable.

Marciano: harder puncher. Louis: quicker and more accurate puncher.

That's just the way it is.

 

Before his comeback, Louis had a like 100% stoppage record against heavier men. Baer Brothers, Simon, Carnera, Galento, Nova..etc.

Louis didn't OUTSIZE guys, his hand speed and accuracy was usually the difference. The best overall puncher in HW history in my book and one of the elite finishers too. He never let his man off the hook once he had them hurt.

There is simply no factual or video evidence to lead one to the conclusion that Louis' simply relied on a weight advantage to put guys away.

 

Going back to The Lion's post who McVey was responding to. The implication is that Joe Louis was a giant of his day, which is inaccurate. Whlie he was bigger than the average fighter, but he was about average for the contenders of the 30s and 40s.

What your fact doesn't show is that even when Louis had the weight advantage over other contenders it was rarely huge one. For instance Godoy (1 lb), Braddock (less than a 1lb), Sharkey(a little over 1 lb), Levinsky (less than a 1lb), Schemling (6 lbs), Mann (7 lbs). So why 71% may be a fact, its not the whole story. These were all similar sized guys.

And as McVey pointed out he was outweighed or matched by many like Carnera, Baer Bros, Uzcudun, Farr, Galento, Simon, Ketchel, and Nova.

Noteworthy fighters he had more than 10 lbs and a decent sized advantage over: Walcott, Conn, Mauriello, Pastor.

Now I believe he outweighed all of his post-comeback opponets in the 50s but he was hardly an effective knockout artist than, which further screws up your 71% figure. Louis could only be considered a giant during his second run. In the 30s and 40s, his size isn't that remarkable.

 

In the hwt division a10 pound difference is nothing. So much emphasis is placed on weight and size. Boxing is a high skill sport...you should be looking at the skills and style fighters exhibit. Size and weight should be the last thing looked at.

 

That's exactly my point. Louis' did not have a remarkable size advantage over his better opponents in the 30s and 40s, and any notion of that being key to his success should be struck down. The smallest guy he fought in Conn, gave him the most trouble in truth.

What Louis did have was remarkable punching skill, as I said, maybe the best the HW division ever saw.