Rocky Marciano vs. Bernard Hopkins, at a catchweight of 180Ibs., who wins and why?

Marciano in one round

 

Frazier had a term he called "ring power".

Sometimes a "small guy" could be much stronger than a "big guy".

Rocky was a 205 lb fighter that fought between 185-190 lbs.

Rocky hit too hard and would bully BHop all over the ring.

Marciano by TKO in 7.

 

Wait, who is picking Hopkins over Rocky?

Rock beat two guys (Charles and Moore) who were blown up, but both those guys are greater than Hopkins.

Hopkins at 180? He has never fought at that weight anyway, the only Light-Heavy he has beaten was Tarver (who Rocky would KO).

Hopkins weighed 170 against Wright and Pavlik. He fought Calzaghe who had never fought anyone at 175.

Now some people are picking Hop over Rocky. Hell, the best names on Rock's record beat Hopkins.

 

Hopkins doesn't beat Charles or Moore, and he doesn't beat Marciano. I do, however, think he might make it to the second half of the fight. TKO8 while ahead on the cards.

Hopkins belongs in fantasy matches with Hagler, Monzon, Robinson, Toney, etc.

 

Marciano wins this one handily. Got to say him and joe louis are so underatted on this site countless threads about b hop and Roy jones running circles around them. It wouldn't happen.

 

Let's not stretch Marciano's victories over the "two" (debatable) best light heavyweights in history ... both were past their best and still tested him ... if we are to debate, lets deal in facts ... for the record I do not think this is a ridiculous match at all ... Hopkins in many ways was a bigger mAN than Marciano and easily moved up to 175. In fact, he could have done it many years earlier ... however, I just think Rocky would have been too strong and Hopkins would not be able to hurt him ...

 

Whether he did or did'nt and in my opinion he did'nt is not the point, you can't compare elite middleweights to an elite heavyweight, especially one that is an ATG fighter like Marciano.

The same people who pick Hopkins in this fight are the same ones who probably think he beat Adamek at 200 pounds easily.

 

Hopkins could have fought at light heavy instead of middleweight at almost any time in his career . He soundly thrashed Tarver and Johnson , two who defeated Roy Jones as well as almost fought a prime Jones to a standstill ... that fight was very close... he had the size and skills to make it a fight , just not a win ...

 

Besides the fact that this is different era's..
The power remain's, Question should be could Hopkins survive a Marciano bomb?
(One, Just one)

 

How old was Hopkins when he beat Tarver?

So a 40+ Hopkins at 180 would have a chance against Rocky?

He grant says, "Let's not stretch Marciano's victories over the "two" (debatable) best light heavyweights in history ... both were past their best and still tested him."

Charles and Moore hit harder than Bernard Hopkins so take that into account plus both fighters had beaten Light-Heavys and Heavys (over 180).

Hopkins at 40+ has only beaten one true Light-Heavy, Antonio Tarver after he was in Rocky Balboa.

Wright, Pavik and Calzaghe are not genuine Light-Heavys with any type of resume at that weight.

Compare hops CV at Light-Heavy compared to Moore and Charles. Would Hopkins beat Walcott?

 

who is stretching these victories out? not only are these two guys top 3 light-heavyweights of all time, they were also # 1 rated heavyweight contenders by RING MAGAZINE upon there fights with marciano.

You don't need to be at your peak to test someone. Max Schmeling proved that against joe louis in 36, and Norton proved that against holmes in 78. Hopkins proved that this year against Pavlik. I think Archie Moore's 45-1 record in his last 46 fights prove he was very much in top form mentally and physically going into the fight. Ezzard Charles performance in the first marciano fight, proved he was more than capable of upsetting many champions. "No fighter in the world today could have lasted those 15 rounds that night with ezzard charles, let alone win the decision."- Boxing and Wrestling August 1954 Issue. I dont think Archie Moore was past his best by 1955. Dont notice much of a difference in his early film matches. I do think Charles was past his best his speed and reflexes had deteroirted slightly. However that doesnt take away from the fact he still fought like a fast talented great fighter all the way through 1954.

I don't see what competition has to do with this thread, Walcott Moore both fought like hopkins. In fact Hopkins watches film of them both still to this day. Marciano disposed of both men, who are bigger than hopkins. Hopkins has never faced a true heavyweight, let alone one of the greatest heavyweight punchers of all time.

Your last comment about charles and moore was all subjective opinion. not facts.

for the record, I do think that is a ridiculous statement

Marciano naturally weighed well over 200lb. That is not an opinion, that is a Fact I found personally when I talked to his family members. Now correct me if I am wrong, but I highly doubt bernard hopkins natural weight is over 200lb. Therefore Marciano is clearly the much bigger fighter, and certainly has the much bigger bone structure.

 

sq: You are endlessly repetitive on Marciano ... We know you think he was the greatest fighter ever, never got hurt, never got tired, threw an average of 300 punches a round for his career, was the hardest puncher ever and fought exceptional competition ... no point going around and around with you about this again ... to the other posters , I strongly state that Marciano's biggest victories came against fighters past their prime ... that's my point..

Hopkins is 6'1" which is at least 2.5" taller than Marciano and has a considerably longer reach. He weighted in 175 ripped, Marciano 185. To call Marciano the bigger man is simply wrong based on facts . If he entered the ring at 200 plus you can call him the fatter man .

 

I think you are underestimating Marciano physicaly here.

He would give up height and reach to Hopkins but then so would Mike Tyson.

Marciano's training regime is ridiculously cardio intensive. More like that of an olympic marathon runner than a boxer.

I honestly believe that if you put him on Hopkins prety respectable training regime he would come in at close to 200 lbs.

 

There was nothing close about Hopkins vs Jones.

Hopkins plodded after him throwing sloppy jabs and was unable to cut the ring off for most of the fight.He lost about 9 rounds and the others were just the ones where Jones didn't do much.

 

No Offense man, but Im starting to think your either not smart, or you dont listen. I only rate Marciano # 5 on my all time heavyweight list, In fact I have said this numerous times. I also pick other heavyweights to beat him, Joe Louis Muhammad Ali Sonny Liston Mike Tyson George Foreman Jack Johnson I think would all beat him. So no, i dont rate him anywhere near the greatest fighter who ever lived, in fact he is not in my top 10 p4p of all time.

No point in going around and around with a poster like you who never listens

since when does 170lb = bigger than 185lb?

Once Again ESB, HE decided to turn his ears off and not listen. Bigger= whos heavier, who has bigger bonestructure. It is a FACT that marciano is bigger based on the evidence. Members of Rocky Marciano's family told me personally Marciano naturally weighed well over 200lb in his prime, hopkins DID NOT weigh anywhere near 200lb. Even when rocky cut down to 185lb, rocky was just as ripped as hopkins. When you go by there bone structure, hopkins had the bone structure of a middleweight, rocky had the bonestructure of a heavyweight. I challenge HEgrant to find 5 posters who believe hopkins is a bigger man naturally than rocky.

Rocky actually weighed as high as 192lb in a couple of his fights in 1950, yet you would tru to claim rocky would look fat at 200lb? based on a measely 8lb difference?