Who is the biggest person Rocky Marciano fought?

Louis was a shell of the 1941 version of himself. Of course he was. marciano was too much of a young handfull for Joe Louis at that point. It was proven. But that's not taking anything away from the fact that comeback Louis still earned the position of being one fight away from a title fight with the tools he fought Marciano with. Bivins,savold, Brion and Agramante were all very decent wins for any contender. Joe Louis was good enough to be where he was -a top contender- even if he was no longer the brown bomber.

Since this is a discussion about Rocky fighting genuine, bigger sized heavyweight contenders Joe Louis deserves to be included because even if he was something of a shell he genuinely was a real contender beating rated fighters... and he knocked Agramante down with a right hand.

 

One can only judge fighters by how they performed at the highest level ( title fights ) and who they fought at that level.

And there is simply no escaping the fact that beating a 38 and 39 year old Jersey Joe, a 39 year old Ancient Archie ( who was a Light Heavy ), and Don ****ell, is hardly the stuff of beating the elite.

All credit for the Ezzard Charles, and La Starza wins though.

 

You are correct, didn't seem to effect him then. His jab and left hook looked great.

 

Louis still had a sharp jab and hook but as a more muscular veteran fighter his right hand required more timing to cross over. It was still potent but harder to land. The Agramonte knockdown is proof that his right hand was still useful even in his final year as a fighter.

 

I dont know if anyone else sees this, but i believe OP is a troll and started this thread purely to say Marciano is simply "too small" to be competitive with other great heavyweights., hence why he then mentions another small heavyweight in Tyson.

This is confirmed, judging by his responses in this thread

 

You need to go back and watch prime Louis. In the Marciano fight, his left hand was painfully slow... almost gruesome to watch him try to fight. I find it intellectually appalling that people can watch that fight and proclaim Louis to be a vital force when compared to his previous efforts.

 

I think he still had the abilities of say a #6 or #7 ranked contender, but when contrasted to the ATG abilities that he had 10+ years earlier, I agree that it was literally like looking at two different men.

 

Joe Louis was a shell of himself but still capable of beating contenders.

 

The level of the contenders was at a definite nadir. It wasn't so much that Louis retained his powers as the division crumbled beneath him as he fell.

 

I think that's what it basically comes down to.. When some organization tries to make a champion by staging a title bout between Bruce Woodc-ck and Lee Savold, it pretty much sums up the picture.

 

I don't think you can knock the post war contenders that much.
Louis was a shell of the 1941 version of himself. Of course he was but since this is a discussion about Rocky fighting genuine, bigger sized heavyweight contenders Joe Louis deserves to be included because even if he was something of a shell he genuinely was a real contender beating rated fighters... Bivins, savold, Brion were solid wins...and he knocked Agramante down with a right hand.

 

No he wouldn't he'd get killed, he wouldn't have beaten Ali, but then Ali wouldn't have beaten Wlad either, athletes get bigger and better, and they made weight classes for a reason.

 

Bivins, Baksi, Walcott, Charles, oma, rex layne, Joey maxim, Clarence Henry, even woodkock and Savold were all pretty good fighters.

 

I know.. But there was a reason why I posted that to the idiot whom it was intended for. Hard to explain..

 

The any and every stick to beat Marciano with is what is crumbing underneath here.

The heavyweight division definitely took a tumble with Ezzard Charles as champion compared to the pre-Louis glory days of Jimmy Braddock?

I don't see the 1946 to 1955 period as at all a bad era in this or most of the other major sports as the post-war sports integration brought in a flood of minority talent who would not have gotten any chance at all earlier, or would have been sided off into career dead-ends w/o getting a fight against the champion (like Jackson, Langford, Wills, Godfrey). It is really difficult for me to see how integration weakened boxing or the heavyweight division.

Even Louis naturally going back from his pre-war peak and having consistently tougher fights with Walcott, Charles, and Marciano than he did with the bum-of-the-month club era fighters in his prime is supposed to prove that the division had collapsed? But Louis was an aging great fighter who couldn't hold his position and lost to his young successors. That seems actually to provide evidence that the quality of the division held up or improved.

"nadir"

Compared to what era? And what challengers? Munroe? Fireman Jim Flynn? Carpentier? The heavyweight division has always been a couple of top men and then the also-rans, and most of the also-rans of earlier eras would be underdogs for me even with the Louis of 1951. As a matter of fact, so would some of the champions.

The top men of 1951-Charles, Walcott, Louis, Marciano, Moore, Johnson, Layne, Henry, Baker, Satterfield, etc., more than match up with most eras in my judgment.