Marciano the heavyweight GOAT

It's devastating when I can name more than half a dozen other boxers in his own weight class who have several prime contenders on their record. Who you beat and what their condition is at the time of the fight is just as important as the ranking.

The question isn't if he can be placed in the top 10. He absolutely can. It becomes a much more difficult question to answer if you want to place him #1, which is what the thread is about.

 

So that GreenLaternSucks clown is back again

 

Nobody will ever beat the amount of solid contenders Ali did…ever. Nothing’s impossible but at the rate fighters fight now it’s highly unlikely. Had Rocky started fighting when he was 20 instead of 24 and fought till 35 and accumulated a lot more wins he would be in the Convo. But no one approaches Ali and Louis for their longevity and wiping out two generations of fighters best.

 

1. Marciano is in the conversation for heavyweight GOAT. The fact that he wouldnt be a true heavyweight today is irrelevant as todayś heavyweights dont fight 15 rounds, many would never make it. He beat every fighter ever put in front of him and the vast majority by ko itś hard to argue with this fact. For all his flaws or lack of speed, footwork, etc he made what he had work and he didnt make excuses. Louis I consider as the all time heavyweight king, Ali is in the conversation for sure but struggling with chinny Kenny Norton, Leon Spinks, and Jimmy Young dont do much for his case.

 

Yet, tiresomely, they still try.

 

Lol when was the last time there was a 5'10 180 pound heavyweight champions? If being 5'10 and 180 pounds is good enough for you be heavyweight champions then why wasn't there a 5'10 180 pound heavyweight champions since Rocky Marciano? Also is 180 pounds is good enough to be heavyweight champion then why is there still a cruiser weight division to this day?

It is hilarious how people like you will make up stuff just to justify Rocky Marciano could beat modern sized heavyweights.

 

It's hilarious how you get banned 2-3x a year, repeat the same things over and over again, change nobody's minds, insult people, form terrible arguments without even attempting to hide your bias, then repeat the whole process over again.

What do you get out of doing this? Not one person finds you funny, interesting, or entertaining. You are neither informative nor insightful. You only post on the same kinds of threads every time, which makes it quite obvious who you are.

 

Yup, those are good starting points. Here's a few more intellectually dishonest approaches to make his case:

*justify fighting a large number of no hopers and tomato cans due to his short amateur career and late start.

*But then shift the goal post and justify his early retirement due to the fact swarmers get a lot of wear and tear with their rugged styles and intense training camps. This requires a lot of glossing over the fact he ended many of those fights early without taking too much damage.

*The absence of larger/taller contenders on his resume is justified since guys like Moore and Walcott were beating them.

*The absence of young prime athletic contenders in general is justified since the best contenders just happens to be fairly old and shopworn guys. Explain that this is not an indictment against the era and doesn't make it a weak one, but rather an era where skilled technicians thrived.

*Claim the older contenders "aged like wine". But gloss over the fact Louis and Walcott retired after their defeats and Charles was suffering from ALS.

*Cherry pick quotes. For every one quote praising him, you can find two saying things along the lines of how he won in spite of his crudeness or that it was his toughness and sheer work rate that won him fights. Ignore the ones that flat out call him sloppy or wild. Attempt to sell the idea he was some genius underrated technician and defensively skilled.

*See what you want to see in footage. Accuse people who see differently as being haters.

 

I think there's fairly three having a decent case for GOAT. Marciano is not one of them, but he's up there. Can I put him as GOAT cruiser?

 

To be fair, I'm not accusing the Marciano fans of being dishonest. Boxing "greatness" is subjective almost by definition. Hence the wild generational swings in ratings.

From my perspective, or yours, this kind of "greatness" rating system would be dishonest, because we don't adhere to these standards. We are discussing them in the abstract as a kind of ideal model of what a guy who rated Marciano at #1 would have to value to be consistent. But different people have different ways of approaching boxing. It's a big world, and all that.

 

Forum opinion currently seems to be that you're a returned troll. Feeding trolls isn't a good use of time anyway, and it would be wasted effort if you end up banned (again?).

If you're still around in a few months, remind me to answer your questions.

 

I have him at 3-4. I would have no problem putting either him or Lewis at 3.

I just don't see an argument for being better than Louis or Ali...the accomplishments were too high.

 

I think a strong case can be made for top 10. I can't put him too high because I do know that some other greats fought a better level of competition. More guys in prime form. That's not necessarily Rocky's fault.
He had an active reign. Faced the top contenders of the era and won. He did have some help getting in position for the title. Al Weil was caught doubling as Marciano's manager....the fighter did what he was supposed to do. Big heart, great condition, tremendous power, relentless.

Certainly a polarizing figure partly because of the 49-0 and because he was white. That really works both ways.

 

I think #8 would be as high as I could place him. For me the 49-0 gets him in the top 10. That was a helluva accomplishment.

 

There I would have to disagree.

A challenger's age dose not invalidate the win, without nay further qualification.