Was Marciano superior defensively to Tyson, and Frazier?

You missed a key thing out. Tyson was coming in to draw a punch, then he would position himself as he slipped the drawn punch, in order to attack from the sides. It is not so dissimilar. Yes Tyson had good head movement when Reggie Gross was swinging at him, technically that was impressive...but because he was not strictly a “defensive fighter” and this was not a constant feature of his entire career it really needs to be taken into context doesn’t it. Like I said all along. It is stupid to ask what offensive fighter fought the most defensively. It’s never the object of any aggressive style to fight passively or defensively.

Frazier famously did this.his weaving worked two ways. Avoiding blows and switching weight. It worked perfectly. But he was also something of a clockwork mouse too. The flaw being he was weaving in a pattern if he needed to or not. It could be read. When his head bobbed down you knew it would bob back up.Foreman timed him because he was told to pull the trigger just as Frazier bobbed down knowing his head would habitually come up into the punch right after.

Marciano wasn’t throwing anything unless he was first in range. Nobody does. Rocky first created an opening. Feint. Slip. Counter. The ratio of “taking one to land one” Was wrong. It was more like “take one to land four”. It’s true of Frazier as well.

right. Marciano did a lot more of this than “throwing the kitchen sink”. Is this so different to Frazier dodging jabs to get inside? Or Tyson slipping and countering his way in?

sticking to championship opponents, which is what I was talking about, Marciano only defended his title against fully prepared challengers who had won important fights to legitimately earn their shot. You can only quibble about seeing better days once they lost to Marciano. Going into those fights they were all good enough to contest against any champion. Where were the 33-1 underdog challengers that Marciano fought? Wallcot was still good enough to legitimately beat somebody like Charles. Lastarza was legitimately good enough to beat somebody like Layne. Charles legitimately still good enough to knockout Satterfeild. Moore legitimately good enough to beat Baker and Valdes. These are good credentials.

of course it skews the numbers that Marciano retired at 32. I recognise that. Frazier and Tyson look as good or better if they retired early.

 

You have no argument. Your only argument is attempting to insult. The facts are Marciano had better defense then the two in that he was hit less by his opposition on a statistical average. You arguing otherwise is false and idiotic. As there is actual video evidence to back up my claims. You’re a child and should learn to admit when you’re wrong. My only intellectual admission was that compubox could be slightly wrong round to round...but that’s slightly and goes for every fighter. As they are being held to the same standards. One fight for example being wrong wouldn’t hurt the averages overall. Like I said if I’m wrong go prove it. But you CANT! Your eye test is obviously flawed as is anyone else who disagrees. Truth is I have stats that back my claim you don’t. It is the only way to judge these things. Grow up.

 

I don’t need polls of people to justify my opinion. You stated when did Moore clean out the division I showed you and provided you with proof and years and you result to “let’s do a poll” as if making a poll justifies your opinion. Lot of children in this thread who can’t actually back up their claims and try to result to arguing in other methods not fact based. I don’t really care about the thought base of the populace.

 

You certainly do. It’s irrefutable evidence.

 

Once again the ages of Tyson and I believe even Frazier’s opponents were all older on average. The “Walker” comments are corny and factually inaccurate like your argument. Even when taking into account that opposition for both are slightly better (neither is fighting Ali Or Lewis every fight) you still have Marciano ahead by a wife five point margin. That’s beyond error. You also don’t take into account there are no bums filmed on Marcianos fights. They’re all solid fighters as only the good fights would be worthy of filming. Marciano was also out of prime for probably a little less then half of them. Depending on when you view it. So once again show me the proof. Your eye test means nothing. Facts mean something. You or anyone else don’t like facts and prefer an “eye” test. That’s fine but you and anyone else would be horribly wrong.

 

There are several things to note here.

1) even if i grant that the way Tyson would draw a punch to slip was similar to the way Rocky did it, Tyson was objectively better at it simply by watching film. Slipping and drawing punches is a defensive skill, therefore Tyson was more defensively skilled than Rocky in that area. I Don't get why this is so hard to grasp.

2) Tyson was unquestionably better at attacking from either side using angles and blistering combinations to punish guys once he created an opening. No one except Joe Louis could match Tyson in this skill set. Using angles and weight shifting to avoid blows and supplement your own blows is a defensive skill. Therefore Tyson was a better defensive fighter than Rocky in that area.

That's not even getting into the fact Tyson had a better guard and until he started neglecting his training and firing Rooney, rarely got hit at all. He wasn't a purely defensive cagey guy like Jimmy Young, but his defense was damn near the top of the division when he was at his best. Even the most die hard nostalgic boxing writers wouldn't say the same about Rocky.

Defense WAS a constant feature of Tyson's style. Literally no one Earth who studied Tyson for more than 30 minutes would agree with you here choklab. He was not strictly an offense fighter who occasionally showed good defense like you're trying to imply.

Yes Frazier fought with a rhythm and a patter. Foreman could only exploit it with rough house tactics and having absurd strength and power to time him with some of the heaviest uppercuts of all time. The fact no other opponent could make Frazier look that bad isn't a slight against Frazier, it's a compliment for Foreman.

If Frazier had a history of getting his rhythm and timing broken multiple times by multiple opponents you'd have a more valid point. Foreman just had his number, and Frazier was a little past his prime.

I never said Rocky threw before he was within range. He didn't have a choice with his incredibly short reach.

Exactly, he took one to land 4. His offense was his defense and he overwhelmed with volume. Now you're finally getting it. If he couldn't slip or draw punches he simply overwhelmed people. Tyson and Frazier did not have to resort to this, which means they had better defense.

It's...completely different? Are you seriously asking me the difference between Rocky's awkward dipping and crowding to Tyson's fluid machine like counter punching or Frazier's smooth bobbing and weaving? The last 2 were a lot more graceful and precise while Rocky had the subtlety of an enraged hockey player.

Tyson and Frazier were unquestionably better at slipping a jab to get inside. Old shopworn Joe Louis gave Rocky a black eye hammering away with his jab. Old shopworn Walcott landed lots of nice jabs and boxed circles around Rocky.

In contrast, Tyson easily got pas the jabs of prime athletic fighters such as Carl Williams, Pinklon Thomas, etc. You can even throw in a past it Larry Holmes since you apparently don't think Rocky's opposition was that bad, and Larry had a top 3 ATG jab.

Frazier got past the jab of Muhammad ali, Buster Mathis, Joe Bugner, all guys who towered over him and were exceptionally good outside fighters.

Do you want me to pull up the quotes of Rocky's opponents where they mention how he would hit them on the shoulders, elbows, chest, anything he could touch to tire them out and break them down? I am not criticizing him for it since it worked, but I'm not going to pretend like this was some amazing display of the sweet science and similar to Tyson's head movement+counter punching.

The problem is Gazelle Punch I don't believe was sticking to only championship fights when he came up with his stats and numbers. There is A LOT more film of Tyson and Frazier before they were champions and when they were past their prime than Rocky. Which, for the 3rd time now, skews the numbers.

I can definitely bring up them seeing better days BEFORE they fought Rocky.

-Joe Louis was a shell of his former self and gunshy. Your yourself have admitted this.
-Schkor was brutally KO'd by Walcott literally in his last fight before facing Rocky and had 18 losses.
-cokkel had been in more than 70 bouts, was on his 2nd weight class, and was stopped more than half a dozen times.
-Savold was in his late 30's and was brutally KO'd by Louis and had been in more than 100 bouts before facing Rocky
-Charles was in his like 3rd weight class with dozens and dozens of bouts under his belt. Dealt with early onset ALS and had been brutally KO'd bt Walcott and had other stoppage losses as well.
-Walcott was in his late 30's with tons of mileage and had more than a dozen losses (half a dozen brutal KO losses).
-Lowry had more than 50 losses.
-Moore was as old as the pyramid of Giza and moving up to his 2nd weight class.

The only fresh prime fighters Rocky beat were Layne and Lastarza. That's it. This is what people mean when they call you disingenuous. Stop playing games like we aren't familiar with Rocky's public record.

Rocky's opponents earned the title shots legitimately, no one us disputing that. What we are disputing is how good those opponents were especially when the conversation is about how good Rocky was on defense. Even if we strictly stick to championship bouts/top contenders, the majority of Rocky's best opponents were over 30 with heavy mileage and had been previously knocked out brutally. Many were moving up in weight and had been in many wars with more than 60 fights on their record.

There is nothing unfair in being skeptical of Rocky's ability to slip and evade and block when we examine just who it was he was up against. Especially considering the majority of Tyson and Frazier's best opponents weren't 30 year old ex light heavies with tons of mileage and prior KO losses.