Marciano vs Foreman... What Can The Rock Do?

Indeed, i will search the archives for some more.....

 

But Williams did not knockout heavyweights as good as the heavyweights Archie Moore knocked out. Baker and Lavorante were rated higher for starters.

 

So it is unanimous that Rocky can’t land one punch? Nothing?

If he can land he has a chance. You can’t entirely rule out a puncher like that.

Rocky dosnt have a punchers chance? Is this unanimous?

 

Everyone who uses the “intellectual dishonesty” line has completely ran out of ammunition and using the millennial tactic of shutting down or hating an opposing view.

Nobody defending Marciano is saying he 100% wins. Just because they defend him dosnt mean they think he wins. Nobody knows.

There is nothing unanimous about this. It is all pure fantasy.

Yes George is bigger and bound to be an awful opponent for Rocky. He hits hard, great accuracy.

But factors like him being green, getting tired and actually getting knocked down are valid points to bring up. Just as Rocky getting cut and being smaller are valid points too. There is no dishonesty in raising either side of the debate. Calm down.

If a durable opponent under 200lb lasted the distance with George this is a valid point and not intellectual dishonesty

If opponents who knocked George down without hitting as hard as Rocky this is a valid point and also not intellectual dishonesty.

There is no place for millennial shutdown tactics over a fantasy fight.

 

I would not write a guy like Marciano off against anybody. That said, it's going to take a very special effort to overcome Foreman who has a sheer physicality that I don't think Rocky had seen before. The first 4-5 rounds are going to be skating uphill imho. I rate Marciano > Frazier in several aspects, and I don't see the Frazier / Foreman fight as an indication of how it would necessarily go, the same way that I don't see the Lous / Marciano fight as an indication of how Marciano / Foreman would go. Their styles were quite different.

 

Thank you. This is an incredibly well balanced view. There is not enough of this going around.

I agree It would be difficult for Rocky to get through the first four rounds. On paper George has to be favoured.

Personally I would not rule out an unbeaten champion causing an upset but I would not be surprised either way.

 

Fair go mate. How was Baker rated. He'd lost 2 of his previous 3 fights going into Moore. Satterfield knocked him out 6 months prior to Moore in 2 1/2 minutes!

Lavorante lost 3 of his last 4 including Moore sandwiched in between them. He was found out by Moore after gaining a ranking by beating Folley who was at a low ebb and starting again having been decimated by Liston just 10 months earlier. Poor kid should never have been fighting again so soon after a beating let alone against who he did. He was then thrown to the wolves again and never recovered the poor kid.

Williams would have a good chance against those two.

 

Based on the knockout loss to Satterfeild or the knockouts to Ali and Liston and Mac Foster?

 

He'd have the slimmest of punchers chances. Foreman wasn't prone to being stopped that's for sure! Awesome chin. The one that needs to worry about getting knocked out is Rocky by a far far higher degree.

 

. Thank you. You agree Rocky has a punchers chance.

no. I agree with you Foreman was not prone to being knocked out. In his first career George had two elite wins, Frazier and Norton. Fabulous wins they were. And two elite losses. Young and Ali.

So whilst he wasn’t prone to being stopped, in his first career young George was decked in 50% of his elite fights. More if you include Ron Lyle as an elite fighter which I don’t.

well yes, if size always translates to causing more knockouts ordinarily I would agree. However, was Marciano ever knocked out? Of course he could be but we would be counting on something we never saw.

We saw Foreman knocked out.

 

You know good and damn well the valid reasons why we spoke of "intellectual dishonesty". It had nothing to do with a lack of ammunition, it's annoyance at you pretending like people are dumb.

Hence why you chose to not actually quote my post where I went at great length to explain WHY i felt you and others posters were being dishonest. Which in and of itself is a very dishonest thing to do. Irony much?

 

Twenty years old when he fought Satterfield.
Shot and washed up when Ali stopped him
Totally gone at 37 when Mac Foster stopped him.

Intellectual dishonesty at it's most blatant.Thanks for the benchmark example!


Some time you need to ask yourself why you and you alone ,are continuously accused of it?

 

You are intellectually dishonest enough to name post shooting losses he had as being pivotal? Why am i not surprised? The guy was 36 against Foster let alone still carrying a bullet.

The Satterfield loss was when he was brought in as a last minute substitute. He was 20 years old and hadn't fought anyone of note at this point. Satterfield could whack and was further progressed. Williams wasn't beaten for 5 years after that until he came up against the monster that was Liston at his best.

How did others go against Liston? At least Williams stood tall and gave him some stick. He went far better than the excellent Patterson and against a fresher version of Liston to boot.

 

3 years before Foreman even won the title. He was 197. Foreman was having his 16th fight, Peralta had been boxing an eternity. Foreman stopped him about a year later.

So there's that intellectual dishonesty yet again. anyone would know that the first Peralta bout means less than zero when talking about peak Foreman.

Ironic isn't it.

 

It's a never ending cycle isn't it. He's not alone but no-one could possibly match his continual output of it.