Who is Greater between Holmes or Marciano?

Rocky Marciano is the greatest boxer ever. I don't even see how this is a question. 49 AND ZERO, folks. What don't you get?

Marciano would KO Holmes within 3, worse than Tyson. And that is PRIME Holmes. Busted blood vessels. 300 pound heavybag. Monastic training. He chewed the beef, swallowed the juices and spit out the meat. He sent slicksters into coma's, caused blood clots in arms and legs just by staring at them. He walked around at 6 foot 6 but trained himself down to 5 foot 11. He could throw a baseball a mile. He ran 20 miles in the morning before his first ****, squeezing out the last of nutrients with each mile before discarding a nugget of coal.

 

Both are top 5 for me


Holmes beat

6'3 220lb Ken Norton- A masterful boxer with good size, WBC Heavyweight Champ
6'3 217lb Tim Witherspoon- An elite boxer/puncher in his prime with good size, future WBC/WBA titlist
6'3 210lb Michael Spinks- ATG in his prime, holmes robbed in rematch
6'4 225lb Bonecrusher Smith- Big, Strong, Ferocious Puncher, future WBA titlist
6'7 225lb Gerry Cooner- A giant with frightening power
6'1 210lb Earnie Shavers- One of the most feared punchers ever
6'2 225lb Ray Mercer- Undefeated Olympic Gold Medalist/WBO titlist
6'1 210lb Mike Weaver- Dangerous Slugger, future WBA titlist
6'5 220lb Carl Williams- Fast, Skilled giant with a great jab
6'2 225lb Trevor Berbick- Strong Workhorse, future WBC titlist

Marciano beat

6'0 185lb Ezzard Charles- ATG former champion, highly skilled with fast hands. # 1 rated in 1954.
6'0 195lb Jersey Joe Walcott- Reigning heavyweight champion, a great masterful boxer-puncher with a top jab, elite footwork, and dangerous power.
6'2 213lb Joe Louis- Far past his prime, but still a threat in the division with a # 2 rating. Thundering left jab, had size and good power.
6'3 215lb Nino Valdes- Big, Strong dangerous puncher with a thudding left jab
5'11 185lb Archie Moore- ATG fighter, rated # 1 at heavyweight. Electrifying puncher and finisher, very crafty defensive skills.
6'0 185lb Roland Lastarza- # 1 rating, a top notch defensive counterpuncher
6'1 195lb Rex Layne- A tough gritty workhorse with good power and an excellent chin. Rated very highly at the time.

 

:deal This.

I have them tied for fifth spot.

If I had to go with one of them, probably Rocky for the reasons Lester stated.

 

Its Holmes by a country mile. He held the title longer, had over 3 times as many defenses and he beat the better heavyweights.

Funny that anyone could say Larry Holmes didnt clean out his division. Saying that a fat, unmotivated, lazy, drugged out Greg Page was a threat or a drugged out Pinky Thomas was "avoiding the division". Thats laugh out loud funny right there!

If Holmes had chosen to fight Page for example then today his critics would say he didnt face Carl Williams or Tim Witherspoon. Its just bull****.

 

He faced 9th ranked Bonecrusher for a new title* rather than face #1 or #2 ranked Page and Thomas.

And most thought he lost to Tim W. Larry had no appetite for a rematch after a very controversial result.

These are some of the reasons we can say that he didn't clean out the division.








* For legitimizing a third alphabet organization when the two we had was one too many, he should have been tarred and feathered, shot and pissed on.:yep

 

When exactly did Marciano beat Nino Valdes?

 

Both are ATG hwt champions. Marciano however did something no other fighter ever accomplished...never lost and fought all comers. This means plenty.

 

I coulda swore I saw someone in here giving Holmes ATG credit for beating Ali, as if beating Ali in 1980 was akin to beating Ali of 1967. That makes me sad. Holmes may be an ATG HW, but tje Ali fight has absolutely nothing to do with his legacy, and it stands as a fractured orbital on the face of boxing that may never heal.

 

Also, he wasn't undefeated and Marciano was. And the fact that Marciano is the only undefeated HW champion pretty much tops Holmes' achievements.

What are Holmes' top 3 wins in your opinion?

 

Depending on your criteria,

Norton, Cooney, Snipes.

Mercer might get a nod.

He had some 'decent losses' too.

Holyfield, Mc Call, Neilsen

 

Thats not fair, I never consider the guys mention as "True" champs any way. In Marciano's day, there was ONE champ. So Rocky didnt have all this alpha champs to beat in his day as Holmes did. Mike Weaver imo had as much right to being call heavyweight champ as I do.

ITs not fair to compare a alpha era to a non alpha era.

 

They were both around the same age when they won the title, Marciano 29 and Holmes 28.
But, do you actually believe that Marciano would have remained undefeated if he had fought on defending his championship until the age Holmes was first defeated? 6 title defenses vs. 19 title defenses.

And as for you having as much right to call yourself a champ as Weaver. Well, at least Weaver managed 2 title defenses against Gerrie Coetzee (23-1-0) and James Tillis (20-0-0). He wasn't that bad.

 

he walked through Liston and if Marciano was black he'd be counted as the greatest

 

Very fun :good

 

No matter how great Marciano was, sooner or later age would have caught up with him, and with the style he used, most fighters burn out around 32 as Dempsey did before him, and Frazier did after him, Holmes did face a lot of ten and 0 kinda of guys in his title rein, and that has to be a mark against him imo. Not every one of the title defenses were against 1 or 2 guys. Am I going to put more stock in Marciano beating number 1 contender Moore? Or Holmes knocking out a ten-o fighter in a title defense? The only guys that are top level in Holmes defenses are Norton, Cooney, Shavers, and a few others that could be on the level of Marciano's foes like Charles or Walcott.

As for Weaver, I am sorry, good fighter, but he was not the heavyweight champ imo. That honor belong to Holmes. If we had 3 guys claiming to be "Champions" vs one guy claiming to be champions, than of couse Marciano more likely would have beating the least amount of "Heavyweight Champs". With Louis, Walcott and Charles. 3 is not a bad number consider only one man held the title.

I cant put wins for Holmes over Smith or Weaver on that kinda of stool of beating 4+ former champs because of the era of the alpha soups.

Holmes was the best of his, and Marciano his. Both should be top 5. I myself would not care who is rank over who imo. I give the edge to Marciano for cleaning out his era, were Holmes pretty much let the Alpha titles run wild on his rein. Thinking of that, I might put Tyson over Holmes for unifying, but again, I think Tyson's losses in the fashion that happen hurt him ranking wise perhaps.