Better overall fighter of the 3 Vitali Klitschko, Primo Carnera or Rocky Marciano?

Since he that pays the piper calls the tune, I suppose I'll put it this way: Carnera might be a better boxing coach for a wider variety of amateurs than Rocky would be, yes.

 

I already answered your question. I said he had more dimensions but was pretty bad or mediocre at all of them. So he was the worse overall fighter.

 

Alright let's do it this way to make things simple with basic ratings.

Carnera:

Outside skills: 3/5
Mid range: 2/5
Inside: 3/5
Overall rating: 8/15

Rocky:

Outside: 1/5
Mid range: 3/5
Inside: 5/5
Overall rating: 9/15

Vitali:

Outside: 4/5
Mid range: 4/5
Inside: 2/5
Overall rating: 10/15

Carnera is more well rounded, but he's the worst overall.

 

This isn't going anywhere.

In no universe was Carnera better "overall" than Rocky or Vitali. That's my 2 cents and I've thoroughly explained why.

 

I watched the fight a long time ago lol. I even made a thread talking about it.

https://www.boxingforum24.com/threads/rocky-marciano-vs-primo-carnera.665223/

I did thoroughly explain why I think he's inferior to both of them. You just don't accept my reasoning that being well rounded doesn't automatically make you the better overall fighter. He isn't even that great at the various dimensions he has.

 

I already said he's the most well rounded about 6x now.

But he isn't the best overall fighter. Those are two different things no matter how much you want them to be the same.

 

All impressive stats, but he came up short against the most elite fighters he faced. He also had several bad losses that are hard to excuse. You can't evaluate overall ability and effectiveness without looking at the actual record.

All 3 fought in fairly weak eras. Rocky dominated and never lost so that has to count for something. Vitali did lose to the 2 best men he faced, but he absolutely crushed everyone else and was competitive even in his losses.

Carnera does have the better signature win than Vitali, but I think Rocky's amazing come from behind KO against Walcott is in a league of its own compared to either of them.

There just weren't a lot of big men in Rocky's era, so you'd have to evaluate based on p4p. It's not like he was avoiding them. Yes Carnera beat many 200+ fighters but so did Vitali. They're pretty close in that regard and Vitali was exceptionally good at dominant long range and halting the offense of powerful big men such as Arreola and Peter.

You could say Carnera had the better clinch game and raw strength, I'll give him that. Already admitted Vitali's inside game sucked, but he's a product of the modern era and was trained to fight tall and robotic with the eastern European schooling.

Anyways, we're basically back to square 1. Carnera is more well rounded, but is not better than either of them in my opinion overall. If you factor in things like defense, chin, technique, balance, speed, timing, finishing ability, ring IQ, etc, the stats will make things even worse for Carnera.