How Good is Rocky Marciano’s Resume Actually?

His résumé is good, but not as good as the names he’s beaten would suggest. The men he beat as champion were most certainly past their prime at the time he fought them. That isn’t Rocky’s fault. It’s just the way it is. The guys he fought before he became champ were good, but overall nothing special.

Sometimes a man’s résumé is strictly based on the era in which he was a fighter. For guys like Marciano, Holmes and Klitschko they just had the bad luck to fight in lesser eras.

 

Not great. He didn't duck anyone egregiously. But his era was so incredibly depleted. He had good timing in that regard.

 

I'll be honest. I thought Mikkel Kessler was gonna beat him but he still managed to retire undefeated. Respek.

 

Here's 76 lines on it:

https://www.boxingforum24.com/threads/the-quality-of-marcianos-opponents.719428/

Archie Moore- Reigning LHW champ and #1 NBA heavy
Don Cockell- # 3 NBA heavy
Ezzard Charles- #1 NBA heavy
Ezzard Charles- #1 NBA heavy
Roland LaStarza- #2 NBA heavy
Joe Walcott- #1 NBA heavy
Joe Walcott- Reigning heavyweight champ
Kid Matthews- #7 NBA heavyweight, previously #3 LHW
Bernie Reynolds- Unranked, previously ranked by The Ring in May 1949
Lee Savold- Unranked, but ranked #2 by NBA in April of '51
Joe Louis- #2 NBA contender
Freddie Beshore- Unranked, previously ranked by Ring Magazine in 48 annual.
Rex Layne- #2 NBA contender
John Shkor- Unranked, but previously "honorable mention" April '47 by NBA
Roland LaStarza- "Honorable mention" by NBA
Phil Muscato- Unranked,previously "honorable mention" NBA April 47, +Ring magazine

 

TBF you can only beat the men in front of you

 

A sad statement on the quality of that era. Truly the low water mark for the division.

 

Weak heavyweight resume because he mostly beat blown up LHWs. Decent P4P resume because he beat two P4P greats in Moore and Charles. But outside of those wins he really doesn't have much going for him so its a somewhat quality over quantity thing so it depends how much you value those wins.

 

Nino Valdes?

 

He was spoon fed about 35 nobodies on his way up,and his best wins are over past prime men.

 

If you like to see it that way. Comparing eras is all speculation, so its pointless to argue.

 

Not really. A bunch of ancient, shopworn hangers on, most of whom were natural lightheavies, and no real crop of younger, properly sized talent. That's a bad, bad era. No speculation needed.

 

Some of the greatest to ever do it.

 

I thought Rocky was one of the best ever as a kid till I read his biography. The author kept describing each opponent by starting with ‘the guy was huge’. He would give the size and the guy would be 6 ft 190 lbs. That’s when I realized just how small Marciano was. When they say Rocky was more powerful then guys much bigger they meant 6 ft. 190 lbs. Charles and Walcott were fairly good in their primes but were on small side even by 1970s standards and past their primes when they fought Rocky.
Louis was a shell of himself Cockell and LaStarza sucked and Moore was a fair heavyweight nothing great.
By comparison Joe Frazier in his prime would have destroyed this group. He wore guys like Moore and Walcott out see Ed Machen Jimmy Ellis Bob Foster.

 

Extremely good. Reaching 49-0 is something that’s damn near impossible even if you’re padding your record with journeyman which he didn’t. This holds particularly true at heavyweight where a lucky punch from your opponent can end your winning streak at anytime which is why so few heavy’s have even gotten close to that feat. Marciano beat at least 4 hall of famers that I know of ( maybe more if I check ). And while I agree they were past prime, they were still among the best heavy’s in the world when he faced them. In addition he beat several good contenders coming I.e. Lastarza, Mathews, Layne, Savold etc.. he also held the highest KO percentage of any heavyweight champion until I believe Deontay Wilder broke it but I stand to be corrected. Mind you he did all this only being in the pros like 8-9 years.