truth about marciano

Makes a good point, apart from at the end of the first vid where he implies that Marciano in some way has a better resume than Ali.

 

Very good vidio's 2nd one showed his undermined defence and rythym breaking style...his style was rough for a rythym fighter

 

Nice. Not entirely accurate though. You could make videos like that for a lot of fighters. It shows Marciano was capable of some slick moves, but how consistently he pulled them off is another matter. If his defence was 'very good', he wouldn't have ended up so battered in his fights :good

Not to say he wasn't a great fighter of course! For his weight.

 

I just convinced this guy to join ESB. He's popular on youtube, makes some good videos.

 

Id have to say Alis fights with Frazier and Foreman are more significant and relevant than Cooper and Folley. The Moore, Walcott, Charles and Louis fights are Rockys legacy fights. Cooper and Folley are not for Ali.

 

But then his whole premise would fall to bits.
He picks fights of Ali where he beat older guys.how about picking the other important ones like against Foreman.Frazier,Norton,Spinks.Or Terrell number 1 contender?
If Marciano was so good defensively how come he looked like hed been through a meat grinder in so many fights?
Marciano's major fights were against men older than him ,usually by up to a decade, two of whom were ex Lhv's , that is NOT the case with Ali. ,or anyone else since Jeffries time.
Walcott said Marciano was easy to hit ,but NOT easy to tag with really meaningful punches.
Interesting video clips ,but a deeply flawed argument,hope the guy comes on here ,he could have some great debates with Suzie Q and co!

 

Not another Rocky post !

 

:good

 

Well most people felt Sonny was older but hard to tell. Archie on the other hand started fighting younger and needed an older guys ID, same with SRR. Arhie claimed he was in his 30's when he fought Marciano, no reason to lie. Archie was on his best win streak ever with 1 disputed loss and a DQ in his last 50 fights. He also beat the top Heavys and KO'd the disputed opponent Johnson. I guess if this guy really wanted to throw the stats off he could have added Archie to Ali's stats because Ali fought Arh 8 years after Marciano

 

Moore's mother said Archie was 43 when he fought Marciano,and as Archie said" she was there at the time ,so she should know,I must have been 3 when I was born".Ali did beat an ancient Archie ,but was it one of his most important fights? I dont think so.
I didnt mention the abilities of the older guys that Marciano met ,just that they were around a decade older.I think Krall was being very selective with the choice of opponents he picked for Ali. Making the glove fit the hand ,so to speak.

 

But this one is "the truth?"!!

Maybe it's time for a separate Rocky Forum.

 

Right, I explained to him that you can't use the age discrepancy logic either way. Because age discrepancy is mis-leading when an athletes prime is generally in the late 20's. So if one fighter were 25 to 34 rather than 31 to 38 generally that would say more about the first example being a better win seeing as Point A and point B are equal in terms of opposition. However, you got to look at the context of things. Walcott was better than the 32 Charles that Rocky fought and much better than his age would indicate as was Moore who was a genetic freak. And yes, the examples aren't the most fair ones to use.

However, it still makes a fairly good point especially on the subject when comparing Ali to Liston in age.

Really a testament to Ali's second reign/run though.

There's always going to be older man hanging around with the younger ones. It does suggest an obvious pattern and makes a good point in that case.

Part 2 is better in my opinion.

 

This content is protected

now that's a peak super-confident ali