The Quality of Marciano's Opponents

Rocky fought and beat whomever they put in front of him.

 

Liston was incarcerated when Marciano retired and really only made a run at contention in 1958. In the interim, the only serious guy he could have faced would have been Patterson, which might have been a tossup at that point in their respective careers. But even then, given Patterson's penchant for getting dropped, I wonder just how much a win over him really enhances Rocky's resume.

Either way, there wasn't a whole lot more territory for Marciano to conquer at the time of his retirement. Given that fighters with his style don't have particularly long shelf lives (Marciano himself was probably a little past his peak by the time of the Moore fight rolled around) I can't blame Rock for calling it a day.

I do wonder just how many more quality heavyweights would have appeared on the horizon post war. As it was, Moore, Charles and Walcott dispensed with the majority of younger heavyweights during their respective heavyweight runs.

 

Rock's best, most prominent rivals are Louis, Walcott, Charles and Moore, maybe La Starza. No one else. 3 of them were outstanding fighters, but at least in LHW they gained fame by fighting in HW. Rock fought each of them at a time that was better for him than for them
The fact that someone like Don Cocwell was #3 in HW shows how weak the weight was. The 1940s had no heavyweights to offer. Rock is a legend, an icon, he has great achievements, but realistically, he is not top 15.
Which outstanding HW did Archie Moore beat?

 

Moore clean out the divsion by beating the guys like Valez, yeah they may not be "Legends" but they were the best at the time, and Marciano and Moore did beat the best heavyweights the era had to offer.

 

If you want to talk ring age the Rock called it quits after 241 rounds. For comparison purposes Ezzard Charles fought 967 and The Old Mongoose gave us 1,472. That's a lot of mileage.

 

so Moore won against Valdez, ok.
It's funny how many people classify Rock in the top 5 and at the same time do not see in the top 15 fighters like Walcott or Charles who, in a worse period of their career, gave Marciano such tough fights.

 

Nino Valdes x2, plus Bob Baker, Clarence Henry and Jimmy Slade were all rated at heavyweight when Moore beat them. Baker and Henry were rated top five. Even though he moonlighted at LH and and occasionally defended his title there, he was clearly the most accomplished of heavyweight contenders in the early 50's and was the one guy that Marciano needed to face to legitimize his reign.

Also, as an aside, Charles and Walcott routinely appear in the top 20 of a lot of all time heavyweight lists.

 

I've had Charles in my top 10 and he remains a lock for my top 20.

 

If you’re two years older than Pacquiao and he’s pfp 2 behind you, beating him would be a feat that Marciano never came close to.

 

Okay - Valdez, Baker, Henry, Slade is that what makes Moore an outstanding HW? On most lists I've seen, Walcott and Charles are at the bottom of the top 20, sometimes higher. We know they are there for one reason - to fight the declining Joe Louis who is a giant name in boxing. However, this was all in the late 1940s. Louis, Walcott and Charles destroyed each other in mutual wars. Moore was HW from time to time. Marciano, like many years later Lennox Lewis, came at the perfect moment to take over the throne.

 

It’s a tough sell to argue Marciano’s record is garbage but Holmes should be called an under-rated Top 3-5 all-timer, but people do it. Granted, Holmes has a wider career beyond being Champion to draw on & I myself place him above Marciano, but Holmes’ reign was a feast of mediocrity. Moore at 42 was better than Shavers even in the latter’s most optimistic dream, for instance.

 

@sauhund II isn't going to like this