Marciano in the Joe Louis era?

There is no question that Ali defeated tougher opposition over a longer period of time. I'm not disputing that, and I don't know of anyone who is. On the other hand, I think it unfair to draw a conclusion on the strength of the respective eras by comparing the best fighters of two different decades to those of about half a decade. It is somewhat like saying Warren Spahn pitched against more tough batters than Sandy Koufax. True. It does not follow that Spahn pitched in a stronger era, or that ERA comparisions are unfair. He just pitched longer.

I would say a fairer comparision of the toughness of various eras would be to compare the men Ali defeated to dominate the 60's and 70's with who he would have had to defeat to dominate the 40's and 50's--Louis, Walcott, Conn, Bivins, Pastor, Ray, Murray, Maxim, Charles, Henry, Marciano, Layne, Baker, Valdes, LaStarza, Moore, Johnson, Patterson, Machen, Folley, Williams, Liston.

Would Ali have been champion as early as 1944. Would he have been undefeated in 1947, if there is no WWII. I don't know, but I think Louis in 1944 and Walcott in 1946 or 1947 would have been tougher tests than Liston and Patterson were in the sixties. What about an upset? There are plenty of men here every bit or more dangerous than Doug Jones or Henry Cooper.

He should be able to beat the smaller Charles coming back after 3 1/2 years, but Walcott is still around and would still have been a threat, and Marciano would certainly have been an interesting test in the 1952 to 53 period. I think the Moore of the mid-fifties would have been a tough test for a fading Ali.

How long does he last? Ali was still champion at the end of 1978. Would he still be champion at the end of 1958 with the young Patterson, Machen, and Johansson nipping at his heels. I don't think so. And I don't see him having a chance against Liston from 1958 on.

Would his record have been as good or better? It is a great deal of guesswork, but I think it is possible he would have lost at least as many, and there would certainly have been a lot of tough fights out there.

 

Ramos was 16-2 with 13 KO's before he was dropped from the ratings. He was rated from February 1967 to October 1969 (30 months). Dunlap was 9-2 with 7 KO's before he was dropped. He was rated from May 1952 to March 1953 (10 months).

Again, I would match the era of Ali against any other one. Like I stated before, match all the boxers he beat against all the boxers any other Heavyweight Champion beat, and see who you have coming out on top.

Back when Rocky was the Champion, Walcott was 10-7 in his last 17 bouts before he fought Rocky the 1st time.

Charles did much better record wise, as he came into his bout with Rocky with a 14-5 (9 KO's) in his last 19 bouts, after winning 24 in a row and 41 out of 42, before his 3rd bout with Walcott. So he really was on his way down too, BUT he was still pretty good.

Joe Louis was past his prime before he fought Marciano. His record was 61-1 with 52 KO's in his 1st 62 bouts. In his last 9 bouts before he fought Rocky, Louis was 8-1 with only 3 KO's.

It would be very hard for the Walcott, Charles or Louis that fought Rocky, to beat the top opponents that Ali beat.

 

Outside of Frazier, and Foreman, I think Charles, and Walcott could handle the Nortons, Shavers, Wepners, Jones, of the era.

Only Foreman, Frazier, and Ali made that era gold imo. Liston was on the slide, Patterson was done as a championship fighter.

 

If you put Tyson, Frazier, Ali, Holmes, Louis etc., against the same opponents as Rocky had at the same time Rocky fought them, they too would be unbeaten.

There always upsets. If someone told us that Tyson would be KO'ed by Buster Douglas, we would say they were crazy, no way. So I agree with that and that is why I love boxing and their is no sure answer, just opinions, BUT its fun talking about what might have happened.

 

Just 7 months before Ali fought Liston, most of the experts were saying that Liston was an all-time Great. He stopped Williams twice, Valdez, Folley and decisioned Machen before stopping Patterson twice in the 1st round.

If you read my other post, which stated:

Back when Rocky was the Champion, Walcott was 10-7 in his last 17 bouts before he fought Rocky the 1st time.

Charles did much better record wise, as he came into his bout with Rocky with a 14-5 (9 KO's) in his last 19 bouts, after winning 24 in a row and 41 out of 42, before his 3rd bout with Walcott. So he really was on his way down too, BUT he was still pretty good.

Maybe in their prime they would have a chance BUT not at the time they fought Rocky.

 

Not sure on that. Marciano was pretty lucky to get over his first 15 fights with no atm background when being match against 15-0 fighters, and golden gloves fighters. Perhaps if they share the same orgin background as Rocky, (Ie no golden gloves or gold medals at the games)

Perhaps, Fraizer at 0-0 might had lost to eddie Ross who was 23-0 at the time of Marciano's match. Maybe, we cant say for sure. I pretty sure Tyson would lose focus sooner or later, before the 49-0 record. And Ali has from time to time show up not in top shape.

Sure at there best, The greats win all the time about, but when there started out or getting old, who knows.

 

Walcott was always a off and on fighter though. Hell in the 30's, he could not win about 7 fights, with out picking up a few loseings.
I think Walcott base on film, was a better fighter from Louis to Marciano, than he ever was in his 20's. Also Walcott was champion. Prime for Prime I favor the Rock, unless you start saying the likes of Abe Simon could beat Marciano too.
And Walcott had a pretty good chance when he fought Rocky, beating him from pillar to post, and leading on the score cards before the 13th round. That Walcott was on fire, and was no were near fighting at the level of 1951 Louis, or even Ali in the Spinks fights.

 

60s Patterson could beat 38 year old Walcott so could Quarry, Lyle, Young, Shavers, Ellis, Bonavena, Norton. All 5 ATG's from 1962-78 would beat him i.e. liston (62), ali (64), frazier (70), foreman (73), holmes (78.

 

Walcott's hands were tied during the early part of his career. I had to do a lot of research on him when we put up a monument in Camden, NJ where he lived, as I was the guest speaker. Remember when he got a shot at the Louis's title it was only the 3rd time that 2 Blacks fought each other for the Big prize.

At the time Ross fought Rocky he was 15-0-1, BUT he only beat 2 boxers that had a winning record and those 2 were both at the end of their careers. Frazier would have murdered Ross at anytime!

I still rate Rocky pretty high and he could have beaten most of the Heavyweight Champions in history BUT their are several that in my opinion that could have beaten him.

Rocky's Pro career lasted only 7 years ( I don't count the 1947 bout because he fought several Amateur bouts after that bout before turning Pro again ). So I think Tyson or Frazier would do very well over that time frame.

I asked Bert Sugar why he rated Rocky #6, he said because of his record. He also said that if he lost just one of those close decisions (Lowry. LaStarza) he would be rated much lower.

 

duplicate-sorry. see below

 

I disagree with Sugar's opinion. Marciano would have swept the best men of his era and knocked all them out even losing both of the close decisions to Lowry and LaStarza. How many heavyweight champions have ko'd every rated opponent they fought? How many have only lost disputed decisions? Marciano would still have an impressive record.

 

Yes, Rocky would still have an impressive record BUT he would not be rated as high as he is now. I am not saying that he had to knock them all out, what I am saying is that if he did lose a bout or 2, how would he be rated. He only fought one Top 10 contender in his 1st 35 bouts, what if he fought some much earlier in his career. After the 1st LaStarza bout, which was in Rocky's 26th bout, he didn't box another one until he fought Rex Layne in his 36th bout. You would have to go back some to find another Heavyweight Champion that did that.

When he fought Moore that was only the 11th time (8 different opponents) Rocky ever fought a boxer that was rated in the top 10 when he fought them.

Louis fought his 1st top 10 contender in his 12th bout when he stopped Lee Ramage. He would box 9 more top 10 contenders before he fought Braddock for the title. That was Louis's 36th pro bout. So after 36 bouts, Rocky fought 2 top 10 contenders and Louis fought 11. Also, Rocky fought 49 bouts and Louis fought 36 and they both faced 11 top 10 contenders. The time Louis had 49 bouts, he faced a total of 21 top 10 contenders.

[FONT=&quot]
[/FONT]

 

"I am not saying that he had to knock them all out"

That is exactly what he did against all rated opponents, and I don't know of anyone in any division who has come anywhere close to equaling it.

"11 victories against fighters rated when he fought them."

And as we went over before--that is more than Liston, Foreman, Frazier, and Schmeling, and I doubt if someone like Jeffries, or even Dempsey, would have had more if there had been ratings. All these men are often rated in the top ten. I notice that when you evaluate Marciano, you compare him only to Louis or Ali, who rate way ahead of everybody on these measurements.

Marciano did have quite a few fights before he began fighting top ten fighters, but he also had a very limited amateur career. Schmeling fought his first rated fighter in his 48th fight. And in fairness to Marciano, once he really started fighting top men with Layne, he fought mainly top men. Some other champions certainly fought a lot of unrated fighters or fringe contenders even after they got to the top.

 

This content is protected

 

Over rated fighters, I dont count Holmes.

Shavers should have done to Ali, what 7-0-1 Spinks did to Ali. Here was Shavers with a shot Ali, and he could not win. That tells more on Shavers imo. Lyle is mostly know for his brawl with Foreman, a fight he lost. Sort of like Luis Firpo so to speak in regards to Dempsey. I see no one claiming Firpo is this great contender. Young?? Other fighter rated higher than he should. Outside of Foreman, didnt relly do much, and like Shavers, had a at the end of the line Ali, and failed to win.
I think they got name because they fought Ali or Foreman or Frazier.

Shavers's power is over rated to me. Sure he takes out journymen, but when he step up, his power always failed him.