The Quality of Marciano's Opponents

Try not being an ahole…it works sometimes. Try discussing the tactics and science of the sport to get ur uneducated view across

 

And that, that is the beauty of The Shkor Extrapolation.

 

Of all the many things I'm "proud" of, literally nothing I've written on this site would make the list.

It's simply a matter of you waltzing in to complain while offering no solutions or contributing anything to the discussion while taking the moral high ground and acting like this is all beneath you. I'm more amused than upset.

Arguing is fun, that's why I do it. If it's not your cup of tea, you are more than welcome to be inactive another 4 years or log out permanently. Not sure what you were expecting to find on a sports forum in a thread where people discuss hypothetical matchups.

 

They cherry pick the quotes that suit them and ignore whatever goes against "Revisionist Rocky", the h2h marvel who had power, speed, defense, technique, endurance, and was the most well rounded and skilled HW boxer to ever lace them up apparently.

All those writers and analysts were bitter haters who deliberately wrote negative things about Rocky because they lost money betting against him. That must be the explanation.

 

Marciano fought a filthy fight against Cockell,but it wouldnt have made any difference if he hadn't, Cockell did not belong in there with him.
The 16 ft ring didnt help any either.

 

Who says Ruiz is 5'11 1/2? Byrd is 6'2" and generally scaled around 215lbs,he was also extremely defensively elusive,Toney was likewise very adept defensively and never came into the ring against a heavyweight weighing less than 217lbs.
Norris was generally around 220lbs as a heavyweight.

 

It would suit me to have Moore described as a p4p puncher .
Top 30 % ? Want to know who else is in that % Carnera.
I gave you my list of elite heavyweight punchers
Q Do you think Moore hit as hard as any on that list ?
I said I'm not convinced Moore hit any harder at lhvy than;
Beterbiev
Stevenson
M Spinks
Moorer
Marshall
Satterfield
Durelle
Kovalev

And I'm not.

 

The ignore feature is a wonderful tool if you don't want to listen to this **** anymore.

 

Why would you make three posts on a thread you have zero interest in?
Posts that add nothing but are just whingeing complaints about the content?
Anyone forcing you to read the posts?
Why not simply take your own advice and ignore the thread?
You've been absent for 4 years?
Anyone miss you?

Catchweight's thread has so far gone to 45 pages which indicates a high level of interest and participation,from both sides of the argument.
Your last thread [yesterday,] is on page 2 now and elicited no response whatsoever.
In other words it immediately sunk without trace.
What is that telling you?

 

Actually they seem more critical of Charles and Walcott.

"Charles, one of the weakest heavyweight champions of all time."

"He'll still have to be a very mediocre performer to be beaten by a man like Charles."

"Yet mediocrities can stage thunderous fights, as Marciano proved against Walcott."

How much credit one gives these quotes depends how much you buy into their take on Walcott and Charles.

I don't think film backs up this take on Charles and Walcott at all. Why did many writers think this way? I will give one possible clue. The United States still had segregation and lynchings in the 1950's, although there were many working to improve things.

"mediocrities can stage thunderous fights"

A better example might be Dempsey-Firpo, although unfair even there.

Here is a quote from an ex-champ to add to the negative quotes. This is Jim Jeffries quoted in the San Francisco Chronicle issue of May 4, 1953:

"It is a big joke. Men like Ezzard Charles and Joe Walcott fighting for the championship of the world. They'd be lucky to get a semi-windup in the days of the real fighters."

"real fighters"---Two guesses about what old Jeff meant by that.

 

I'd pick both to beat him.
It is a fact that going back to the 60's,neither Charles or Walcott were ranked as anything special , Boxing Illustrated ranking all the heavies up to that time said, not the best and not the worst,moderate champs.

 

As you correctly say Louis timed his jab to perfection. However, Louis was forced to use a defensive “step off jab” whereupon the jab concludes a step away and reset without making room to use the right hand. The practice exhausted Louis as he was forced to move and reset each time he landed. A round of doing this Louis felt like he’d done 4 rounds worth of effort. People like to say Joe had no right hand at this point. In truth Marcianos mauling pressure took away the room and leverage to get set and land anything but the step away Jab.

 

So for more than half a dozen rounds, the veteran Joe Louis (who was a former champion with over 60 fights) didn't throw many right hands because Rocky pressured him too much?

There are only two conclusions:

-Either Louis was absolutely clueless on how to deal with an opponent who pressured him.
-He was gunshy and washed up.

Pick one.

 

There is a reason people say Louis had no right hand at that stage.He didn't.
For the only time I can remember Louis stood off and waited for Marciano to come to him,he did not have the legs to pursue Marciano ,nor any longer the power to take him out,he tried to box a countering defensive fight,and win on points but his legs gave out on him.

 

A prime Joe Louis couldn’t always keep Tony Galento off him. Against the same version Don’t you think Marciano would have had as much success as Galento?