Marciano v.s. Bruno ?

Thank you for stating what should be plainly obvious to everyone saying Bruno would win. And I say that as someone from Britain.

I remember Bruno and likeable though he was, he was also a fighter who fell apart at the first sign of pressure. Marciano would have absolutely taken him apart.

 

From ALL YOUR STATEMENTS it is obvious to anyone that you have ZERO idea what makes a fighter good, much less great. Just another delusional Bruno fanatic disappointed with Brunos lack of competitiveness against even middle of the road contenders. I can truly never take seriously anything you say about boxing after you have exposed yourself with this asinine argument.

 

I've never met a Bruno fanatic in my life, i'm definitely not one, nice fella, and I cheered him on, but i'm well aware, like every other Brit of his limitations. Just stating physical facts that have a major say in the outcome of a fight..I could not give 2 ****s whether you take me serious or not, it means nothing to me, its an opinion, and for you to think that 180lb Marciano has the same effect on 230 plus fighter, then you are either too attached to that period for sentimental reasons or your just plain stupid. Theres weight divisions for a reason, and Marciano is not a modern day sized heavy or anywhere close. To be honest Marciano is closer to being a light heavy than a cruiser

 

If you blow your knee playing baseball or even walking to the fair, it's still a blown knee if you pick up boxing. Common sense suggests the "wear and tear" argument has too many variables and unknowns to base a solid argument around.

All we can conclude is that Charles was becoming less consistent when faced with intense schedules but was still an elite force on his best nights, men who watched Charles his whole career have stated the first Marciano fight was one of his best individual performances.

I don't think you'll find much resistance to simply stating Charles was past his best but still formidable, a top Heavyweight, or something along those lines.

But calling the Charles who faced Marciano an "old light heavyweight" just doesn't make sense.

1. Charles was actually heavier than Maricano in the rematch, and equal weight in the first fight.
2. Charles had not fought as a LHW since he was 26.
3. Charles and Marciano are actually less than 2 years apart and were both in their early 30s when they fought.

To argue against these points you have to go against the hard facts, hence you have to come up with weird vague arguments that easily fall apart. But nobody said you HAVE to try discredit a universally acclaimed legendary fighter.

 

It’s a lot more to do with levels than size. You seem to have decided upon something without considering the levels.

Naturally a Frank Bruno level cruiserweight would be destroyed by the actual Frank Bruno. Because the actual Frank Bruno is the same thing but bigger. And this is where size comes into the “all things being equal” stakes. But that is the only place where it counts in ATG discussions. In the All things being equal department. Not where one fighter was greater than the other.

Marciano is not a Frank Bruno level cruiserweight is he?

But within the echelons of all time great fighters, exceptional ones, size becomes just one factor up against all the other things that count as much or more than this one point. One point is greatness. That stops all things being equal.

Size can level things up. Perhaps 90% of the time a less talented guy can overcome a better fighter with his size. But not when it comes to great fighters. Fighters who are greater than all the guys who already knocked out the less talented big man.

 

Your evaluation of Maricano is going against the grain. You are denying logic with abstract idealism and stubbornness. Your only hope to make a case for Bruno is to reduce Maricano's resume to wins over "old light heavyweights" and irrelevance, which frankly doesn't align with history.

Joe Louis was 215 pounds, his physique appears to be composed of a low body fat to muscle ratio. You are arguing it's not muscle, it's just some sort of magical "weight gain" that means nothing, an abstract concept that defies the laws of physics, because you don't want to admit Marciano was effective against a much bigger man.

 

I know Marcianos a better p4p fighter but the oldest saying in boxing "size matters" is really relevant here. Weight disadvantages effect every fighter EVEN great fighters.

 

Joe louis wasn't a 215lb fighter prime. Please can you put me right on why he weighed more at the end of his career ?? Can you tell me why Ali, Lewis, Frazier infact every fighter that I can think of weighed more at the end of their careers than they did in their primes ? Could it be that they are big men and even a stone out of their prime weight they can still look in good nick ? That's my argument. Its not a good thing, and 99% of the time its not added muscle at that stage, its them struggling to maintain their weight down to age. IT GETS HARDER TO SHIFT

 

So? It doesn't mean the 214 pounds coming down on the Rock, weighed any less.

Cause he trained down to 203 against Bivins and felt he was stronger at 210+

No. You bring up an example of Ali, well there were times he looked husky..cause he was, it's not magic invisible to the naked eye.

[url]https://i.ytimg.com/vi/R-_mJjONzns/hqdefault.jpg[/url]

We are not talking about a nameless theoretical 99%, we are talking about Joe Louis. He wasn't fat against Marciano, end of the story.

 

It’s actually less that that. Charles never became a lightheavyweight until after he came out of the army in 1946. Before that he was a Middleweight. Within two months of being a LHW Charles was fighting real heavyweights. Charles fought just 12 bouts where both he and his opponent were within the LHW limit. It’s the smallest percentage of his 121 fight career. When he fought Marciano Charles had already had 50 fights with heavyweights. And he had another 23 against heavyweights after fighting Rocky.

 

It’s relevent when all else is equal. But it’s not equal level. Bruno was good but not great.

 

Well yeah, he was fighting HWs his whole career just about.

I was referencing when he last weighed 175 or so.

People don't realize Charles was fighting as a heavyweight at 26, the same age Maricano was when he turned Pro. Charles had just been fighting since he was an under fed teenager, who grew into the weight as he matured and was eating better.

 

Charles was just shy of 100 fights into his career when he faced Marciano, a career that would see him as a .500 fighter for the remainder. Let's not pretend he was some razor-sharpened fighter. And at 187 pounds, let's not overinflate his relevance to the sort of heavies that Bruno faced on the elite tier.

 

As a Middleweight Charles beat a 183 pounder in 1942 aged 20 years old. He was never ever an exclusive LHW. He was always beating heavyweights.

 

When a fighters management won't put their fighter in with a top flight opponent, unless there is a title on the line, I always ask myself what they no that I don't.

Then you are basically assuming that the 80s heavyweight division, was qualitatively far superior to the 50s, and by extension the 60s.

I like to make as few assumptions like this as possible, because if you insert an erroneous assumption into your house of cards, they whole thing can come crashing down.