Was Marciano superior defensively to Tyson, and Frazier?

no I’m disagreeing with your statement

 

Saying Marcianos style was more conducive to better defense isn’t an insult on Frazier of Tyson. Both of which had good to excellent defense. Tyson wasn’t always focused for a lot of his career which I’m sure hurt his numbers but that’s on Tyson. I just think you can’t get over the fact that the numbers don’t go your way. I’m 100 percent confident if they did go your way you’d be plastering them on here as exhibit one. I don’t suppose we will agree on this issue and I’ve made my peace w it lol. Good luck

 

This. Marciano's offense was his defense. Unlike Frazier and Tyson, the way he applied pressure with volume and awkward crouching made his opponents hesitate to throw at him and made them fight to survive while backing off.

Ali didn't really set up his uppercuts against Frazier. Sometimes he would even lead with them.

The difference in the Foreman fight was that his roughhouse tactics and guard manipulation set Frazier up for the uppercuts. He used angles to get Frazier to walk right into them and time him as he was bobbing and weaving.

 

Boxers like Frazier and Liston cleared out the division demolishing all the top contenders before they became champions. Hence them not having as many title defenses. They also lost their title to 2 of the greatest ATG boxers in HW history.

Marciano feasted on weak competition and even when he stepped up, the ranked guys were fairly shopworn and in their 30's. He got out of there and retired before the new crop of prime young fighters showed up. In contrast Tyson and Frazier continued fighting past their best yet still managed to pull off some impressive wins. So people do have a valid point when you keep going on about punch stats while failing to address how he had a relatively smoother career in terms of opposition.

The fact Marciano was going life and death with Don Cokkel and an ancient ex light heavyweight Moore shows that the writing was on the wall.

 

Your right, Marciano wasn't in either of those fighters class as far as defensive ability is concerned.

 

Also Foreman actually would push Frazier off balance, which was the main reason Foreman beat him so easily. Foreman possibly the strongest heavyweight in history used his unmatched strength as a key part of his fight game.
Very few heavyweights in history could handle the physicality of prime George Foreman.

 

Marciano dominated Cockell and I agree and even started he had easier opponents. And Moore beats everyone who Frazier beat barring Ali. Don’t know where your coming from but should prob read the whole convos.
FYI would never insult any of those fighters u named great champs

 

This is true of Tyson and Frazier too. Which is why I made the comment that this thread is a bit stupid. It’s asking which offensive fighter was the best defensive fighter. It’s like asking if Bob pastor of the first Joe Louis fight was more offensive than Johnny Nelson of the Carlos Deleon fight.

so is the question really who got hit more?

Like you say these types of fighters have Different methods but each had the other guy guessing..,,

Marciano certainly made it look smoother because he kept winning. But that doesn’t mean he was never matched to lose. Not every champion was going to get through Marcianos championship fights without a loss. If a champion retires before he starts losing the temptation is to say the guy only had easy title fights.

it works both ways.

Who knows, If Tyson beat Douglas then retired people would focus more on how ill prepared much of Tysons challengers were for his title defences?

History might also have been very different had Frazier retired right after beating Ali. People would focus more on the lay off Ali had even more than they do now then knock Joe for bypassing the WBA tournament.

Would Marciano losing the title actually make the opposition look better?

 

No he did not dominate Cokkel. I watched that entire fight with Marciano commentating. He himself admitted Cokkel was tougher and more skilled than he thought and had to make adjustments mid-fight. If the fighter himself is saying that, your assessment is pretty much irrelevant, no offense.

Moore does not beat everyone on Frazier's resume barring Ali. What gives you that impression? Moore was 38 years old and had been in more than 150 fights! You're telling me THAT version of Moore cleans out the entire early 1970's HW division? He goes undefeated against Jones, Machen, Chuvalo, Bonavena 2x, Quarry 2x, Ellis 2x, Bugner, and Mathis? When did Moore ever put together a string of wins like that undefeated?

a 38 year old Moore might not even be Frazier's 3rd best win.

I don't remember insulting anyone. It's a FACT that they were past their prime and had been in many wars. Those are not insults, they are stats.

 

It is not true of Tyson and Frazier. Only partly true. They both did pressure guys and tried to force them to back up but in totally different ways.

-Tyson cut the ring off and then stood at mid range to slip punches and counter with heavy bombs. Once he got the range and timing of his opponents down, he would start unloading powerful 3,4,5 punch combinations upstairs and downstairs with either hand.

-Frazier used bobbing and weaving with a smooth rhythm to dodge jabs and get inside to batter the body and in fight at close range.

-Marciano would throw everything but the kitchen sink and was willing to take one to land one and overwhelm with volume, or he would use an awkward crouch to draw a punch to land one big suzie Q or gazelle punch.

3 completely different approaches. The first 2 are much more geared toward using defense to create offensive opportunities while Marciano used his offense to make up for his lack of defense. If Rocky couldn't bombard his opponent with volume or making them miss with his awkward dipping, he got hit a lot and was perfectly willing to eat a shot or 2 to get close. His guard was not very good, nor was his head movement. He did not have fast feet or reflexes.

Frazier and Tyson had all of the above. Frazier had a tight cross arm guard and was very good at blocking straight punches, had great upper body movement, and could anticipate and roll with shots. He was a nightmare for guys who threw a lot of jabs and fought off the back foot. Tyson had a solid peak a boo guard, arguably the best head movement in the division's history, incredible athleticism/reflexes and timing to dodge entire combinations (not just one punch) and return with a devastating blow of his own using the built up momentum from him evading and ducking.

Nobody was "guessing" with Marciano. He had a 1 track mind and not a lot of variety. To quote one of his own opponents, "he just threw more than anyone else". His stamina and non stop pressure were his offense and his offense was his defense for the most part. The Moore fight is a perfect example of this where we see More slipping and dodging many punches and Rocky is missing by a mile with some of them, but Moore's older age and Rocky's relentless pressure eventually breaks through his defense and knocks him down.

We now have the benefit of hindsight. You are making this more complicated than it needs to be.

We can look up the records of Rocky's opponents and see how good they are on film. A lot of them simply weren't. Even the ones who were, several of them had seen better days before Rocky faced them.

That's my point. No need for all these hypotheticals about if Tyson beat Douglas and retired or if Rocky lost. Rocky was a bit like Lebron James in the Eastern conference. Sure, those were the best players in his division but it wasn't a particularly strong division. Had Lebron stayed with Cleveland and managed to win a championship then died tragically young, his career would greatly resemble Rcoky's in the basketball sense.

And Rocky retired relatively young without having been in too many big wars the way Tyson and Frazier did. That skews the numbers and stats for who got hit/defense/etc whether you want to accept it or not.

 

Not even close, I’m a huge Marciano fan , he was my grandfather’s absolute favorite and growing up watching films of Rocky with my Gpa means I will always have a soft spot for him, but, while I think Rockys defense does get underrated, he’s not on the level of Frazier or Tyson

 

That version of Moore would beat all of them. Moore beat Baker, Nino x2, Satterfield, Bivins, Harold Johnson,Lavorante, Clarence Henry, Norkus, etc etc he cleaned out the division from 1950-55 let’s not act as if he’s not capable. His list of scalps far exceeds everyone on Frazier’s resume w the possibility of Ellis. Ellis would be a toss up because of styles and how skilled he was too I’ll give him that but I’d still favor Archie. And your words were “life and death” with Cockell that’s completely inaccurate even if you don’t think Marciano dominated (which he did albeit he looked sloppy he never looked in danger of losing).

 

Go ahead and make a poll asking people if they think the 38 year old version of Moore goes undefeated against Frazier's opposition.