Who is the biggest person Rocky Marciano fought?

This content is protected

This content is protected

 

Well, which champions were bigger than Louis? since Sullivan?

The giants Willard and Carnera,

Baer was slightly bigger.

Jeffries was heavier, but probably not as tall.

Johnson was slightly smaller, I think. His weight is generally given as 196 (or even 192) when he fought Burns at thirty. His weight is listed at 208 when he fought Jeffries when thirty-two. At that age the slightly taller Louis went 207 to 211.

Louis, I think, rarely come in at less than 200 after 1937--I believe only for the second Schmeling and first Conn fights. In his mid-twenties in 1941 and 1942 Louis was going as high in 207. And he was obviously in shape. Ten years later at 213 is a logical progression. Most put on more weight than that.

Even Sonny Liston, generally considered a big guy for his time, was really only about the same weight as Louis in prime shape, and was slightly shorter.

Hard to see the case for Louis not being a big heavy for his time.

 

Interestingly enough, Joe Louis weighed 203 for his fight with Jimmy Bivens in August of 1951. Just two months later in October of that year, he weighed 213, which was the second highest weight of his career, topped only by the weight of his fight with Ezzard Charles (218). When a guy gains 10 pounds in two months, it makes me wonder how hard he was training and dieting.

EDIT: I just saw that Louis was also 216 against Brion.

 

Louis felt he was too light against Bivins. This also seems an odd weight, so perhaps something physically happened to him (illness?) or perhaps the scale was off.

It is hard to believe he didn't train all-out for the 1948 fight with the elusive Walcott when he came in at 213.

I have read that Louis was unhappy with his condition for the Charles fight and felt he needed more time to train. His weight for that one was a high 218.

 

Good observation. He was 211 for Walcott I. 213 for Walcott II. 218 for Charles. And 216 for Brion. He was decked in both of his fights with Walcott and was awarded a decision in the first match which a lot of people felt he didn't deserve. He outright lost to Ezzard Charles and barely squeaked by Brion with razor thin scores.. Of course old age, inactivity and facing quality men had every bit to do with these performances as anything else, but something tells me that he wasn't at his best when reaching those weights.

 

Louis was a big heavyweight for his time, but if we look at the post WWII era, then even alowing for differences in training, he more fits the mould of a medium sized heavyweight.

You might use the Louis fight to argue that Marciano could have done well against a Chagaev type heavyweight today.

 

Well, the problem with this analysis is that Walcott is simply a tougher opponent than most he fought. Yes, Louis had trouble at 211 with Walcott but at 211 he put Mauriello out in the first round, although he was rocked.

He was at lighter weights when he got KO'd by Schmeling and given hell by Conn (also two of his tougher opponents).

I think it a tough sell that Louis was out of shape at 213. Everyone gets heavier as they age. Marciano fought Walcott at 184 and Moore at 188. Was he out of shape for Moore?

*by the way, if Burt Sugar is a reliable source, Louis was actually at 201 for Conn in 1941.

**as for Charles (also a very tough opponent) and Brion, Louis had been laid off for a couple of years. It took a while to get rid of the rust, sort of like Robinson took a while to get back into fighting trim when he came back in 1954 and 1955, but he proved against Olson, Fullmer, and Basilio that he was still a formidable fighter, even though he had gone back.

 

Agreed, which is why I alluded to the fact that his facing tougher opponents, being older and in some cases returning from layoffs may have also had something to do with it. On Marciano weighing 184 for Walcott then 188 for Moore, his average weight was around 185, so I don't think those numbers had any bearing on anything. Louis being anywhere between 10-15 lbs over HIS best weight against charles, Walcott, Brion and Marciano may very well have had.. I don't know what the consensus is on exactly when Louis was in his prime. But looking at his fights on film, his record, and the men he was facing, I'm guessing it was probably sometime between 1937-1942, before he went inactive due to military service and fighting only in spurts here and there. During that time frame between 1937-1942 his weight ranged anywhere from 197 to as much as 207, but rarely reached 207 and was seldomly 197. His average weight around this time was probably in the vicinity of 202.

 

"fits the mould of a medium sized heavyweight."

Of the 21 champions from Sullivan to Johansson/Patterson, Louis I think comes in at #5 in size.

Carnera, Willard, Jeffries, and Baer were larger. (Jeff was probably shorter)

Sullivan, Corbett, Fitz, Hart, Burns, Johnson, Dempsey, Tunney, Schmeling, Sharkey, Braddock, Charles, Walcott, Marciano, Patterson, and Johansson were smaller (Braddock was probably taller)

Louis' weights of 213 for Walcott and 218 for Charles would not be approached again by any champion or challenger until Liston in the 1960's. Louis might have been overweight at 218, but so was Liston. No one would fight for the heavyweight championship with a higher weight until Buster Mathis in 1968 (243).

I find it hard under any criteria not to consider him a large heavyweight for his era and pretty big even put against most of the big men prior to the sixties, except for the rare (and generally inept) giants.

 

The first thing I want to say is that I am not saying at all that the Louis of 1951 is comparable to the Louis of 1941.

But the issue is was he in shape at 213.

Marciano--those weights were only three years apart. Running 184 against 188 in a calculator and 207 against 213 in a calculator I find they come pretty close as a percentage, but Louis is over a much longer period of time.

The last time Louis w/o doubt made less than 200 is Schmeling in 1938. He might have made 199+ against Conn in 1941. He was 24 against Schmeling and 27 against Conn. At 24 Sugar Ray Robinson was a welterweight and Henry Armstrong could make the featherweight limit. Archie Moore was probably a middleweight.

Men naturally get heavier, and so did Louis. I just don't think he put on an extreme amount of weight at all, and there is no evidence he was out of shape at 213.

 

Except for the fact that he simply didn't look that good, especially post Walcott, but we've already discussed some of the other possible causes for that.

 

Louis looked in great physical shape against Rocky. His detoriation was likely the result of other reasons as mentioned such as the shoulder tumor that forced him to fight with his left hand in his comeback. Actually I think that was the major reason he regressed so much, he was still a good jabber and against Savold he demonstrated a mean left hook, but the loss of his right hand limited him severly in contrast to his prime self.


[url]http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/real-life-rocky-rocky-marciano-world-heavyweight-champion-60-years-gallery-1.1165035?pmSlide=1.1165016[/url]

[url]http://takimag.com/images/uploads/Joe-Luis.jpg[/url]

 

Louis was in pretty good shape.

Big Bill Wilson I believe was the biggest man Marciano fought.

 

No dispute, but it is hard to judge.

I think anyone taking off two years and coming in with short training to fight Charles would have had a very tough time, let alone someone 36.

As for the Marciano fight, this is also hard to judge as Marciano went on to win all his fights.

Louis was still good enough to beat ordinary contenders, but of course had gone back, especially as a puncher. Obviously the older and heavier Louis was not the fighter he had been when about ten pounds lighter ten years earlier, but I don't think training down in weight would have done him any good in the 1950's.