Marciano vs Tua at cruiserweight

Nobody, and I mean NOBODY is picking the superheavyweight over on my thread.

Two guys, both gold medal winners, one bigger one smaller, both at the same stage of development. Pounds apart.

The difference, clearly is greatness.

Same here.

 

We have been through this before. These guys (Charles, Moore and Walcott) were coming off world class knockouts against world class fighters in their most recent fights. Career highlight wins! That is not revisionism. It is called factual.

Now, (please, please, please) explain imediatley before meeting Tua, what great wins or knockouts of rated fighters did Bryd and Ruiz ever perform?

"When they fought Tua". This is something crucial.

 

Quit playing dumb or devils advocate...or both. It doesn't suit you.

 

irrelevant? :rofl

 

the funny thing is that some guys keep talking about charles, walcott and archie moore, lmao. moore was 40 when he fought marciano, he had glass chin between hws and he was a former mw an dlhw ( he did weight even 145 pounds in his early career at 20 lmao), charles was another guy past his prime when he fought rocky and was a former mw and lhw and weighed 157 pounds at 19), walcott was not even a full sized cruiserweight and had a weak chin too, he got knocked out by nobodies. tua would have demolished these 3 guys and easily... moore would last maybe 45 seconds, walcott would survive well until he got hit by the first punch to the chin and good night, charles is the one who would better but he was too fragile and small for tua, he was not a southpaw like byrd, he did not weight 215 pounds like byrd, and he was not as fast as byrd,the highest weight that he could carry and being effective was 185 pounds, soon or later tua would put him against the ropes and he would get smashed. in few words... tua would kill the 3 best victories of marciano

 

I was talking about marciano's weight in relation to Moore, Charles, and Walcott's weight. Same for Tua and his opponents. I wasn't comparing Tua nor his opponents h2h with Marciano and his.

 

You are a sad, sad, delusional little man.

 

I don't now to what you're referring.

 

Quit being an arrogant C*NT.
Don't presume to tell me what to do, you're definitely not qualified for it!

 

I am stating categorically that no boxer is in his prime at 40 years of age.

You can disappear up your own a*se with your convoluted spin but you will not change that stone cold fact!

 

Says the guy who said Walcott was trash just because he retired.

 

I didn't say he was "trash," I said he was not in his prime.Don't try and put words in my mouth ,I find I have no difficulty speaking for myself.

Walcott,Charles ,Louis and Moore were all past prime ,whatever results they achieved during that time tell us two things.
1. How good they were when in their prime .
2.The paucity of talent in the division.
It does not indicate they were in their primes.
Now do you want to be civil ,or do you want to continue in this vein?