Feelings on Marciano vs Louis??

Dan you are upset,I know you don't mean the things you are saying and I forgive you for them.
Repartee definitely isn't your forte' is it? No worries, I'm sure you have many excellent qualities ,you just keep them very well hidden!
I thought we were done here but,to paraphrase Al Pacino,"just when I thought I was out ,they pull me back in!"
Whenever you feel the urge to make another remark about pink benches and men holding hands,just remember these names.
Pyotr Tchaikovsky
Oscar Wilde
Leonard Bernstein
Samuel Barber
Stephen Sondheim
Vaslav Nijinsky
Hadrian
Alexander The Great
Andre Gide
Cole Porter
Sergei Diaghilev
E.M. Forster
Walt Whitman
Leonardo da Vinci
Marcel Proust
Ralph Waldo Emerson
Tennessee Williams
Michaelangelo
Siegfried Sassoon
Rod McKuen
John Maynard Keynes
Cyrano de Bergerac
And say to yourself ,"everybody has worth."

You can make this cup pass you by Dan.

 

When I made the comment I was only referring to the men that Louis was taking heat for failing to knock out. Bivins, Agramonte, and even to a degree a Brion. In the case of Bivins and Agramonte (on film) they both retreated from Louis all night. I don't know this for a fact but I can take an educated guess and say Louis as an older man just isn't going to be up for chasing these guys all over the ring in fairly meaningless tune up fights scheduled so closely together.

Now Brion is an awkward guy who had the same trainer as Godoy, who interestingly frustrated and went the distance once with a prime Louis. Brion used lots of the Godoy tricks, constant ducking, weaving, and smothering.

Good point on Beshore, he was a tough but frankly wasn't very quick or athletic, he couldn't retreat or bob and weave. Smothering Louis was his option at neutralizing him, but Louis was just deadly with those short uppercuts.

 

I never said a god damn thing about men holding hands.

Pink benches is a reference to you acting like an old woman. Most of the gay men I've known in my life are quite masculine, if you associate femininity with homosexuality, that is your hang up, not mine. The only homophobic numb skull here is you, and this is a boxing forum. While the mods are letting you run wild with this off topic garbage is anyone's guess.

 

Dan please, no personal stuff about the gay men in your life!

 

When you have to urge to be homophobic you need to remember these names:

Pyotr Tchaikovsky
Oscar Wilde
Leonard Bernstein
Samuel Barber
Stephen Sondheim
Vaslav Nijinsky
Hadrian
Alexander The Great
Andre Gide
Cole Porter
Sergei Diaghilev
E.M. Forster
Walt Whitman
Leonardo da Vinci
Marcel Proust
Ralph Waldo Emerson
Tennessee Williams
Michaelangelo
Seamus
Siegfried Sassoon
Tom Cruise
Rod McKuen
John Maynard Keynes
Cyrano de Bergerac

 

You can't begin to know how gratified I am you are finally taking this on board Dan. It had been an average , grey, winter day up until now,but the sun has now come out!

Keep these names in your heart!

 

Why no great black gay men on your list? Are you racist or something?

Why do you hate Lee Daniels and Little Richard?

 

What the hell am I reading here! Jesus Christ it's only a boxing discussion, get a room will ya!

 

The mods have made it clear they have no interest in checking Mcvey's trolling. So why the hell not...

The last boxing related post was made by me in response to Dempsey. Please respond to it! lol

 

You are right, why cant "S&M" see how simple it is, Louis fought some solid journeyman give the guy credit. it's even in the articles which apparently they dont understand, Bivins, Argramonte, and Brion, used defensive tactic's for a reason, such as moving, crowding, and Godoy's awkward tactic's, all those throw a puncher off, and you need reflexes to fire your guns. Louis' gun's might have been rusty but there was still a bite to them, that's why those tactic's were used. And they should really study up on Lee Savold, he wasnt bad, in his last fight he had his moments in the Marciano fight
What I cant understand, is with all the articles seamus & mcvey, have read they cant draw their own conclusions and totally disregard any evidence to the contrary. I guess somebody should write an article that says here is what you have to do, go to YT, click in Marciano - Louis, click on enter, wait a few seconds, click on vid, view. Here is what you will see..........lol

 

I don't know Lee Daniels, Little Richard is fine by me .Johnny Mathis is a favourite singer of mine.Al Jarreu?
I'm frequently accused of being racist towards white boxers by Mendoza,puzzling when you think my avatar shows I am white,but Mendozy isn't the sharpest knife in the drawer.
I don't know about you, but I think we've taken this about far enough, truce? Anyway I'm leaving this particular thread.

 

It's gone 13 pages Wass ,I think the salient points have been covered.
Sorry for the detour.

 

I don't think anyone could argue it was a fight that Marciano could not take. It was the classic passing of the torch scenario. It was absolutely incumbent that he take the fight and performing as he did catapulted him into the real title chase.

That said, another issue to be addressed is what did the victory mean in a pure boxing sense. Was it closer to an Ali - Holmes or a Dempsey - Tunney? Personally, judging by the entirety of the footage of his comeback (not a couple punches) and the overwhelming contemporary opinions, I find it edging closer to the Ali-Holmes scenario than the Dempsey-Tunney match. Edging, mind you, not exactly correlative. Louis was pretty much shot, was almost exclusively one-handed, had lost his reflexes... and as one commentator stated, only hit his target by accident with his right hand.

 

Seamus,
I don't think anyone could argue it was a fight that Marciano could not take. It was the classic passing of the torch scenario. It was absolutely incumbent that he take the fight and performing as he did catapulted him into the real title chase.

I agree

That said, another issue to be addressed is what did the victory mean in a pure boxing sense. Was it closer to an Ali - Holmes or a Dempsey - Tunney? Personally, judging by the entirety of the footage of his comeback (not a couple punches) and the overwhelming contemporary opinions, I find it edging closer to the Ali-Holmes scenario than the Dempsey-Tunney match.

Really, tell us how they compare, when you have a really faded ex champion who had no business fighting a prime Holmes, you must agree the same cant be said of the Dempsey - Tunney fight.

Louis to his credit was fighting himself into shape, the fights he had pre- Marciano were vs decent opposition. Why not breakdown those 8 fighters Louis fought on his comeback.
Before you go on a tangent, out of the 8 comeback opponent the ones that were stopped before they met Louis, the countdown of the number of fights after their last ko loss, in most cases, example Beshore was stopped by Francisco dela Cruz, on cuts I am counting the fights after his loss to Dela Cruz. In Beshore's next 15 fights he was only stopped on his feet after 14rds by Charles in a title fight.

1- Brion, had never been stopped and had fought decent opposition pre-Louis

2-Beshore, in 15 fights pre Louis, was stopped only once by Charles and he went 14rds without being dropped, Since you love to post what scribes say and thought here is one for you. (Nat Fleischer in The Ring, October 1950, page 3.) Beshore was not off of his feet in this fight and lived up to his reputation for toughness. Please dont comeback with the Charles, fight was one sided, the point is Beshore was a tough, durable opponent.

3-Agramonte, in 22 pre-Louis fights was stopped only once by JJW.

4-Walker, went 23 fights pre-Louis without being stopped, and just 3 fights before he fought Louis he fought a draw with a very decent Rex Layne.

5-Agramonte fought two times between the Louis fight winning both.

6-Savold, fought 15 pre-louis fights and wasnt stopped and despite what McVey said Woodcock was very highly thought of and had a record of 35-2, coming in, that he was fighting with one eye is an excuse woodcock accepted the fight and took his shot like a man. How many fighters past and present has fought with one eye, they make the necessary adjustments, and keep fighting. Woodcock, was cleared by the British board to fight and not only that declared that the fight between Woodcock and Savold would be for the vacant HW championship. So Savold was a legit guy coming in with a decent win in his previous fight.

7-Brion again, still hadnt been stopped and had two good results between Louis I & II, fighting a split with ranked Rex Layne, and beating up a decent Brit in Jack Gardner, who was the British, commonwealth and European HW champion and had won those titles in the 3 previous fights to fighting Brion, so it was a good win for Brion. Making Brion a credible opponent for Louis.

8-Bivins, in 75 pre-Louis fights had fought the biggest punchers of that era and was stopped only by HOF-ATG's Moore and Charles. Yes I know big punching Lem Franklin stopped him but in 75 fights post Franklin the only stops were vs HOF's. So another guy who was durable.

As you put it "not a couple punches" in all those 9 fights he must have thrown more than a few punches to win vs decent opposition. But since you need articles and scribes to tell you what to think you believe the scribes not you own eyes. That in itself reveals you're reaching for something, that is a fantasy.

Here is another brilliant all knowing scribe, The official round-by-round scorecards, all in favor of Louis, were 7-3, 6-3-1, and 6-3-1. Louis's left jab scored most of his points as he only occasionally threw his right. By accounts posted Bivins was a moving target, Louis used the correct punch the jab to catch Bivins the jab, a good clean right is more difficult to land, duh!
Jeez and you two guys thought you were making points lol.

Back to Tunney was a legit contender and Dempsey could still fight maybe not like the 1919 version but good enough to put Tunney down and not with one punch but an avalanche of punches, catching Tunney one after the other.

Louis was not as far gone as Ali was in the Holmes fight, that Ali would have been pounded by the old Louis on his comeback run.

Edging, mind you, not exactly correlative.

Oh please

Louis was pretty much shot,

not as shot as you and all your scribes make him out to be

Please put away your thesaurus & dictionary

“Let's bring this back to reality and pretend that the discussion hasn't veer over the precipice of fantasy...”

Haha

I know you have to wax poetic but in doing so all you do is put words together and make no sense.

Pray tell where is the fantasy? Who was pretending? And what precipice?

The discussion

Why do you state the obvious, is that how you make your points?


was almost exclusively one-handed,

Wrong, he used both hands throughout his career including his last fight, that you cant see is amazing you and mcvey are the only blind mice who have to be told what they are seeing.

had lost his reflexes...

True to but to say he wasnt a capable fighter at that point is Fantasy

and as one commentator stated, only hit his target by accident with his right hand.

"ONE", one commentator doesnt make it right sorry, all your previous posts were shot down and this is going down in flames. Make a new point something that you have seen. Let me ask since you know so much, George Foreman, needed how many fights in his comeback? Was it the same Foreman as the young Foreman? Did he fight the same, were his reflexes the same? No, No and No.

 

With your tail between your legs, still no reply as you so often require of others. Anyway enjoy your PB, I for one enjoyed our discourse. I respectfully answered each and every question you asked of me, and you still havent answered mine, but in a way you have, your silence says it all. It has been fun.