Prime Marciano V Tysons Challengers?

I still don't see it Rocky is keeping up just fine with whoever he's fighting and lands on some very faster fighters like Charles, Walcott, Matthews, and Larstarza. Maybe its because he's not bouncing around looking super flashy while doing it.

 

I actually like the stuff he does to close distance, tho he still gets whacked pretty often. But his hands are slower, and his feet even slower. There is no correlative over the past 35 years that combined his physical shortcomings, style and lack of speed. There have been successful smaller guys but all were much faster and most not power punchers.

 

Yes, but Rocky is getting whacked by very fast guys it be different if they looked slow and cumbersome like so many think of Rocky but their not. I think if you'd put him in their with a 215 plus pound guy you'd actually be surprised how fast he was. Sadly though we will never be able to see it.

 

Everyone knows that Marciano was slow. He was slow his whole life. His own brother said he wanted to play baseball but was too slow (or something like that).

I also think that you are greatly overstating how fast a 38-yo Joe Walcott was.

As an aside, I rewatched a couple of his fights with Walcott and Charles a little while ago and I was stunned by how relatively flat footed each of them stood, how long they stayed in front of him, how little they jabbed, and how often they lunged in with lead power punches. They seemed to have surprisingly little respect for him.

 

Not everyone because I disagree with it and they didn't have much respect for him read any of their comments before the fight but that all changes when they get in their with him. Like Walcott saying take him out of the record books if he looses. The right hand that knocks out Walcott is just as fast any ever threw by any fighter. Also, Charles kind of stood in front of him but Walcott after realizing he couldn't slug with him does go back to sand dancing to stay away. Yet Rock still lands on him. You'd be surprised how few heavyweights could never land anything meaningful on Walcott.

 

Then that's what you would be then. Six knockouts isn't bad for someone with 71 fights. Especially three of them came later in his career.

 

Of course he was only stopped three times by two men after returning to the ring as a proper full time fighter in the mid 40s. And two of those stoppage losses was after long struggles.

But of course you know that. Why roll out such a straw man argument and expect it to be took serious?

 

He wasn't prime but still good enough to beat a lot of top heavies of any era.

So Jack Johnson who was ko'd six times as well isn't too hard to tag either? If that were true Charles should've knocked him out if he was so easy to hit solidly even Louis should've done it both times he fought him. Yet he got schooled first time.

 

Do you honestly think Walcott couldn't go 26 rounds with Willard he was in much better shape than Johnson was at the same age. Three of Walcott's stoppages are from the hardest hitting heavyweights ever Louis and Marciano spot the difference?

 

Why pretend like you don't know anything about Walcott?

Are you this desperate for the same arguments, you are going to fein ignorance?