1951 Marciano vs 1987 Holyfield (CW)

Discussion in 'Classic Boxing Forum' started by Fabiandios, Aug 24, 2025.


1951 Marciano vs 1987 Holyfield (CW)

  1. Rocko

    6 vote(s)
    33.3%
  2. Holy

    12 vote(s)
    66.7%
  3. Draw

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  1. Seamus

    Seamus Proud Kulak Full Member

    61,704
    46,369
    Feb 11, 2005
    It's a class, a talent issue. The breakdown is that Marciano lacked the quicks, lacked physical attributes, lacked the skill to deal with a young, active heavy who threw hard combos behind a 78" reach, lacked the durability to take the damage that Holy shipped, lacked the footwork, lacked the balance. He was a tough SOB with an endless supply of gameness, good stamina, and a stout punch. But all that willingness wouldn't amplify his physical shortcomings sufficiently to overcome an equally game but much more blessed and skilled opponent such as Holyfield.
     
    Smoochie, Homericlegend03 and Pat M like this.
  2. Gazelle Punch

    Gazelle Punch Boxing Addict Full Member

    7,114
    8,823
    Aug 15, 2018
    Negative. The man beat several men of similar caliber as Holyfield. There is zero proof he didn’t have the durability to fight Holy. Quite the opposite. He was extremely durable. His balance was off early in his career. Not when he was a contender. You don’t make it a career like he did and only being knocked down twice if you have bad balance. Youve at least did some sparring you should know this. On. Technical stand point you mentioned Marciano only throwing 30 punches in one round (prob lite on that number but let’s play). What was he doing when not throwing punches? He was a mauler. He would push you off balance, grapple with you, head butt u (I know dirty but he was), he wouldn’t stop making you work. There was no standing out of range. When people mention his work rate they don’t do a good enough job explaining this. He never met a man he didn’t set off balance, tire out, and absolutely frustrate. Holy would be no different imo
     
  3. Seamus

    Seamus Proud Kulak Full Member

    61,704
    46,369
    Feb 11, 2005
    He beat several men who were ranked high in his era but wouldn't even sniff the top ten in Holy's era. Each of the three was old, two were blown up lightheavies, one would never fight again, another was devolving into a .500 fighter, the third was in his 40's.

    Two tiny, old fighters, guys who fought at a pace to conserve their output and legs, put him on his ass. A high volume, young Holy puts him there until he doesn't rise.

    Levels, sir. Levels here. There is a reason we haven't seen a tiny, slow, bumbler have any effect on the division in half a century.
     
    Smoochie and Homericlegend03 like this.
  4. slash

    slash Boxing Addict Full Member

    6,539
    2,804
    Apr 15, 2012
    Holyfield-Qawi II 1987
     
  5. Gazelle Punch

    Gazelle Punch Boxing Addict Full Member

    7,114
    8,823
    Aug 15, 2018
    Marciano wasn’t a tiny slow bungler. Tiny maybe but others of his height and reach have been champion. We aren’t going to agree here. But for others not in the know Marciano wasn’t even wobbly when got up. Both being flash Knock downs he may have been down for a total of 7 seconds combined
     
  6. Fergy

    Fergy Walking Dead Full Member

    29,657
    36,258
    Jan 8, 2017