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

What crap equations running in your head? Or trolling again?

Comparing the lightest Foreman to the heaviest Joe Louis in another choklab-solution?

Or do we have another trolling piece or art, with chok beeing totally aware of trimmed Foreman exceeding trimmed Louis by over 20 pounds of muscle here?

 

Size (and muscles) in particular seem to be all that counts with some people here so I feel, regarding how he deals with strength, it is justifiable to raise the comparison of a 213lb contender Rocky actually fought (as an underdog) with a 217lb challenger (on his prime night) for a fantasy fight where he must also be the underdog.

I’m sure you have something relevant to bring to the debate, so can I ask you too if it is a consistent belief of yours that the same man is weaker in a pushing contest weighing 213lb than he is at 196lb?

Perhaps you can lay down something coherent that can explain why you believe this?

 

Pushing is illegal but Foreman wasn't playing nice in those days. Joe Louis probably never needed to push to any great extent.

 

Yeah, pushing is illegal. Leaning on is illegal too. It goes on.

The point I was making is that Marciano came forward against Louis. He crowded Louis, forcing him to give ground because Joe couldn’t push Rocky back. It is incredibly hard to deal with effective crowding regardless of size advantage.. Even a prime Louis struggled with Arturo Godoy and difficultly with others he beat who crowded him. And that’s Joe Louis!

By the way, I pick a prime Louis over Marciano. But it wouldn’t be easy.

 

Did Louis try to push him back?

 

This may shock you.

This May amaze you.

You may already know it...

But 2 men can weigh the same or similar and yet 1 is far stronger than the other. Are you going to sit there with a straight face and tell me you think the flabby past his prime 38 year old Louis had comparable physical strength to a prime foreman just because their weights were similar?

Here's another news flash: lifting and pushing require different sets of muscles. Louis supposedly lifting carnera and failing to push rocky are 2 totally different things. If Carnera resisted and didnt want to be lifted im pretty sure the outcome would be drastically different. He may have been off guard or off balance.

Either way, it seem extremely silly that youd use Louis failing to push Rocky as evidence Foreman wouldn't be able to either since he had no trouble pushing back the 214 Frazier, 214 Chuvalo, or the 212 Norton. All of a sudden he'd have a hard time moving a short 185 pound man because he's standing to the side in an awkward crouch? Does that even sound remotely logical?

I mean by your logic 2 guys who weigh the same have similar strength so I guess Rocky's "power level" would be significantly lower than Big George and it wouldnt make a difference anyway!

 

Onanist.

 

I said 40lbs go back and check.

 

no I am NOT going to sit there with a straight face and tell you I think the flabby past 38 year old Louis had comparable physical strength to a prime foreman just because their weights were similar. #1 because Foreman was stronger than Louis. #2 Louis was not flabby. #3 Louis was 37 not 38. #4 I didn’t say it anyway.

What I said was at 213 Joe Louis couldn’t have been weaker in a pushing contest than he was when he weighed 196lb!

The issue being, if Louis was weaker at 213 than he was at 196 why is Marciano automatically weaker and pushed back against anyone he was lighter than?

The evidence was Rocky was pushing Louis back. Not the other way around.

Mostly because of his stance and effective crowding. Not because of strength.

Foreman being 3 pounds heavier (and always stronger anyway) dosnt mean he can’t push Rocky back. It might just mean it is not given that he can. Because effective crowding can prevent this.

It can also mean that rather than being pushed back like Louis was, Foreman won’t be pushed back.

Who knows?

 

I never said Rocky is automatically weaker than anyone heavier. We're talking about a difference of 35-40 lbs of rock solid muscle though.

Its entirely within the realm of possibility that Louis was physically weaker as a 37 year old man (desperate to pay off the IRS and coming out of retirement) than he was as a 20 year old prime specimen when he demolished Carnera.

Louis wasnt some shredded hulking specimen as a past his prime 213 pound man. Simply weighing more doesn't automatically=stronger even if we're talking about the exact same human being.

Rocky pushed back a has been old Louis who never fought again after this bout. Why bring it up if you agree that its silly to compare Louis And Foreman if they were drastically different in the strength department even though their weights were close?

The critical issue youre overlooking is that George isnt simply going to allow himself to be crowded. Maybe you forgot Foreman had a battering ram jab and the old Louis you like bringing up all the time popped Rocky's face until it swelled with the diminished shell of his old jab? There are also uppercuts waiting for him; the kind that lift 200 pound men off their feet.

Foreman's stance was an open mummy stance (both hands extended) while Louis had a technical old school stance with a low left and a slightly hunched back (elbows down). Once again, why make the comparison if they didnt fight remotely similar?

Foreman only does his pushing if he felt he wasnt getting leverage on his shots and had no room to punch. Not one single opponent in 81 fights ever effectively crowded George or pushed him back but a guy 35-40 lbs lighter with short arms will do it? Stop making me guess your position and just explain your thought process and argument because what your saying doesnt make sense.

 

What counts are your terrible silly comparisons.

If someone lets you push (saving energy), a significant weight advantage is no problem to overcome.

In general, Louis as a 198-205 prime fighter is no comparison for any modern Foreman-like boxer. Especially not the old speedless, reflexless, nonexplosive version of a past prime fighter.

 

Oh I see. a modern Foreman-like fighter...

I agree Louis was in his boxing prime at 198 -207.

However. The post war Joe Louis, at half force, was still a world class fighter. At least in that form, still as good as somebody like Ray Mercer. Since he still was beating actual contenders.

But even if, in that form, he was worse than this, as bad as you say, totally shot, in boxing terms, then his actual physical strength, which relies not on boxing attributes at all (just the ability to push and pull, grip and lift things up) would never have left him. Remember, he’s 37 not 97!

 

I boxed, unlike some on here, and I was infinitely stronger at 37 than I was at 20. At 20 most people haven’t got mans strength at that age hence most are still in the amateurs. Louis might be the exception but I doubt it Mike Tyson maybe.
When asked if he was better in his first or second career Muhammad Ali said he was stronger in his 30s but slower.

 

Exactly. And did you ever hear of an individual during your time, who was stronger at a boxing age whilst he was lighter?

For example, Was Evander Holyfield stronger aged 23 against Dwight Muhammad Qawi or was he stronger aged 34 against Mike Tyson?

Because Somehow people are saying, and I am talking of devout modernists here, that Joe Louis was less strong in his thirties when he weighed more.

 

I am much bigger, stronger, and fitter now than the 21 year old version of myself, but I am not sure that I would want to take him on!

I suspect that a lot of boxers have that dilemma!