Rocky Marciano is so underated and underappreciated

Don't know if he makes my top 10.

 

Rocky doesn’t make my top ten as he only defended the title against three fighters he hadn’t beaten before ie Charles, Coc-kell and Moore. Moore and Charles peaked at light heavyweight and C ockell was one of the worst fighters to ever challenge for the title. Rocky had already beaten the mediocre LaStarza and won the title of Walcott.

Rocky only made six defences of the heavyweight title in total which is actually a lower number than Jeffries, Charles and Patterson.

Rocky is number fourteen on the list as far as defences by lineal or Ring magazine champions.

If you examine Rockys record it is similar to George Foreman’s in the fact Rocky had a lot of fights against trail horses n regional types before he got a shot at the title. Unlike Rocky though Foreman did smash a prime Norton and a Frazier who was the undisputed, unbeaten heavyweight champion.
Giving Rocky credit for beating Louis is like giving Berbick credit for beating Ali. It’s silly.

Despite this I love Rocky as a fighter, his bravery was incredible and he always turned up in superb shape. He was always entertaining as well unlike fighters like Ali, Holmes or Lennox.

I just don’t feel he did enough , was champion long enough or beat enough prime good heavyweights to make the top ten.

Size doesn’t even come into it as I am talking about legacy not head to head.

Cheers All.

 

49-0, win over prime Walcott is a strong one, most consistent heavyweight champ ever, overcame shortest reach ever, defied all odds, went undefeated in a time when it wasn't the norm, defeated fellow p4p great Ezzard Charles, defeated fellow p4p great Archie Moore. No heavyweight has even gotten to 49-0, much less retired undefeated, the record will probably be unbroken forever. Fought an average of 10 times a year from 1948 to 1952, nigh unheard of for a heavyweight, no amateur experience boosting his position in the start. Only defended his title against the rank #1 and #2, no gimme title defenses.

Every single fact about Marciano makes him sound like a miracle to walk the earth rather than a heavyweight outside the top 10. Even other heavyweight greats took gimme fights during their title reign and lacked consistency, coming in in poor condition and untrained. Marciano provides everything possible to ask for in greatness that is askable, what you think about his competition is whatever, out of his control (besides the fact that it's better than you think, but hey, bigger is better right?)

Greatness is the only thing I'm disputing here, I don't care about h2h, that's an argument for another day. Stop combining the 2

 

I stopped at "prime Walcott".... Do you really want me to requote the dozens upon dozens of contemporaries who saw Walcott as an old, fatigued journeyman? Or are you just hellbound to rewrite history to fit your own vision?

 

You're the one rewriting history, Walcott isn't a journeyman, he was champ. He was a journeyman when he was unmanaged living off a $5 weekly release check and hard labor, going into fights starved and fatigued. The skill was there, the spirit was there, the body wasn't. No contemporary thought Walcott was shot against Marciano

But I understand what you're doing, ignore all of my much stronger points to take me on in the most easily disputed. In a formal debate, I would've won from that. I won't talk about this topic further

 

So, the writers who made a living off following the boxing scene in the 40's and 50's are wrong about Walcott and you, who never saw him fight live, never spoke to him (I did briefly, by the way) and never spoke to his or his opponents trainers, know more.

You sure must love you some you.

 

LAWD, Have Mercy!!!

 

Please find a source that called him a journeyman that's 1952 onward

 

Usual quality post fairly explained and balanced whenther one agree's on placement or not. I will however say that Rocky - Louis wasn't as bad as Berbick - Ali IMO. Totally agree Louis was a shell of what he was but at least he'd beat a contender coming in.

 

You're completely overreacting. It is arguable to have Marciano out of the top 10, since there's 10 with better achievements. There's 10 with better résumés, there's there's at least 7 with better title runs and a good 15 with better longevity. Acting like Marciano is a lock for top 10 is disingenuous, coz he's not. Holmes, Wlad, Tyson, Liston, Holyfield, Frazier, Foreman, Ali, Louis, Holmes and Lewis can all be argued over him. Hence why he's not a lock for top 10, let alone 3. You've tried to play devil's advocate and say he has a case as the HW GOAT before. That's ridiculous.

If we're giving fighters extra credit for overcoming poor physical attributes like reach why not extend that? Lewis and Wlad were packing glass yet look how successful they were. They should get extra points, right? No. Since that's mixing H2H and Greatness... Which brings my next point on quite well. You say stop merging arguments? You're doing just that; H2H/ATG are often merged to form lists, P4P/HW aren't though. Of it's not a P4P ranking and size doesn't come into it, why does Marciano's reach matter?

The only thing Marciano has a clear edge over anyone with is retiring undefeated. Is it actually that impressive? Given his lack of quality opposition it'd be embarrassing if he didn't go undefeated. Plenty of fighters could go undefeated against them, plenty went undefeated through there own times. You say the era being weak isn't Marciano's fault, by that logic it isn't Holyfield's fault the era was that strong, had it been as weak as Marciano's he'd have gone undefeated too. It goes both ways, but you seem to block that out.

Also his competition was ****. Compared to other résumés at HW, the wins he had just aren't good.

 

He beat everyone put in front of him, and the names on his cv include ATGs Louis, Moore, Charles. Retired undefeated. Kind of short reign but he only got a crack at about 28-29. The ATGs on his resume were all IMHO, slightly removed from their primes, (don’t know exact ages but most probably mid-late 30s) and in two instances, north of their best weight. In saying that he was one hell of a fighter.

 

Nope

Also no

Nope

But none with Marciano's activity, moot point

Marciano did have quality opposition, he beat 2 (not counting Louis) men I rank top 20 all time at HW.

If it were any other weight class, Lewis and Wlad would be labeled weight bullies. Marciano wouldn't be though, he'd be a p4p fable who fought at a weight class higher than he had to for his entire career. And this is coming from someone who doesn't care about weight at heavyweight. It's incredible how people dock points at lower weight classes for things they don't even bother to think of at heavyweight

Also you and I both know Marciano had to overcome alot more than Lewis and Wlad. Both had pampered amateur careers and the size that makes modernists quake, no doubts that they'd be great from their trainers, no struggle to find a trainer, no hard labor jobs til they were mid 20s for them.

 

Marciano was well respected until the barber scene in Coming To America

 

So you can't dispute my first 4 points? If you can, do so. Given I'm confident I can name the guys I was talking about, I don't mind. You look deluded and not in touch with facts by not actually arguing a point and just refusing.

Oh and It's not a moot point at all, you're just being awkward coz it's your favourite fighter. Most of Marciano's 10 fights a year were 1/2 round jobs vs no hopers, having 20 title defences and dominating for 7 years is more impressive than fighting 10 times a year.

This is HW. They're the same weight, treat them like it. Marciano should get no extra points for overcoming a short reach. And give over, Marciano fought 2 opponents of note who were bigger and even then it was only by 10lbs or so.

You say that like I should take it into account. It doesn't make Marciano's achievements greater than Wlad's or Lewis'. It might make them seem more impressive in context but it doesn't actually boost what he achieved, it's just impressive that he did achieve it. What you've just done is made a pocket argument, not a reason to have a lock for top 10, let alone top 3.

It's not disrespect to say Marciano isn't top 10, it's an arguable opinion.

 

After he won the title the Journey men comments are non existent. As they should be.