Exactly, Greb is often described as the fastest fighter anyone had seen.I don't recall that description ever being used in conjunction with Rocky.
Boxing Marciano is the wrong game plan. I'm just gonna come out and say it. McVey, yer a hater and your information is internet based. Read a ****in' book. I realize that if you go by the internet boxing Marciano is the way to beat him. After all he's slow, clumsy, and doesn't even try to win on points. Yer a ****in' mook. Dude was small and made sure no one took advantage of that by staying small and fighting big. The way to beat Marciano isn't by diving right into his game plan like all the guys who on paper shouldn't have even struggled tried. Ezzard was more than capable of outboxing a slow plodding puncher. Walcott shouldn't have been lying when he said he'd **** that bum up, but what happened? You missed the whole ****in' gambit is what happened. You watch those fights and to this very day do not understand why those men lost. Ezzard trying to box Marciano is what got Ezzard KTFO and if Tunney tried that nonsense his ass would be laid out as well. Who on paper was meant to be easy? Who in the press was meant to be a walk? How well did they do and what was the difference between the overachievers and underachievers game plans? Read a book. All this and more is laid out....in books. Just because no one can convince you on yer own terms doesn't mean you are not wrong it means yer terms are ****ed. I don't mind the idea that Tunney would win, but claiming he'd win by outboxing just means you've slept on Marciano. End of, don't give a **** how many articles you've read or how many newspapers you can pull out of yer ass. You didn't even attempt to understand the dude's formula and now yer writing rubbish based mostly off what was successful for a man who lost not what was successful for a man who never did. Probability alone ought to clue yer ass in, but no go on telling the world but Tunney can move doe...dats how you end Marciano. ****in' mook.
Look, I think this would be a great fight and I don't know .. I favor the boxer in this sort of fight .. an old Charles went 15, an old Walcott went long , a much weaker LaStarza went eleven but who knows ? Rocky was a beast.
Bump. It's funny how the Classicists who question whether Ali could possibly muster the effort to beat Marciano have no problem talking themselves into a scenario where Tunney beats the Italian lowlander. I wonder why this is? (rubs chin)
Probably this. Marciano's sheer physicality would need time to work its magic on Tunney. Tunney was a good enough boxer to win a 10 rounder, even if he'd probably be losing the last few rounds.
Im just going to come out and say it. I boxed for 20 years.Started watching films of fights in 1964 including a collection of Marciano's fights. I've built up a reasonable collection of fights and a comprehensive library .I've also spoken to Don Cockell about Rocky. Joe Louis was champ when I was born FY I There was no internet when I began boxing and studying the art! You ,as far as I'm concerned have brought nothing to this forum but some excrutiatingly boring sewage about cestus fighters of many centuries ago ,about which no one has ever heard or is remotely interested in. You are the total twat who thinks Charles tried to box Marciano he ****ing didn't ,he traded with him you absolutely ignorant ****!Now **** off and bore someone else you cretin! No where in this thread have I picked Tunney! ******!
A **** is a **** and should be treated as such.This ***** has had me in his sights since I corrected him on a minor point on his first ****ing day!
For what it's worth I think Tunney is massively underrated and Rocky although great has reached this mystical cant be beaten unless you have a.357 magnum. I like Tunney by decision in a tough fight. A fight where people see just how tough Tunney is.
That post is old as hell and taken out of context. It's been a while since I had enough respect for you to even remotely ***** foot around with what I mean to say to you. Likewise it's also from a time prior to you having told me several times over how old you are, how extensive your library is, how experienced you are, and any other way of saying " I know more" including outright saying " I know more" As if that changed anyone's opinion about anything ever. What you're hunting by putting out yer credentials, or what you perceive to be credentials, only has one motivation; you want me to back down based off your clout alone. Well, no, not happenin'. Just like every other interaction I am going to push you to share something of worth or shut the **** up. If all you have to say is 'no, your wrong because I perceived just the opposite' then what you are saying to me has any no worth at all. Oh, at this point I'm well aware. Rather than being one of these internet educated ****s you're one of those old ****s what wrote the original bull****, came up with the stupid sayings that are nothing close to true, and generally are responsible for all the misconceptions I deal with all the time, have I got you? Short sighted, lazy minded, and yer head so far up your own ass you haven't the ability to respect any opinion outside yer own? Yeah, I know your generation. What do you expect out of me? If most of my opinions are in stark contrasts to the prevailing opinions of your generation then why the **** would you expect me to give a damn when you were born? Let me say it real clear like: You mean the same generation that wrote history books, gave sources, then when you look at those sources find those guys just lied? That generation? How about the generation prior to that who plagiarized their grandfathers and added a little fictional spice? The **** am I meant to respect? I don't hardly hold it against no old man for being an old man but when you get to bragging like that gives you a freepass and you ain't gotta back up **** then why shouldn't I highlight all the bull**** your generation is responsible for? If I'm misinformed that'd be by your generation as well. To take it way back to your first go; Libby ain't exactly from mine ya dick. In all your bitching, moaning, and attacking my threads I've seen no attempt to detract from my central point; boxing Marciano is a mistake, great boxers tried, great boxers failed. A no hoper didn't try, did better than people expected. I didn't even feel strongly about that opinion it's just that your **** is so lazy minded someone had to say something. I know.....you talked to Cockell....what y'all said, not important, that bit is never important when dealing with the allknower mcvey, the only part that is important is the credential drop....you talked to Cockell so I'm an idiot. Yeah? Whatever you say captain. Anyone of us can read your opinions anywhere we like all over. They are the basic opinions every surface fan pretending to know some history has, my bad for assuming you're one of them, however you're a boring **** and at least I express some dissent in a room of grown ass men patting each others asses because they agree...in their fantasy fight fan fictions.....you *****. You say Charles didn't box? What's the point in me disputing it; all you're going to say in response is I'm wrong with nothing to support it outside of the 30 millionth time you've told me yer old as hell. Alright, Charles didn't box, my posts have no worth, and I'm a dumb****. Does that make you less of a ***** or does mean Charles made an attempt to overpower Marciano? Neither yeah, just makes us both a pair of dicks because at this point there is no boxing to be spoken on just you and me. Now tell me about how you can't be bothered to read and run along to your next fairy fantasy fan fiction you throw a **** fit over while you call yourself a grown ass man.
