Rocky Marciano is so underated and underappreciated

So now reigning as champion for a long time means something when you only fight nobodies and no hopers? Compare Marcianos top five wins to anyone not named Ali and Louis and he holds up well. when compared to Wlad, Holmes, Foreman, Frazier, Tyson etc he holds up quite well. Beating three HW champs (bs fake titles don’t count) and a p4p great LHW champ with a heavy weight record of like 64-4-2. I’d put Moore, Walcott, and Charles in my top 20 HWs ever and the Louis that fought Marciano was not and can not be compared to the Ali that lost to Holmes. He won like 9 fights in a row beating ranked contenders. Was he prime? Hell no but was he so washed up and injured he should have never been near a ring? No. Obviously by his record he still had some in the tank you can’t say that w Ali.

 

There isn't one...it's just that his purpose is to try you **** you off...don't let him!!!

 

No, Carlos Monzon is the most underrated, disrespected legend of our time...followed by Emile Griffith and Gene Tunney.

 

He was champion for 14 months, one successful defense. You want some quotes in that minute window?

 

sometimes I think he is overrated a bit. A lot of the greats are overrated a little and whomever fought earliest is better just on how long ago they fought. Guys in the 1940s will beat guys in the 1950s and 1960s-for example. And what is not taken into account is amateur experience of guys later on which could be formidable. Everything has to be taken into account.

 

#3 or #4 for me. I go back and forth between him and Lennox.

1 and 2 are probably obvious.

 

Marciano's determination, underrated defense and stamina are really good as is his Suzie Q. My issue with Marciano is 2 fold, firstly how his fans think he unrealistically scales up against far bigger men and secondly he was only boxing at the top level for 4 years and his best opponents were:

Charles - 33 coming off several losses to Valdes and Harold Johnson
Walcott - 38 and probably lost the 4th the 4th Charles fight and also lost to Layne
Moore - 39 and Patterson's performance against him was much more dominant.
Layne - looked a good win at the time but had a padded record and he seemed to come up short against the better contenders of the day
LaStarza - padded record without significant wins
Joe Louis - was 137 years old

This content is protected

He didn't face the bigger guys like Valdes or Baker and Valdes had a very convincing win over Charles and Jackson. Jackson would go onto beat Charles twice and stop Layne. So both of those fighters deserved their shot and Jackson would get his against Patterson.

And while he did go undefeated, he wasn't dominating his era. Charles 1 gave him a closer fight than Charles managed previously against Valdez/Johnson. Walcott was battering him early. Moore put him down. Louis was winning the early rounds and making him look amateurish.

It was just Patterson was that much faster. This is the same Archie who said in the 80s he will never forgive the ref until the day he dies for the Marciano fight because he would have ko'd Marciano if the ref didn't delay the action. There's pretty much no delay to the action after the KD

Many fighters find it hard to accept they weren't good enough

He's slow compared to Patterson who alongside with RJJ is the fastest ever HW. Patterson was 19 and 168lb in the Maxim fight. He obviously improved significantly to completely dominate Archie a punch perfect performance.

 

What I meant in regards to Moore’s speed which I may not have typed out correctly was Moore earlier in his career was in no way slow. Patterson was faster but no one in their right mind would call him slow. He looked sluggish in the Patterson fight and not at all himself (so much so people thought he took a dive he was the favorite).
Yes Baker and Valdez were good fighters but they were also beat by Moore. Moore also beat Clarence Henry the other Young up and comer at the time. So Moore more then deserved the shot at the time over those men.
Charles 1 wasn’t all that close. It was more an entertaining fight. The score cards imo didn’t warrant another fight but it was fight of the year I believe and people wanted to see it again. He also was coming off good wins against Wallace and Satterfield who beat Nino. Nino also refused rematch Charles in. Title eliminator.
For some reason people only complain about age when it comes to Marciano. AJs opponents make Marcianos look like newborns. Layne was an excellent win at the time that constantly gets shat upon by his detractors. He was the number one for a reason. Lastarza also an underrated fighter was pretty good. Not great but he was ok. Matthews was a good fighter. Cockell was ok. Those men weren’t great but they were good young contenders with more rated wins then people like Wilder who get put up there with ATGs.
I think If Marciano competed today he would have to get with modern times and bulk up. can Easily see him 215-220 area without affecting his style. Would he be able to be as successful? I don’t see a reason why not. If Bulked up cruisers like Holyfield, Moorer, Byrd, Toney could have success without Marcianos attributes I see no reason why he couldn’t compete today . He was 11-0 with 11 KOs against men over 200 there is more evidence he could compete then not.

 

Great summary, though I disagree on one point.

IF Marciano was fighting today, he wouldn't be anywhere near Heavyweight, he would do exactly the same as ALL the other men of his size and stature and that is Fight Down!

Marciano today would be a Light-Heavyweight!

 

Probably a cruiser with a few fights at HW...can agree there but I don’t think he makes LHW. He felt to weak at 180 I don’t think he’d be able to cut that much and be affective. That and there isn’t the money and fame at LHW like there is at cruiser and Hw today. Marciano went into boxing for those two things I don’t think he cuts. Just my opinion you could very well be right who knows lol

 

I believe in the past you quoted one source after he was champion. That isn’t what I’d call a consensus at the time but I understand the point you’re trying to make. He wasn’t viewed as that great. In hindsight his record is good. Not all time great but it’s good. A lot of wins over ranked men is what you want to see and Walcott has that. Along w a lot of losses.

 

your still thinking in the Past, he might have been weak in the 50s when his training got him a bit lower than normal, But TODAY, he wouldn't be training to fight every month or two.

he'd have 4-6 months to get down to L-HW just like ALL L-HWs today, who walk around either side of 200lbs...

the Rock isn't a Tyson or Tua, he is less stocky compact than them, so TODAY with 2 fights a year, the Rock would do exactly what ALL the other either side 200lbs, either side of 6' in height fighters do and that would be fight down.

Today MOST fighters of that Stature fight from MW - L-HW, most of them and TODAY the Rock would Act and Think like them, the Past wouldn't be a part of his understanding. how could it be 'IF' he were living and fighting TODAY.

 

Rocky’s walk around weight was 210-215 according to family members. I don’t think he’s training down that much and keeping much of anything. He was built more like Tua then you think except Tua trained up and Marciano trained down. He had thick legs like Tua. I see no reason why a 220
Pound Marciano couldn’t exist it would be easier for him then losing 40 pounds.
I do agree many train down now. That’s 100 percent correct. Marciano was obsessed with money and fame. You don’t get that at LHW and I don’t think he would have been physically capable of training down that much even by today’s standards and still be competitive.

 

maybe so,

but today there is big/good money in most divisions, comparatively, so I think like his 'today' contemporaries he would have been fine at L-HW, finishing at Cruiser.

the Rock TODAY is going nowhere near HW

BUT neither are 'Most' of the other 6'3" or less past HW's.