If we are going that route, than MOST of the past heavyweights, even the great PRIME 200 pounder Ali would have been too small for Klitschko. What VK or WK has over Marciano, they pretty much have over any pre 63 heavyweight champ for the most part, with some expections like Willard or Carnera. Marciano would have to climb the same mountain that Louis or Dempsey would need to in order to beat VK. We cant say Marciano is too small, than say Louis would beat VK.
You must allow for styles. There is a difference between being a swarmer outweighed by 60lbs and being a super-fast box-mover outweghed by 45lbs. Also, Ali was surely nearer 215 in his prime?
He was around 200 when he started out, but still Ali would have a large hill to climb base on size. I think Marciano is durable to take what the Kilts would be dishing out, and I think the Rock has the power to give back the damage. Be a good brawl, but I would not relly count the Rock out here base on size. Might turn into a WK vs Brewster 1 type of affair, or Marciano overwhelming them if he hurts em.
Sure but then it comes down to the issue of whether you give a higher rating to theoretical physical advantages or proven ring acomplishments. Personaly I would have to see a lot from a fighter before I picked him over an all time great however visualy impressive he is.
Marciano is 5'11, 180-190 pounds with 68" reach. Louis is 6'2, 200-210 pounds with a 76" reach. Ali is 6'3, 210-215 pounds with 80" reach. I believe that Marciano can very well trouble Ali and Louis in their primes, the size difference between them isn't very big, but asking him to beat a 6'5+, 240+ lb great fighter when he never faced a prime, world class opponent over 200 pounds is a bit too much, in my opinion. Louis and Ali on the other hand aren't that badly over-sized by the likes of Lennox Lewis and the Klitschko brothers, and they have both proven that they are able to deal with fighters of that size. Perhaps Marciano would stand a chance, it's not like Brewster, Sanders, Byrd were huge and like it or not, they do hold wins over the Klitschko brothers, but it's difficult to tell.
That's a fair thing to say, but the point of excersise is to try to be right, rather than just. Champions get beaten by men who haven't quite stepped up all the time - Kostya against Hatton, for example. When I confront a fantasy fight I'm trying to pick the same man I would pick two hours before the first bell based upon what I know of the fighers - and that means level of competition is only one factor, and not the deciding one.
That is essentialy the weakness of my method. I would never in a million years have picked George Foreman to beat Joe Frazier for example. I will say however that my substance first aproach is generaly vindicated because there are many more busts than legends born.
Yes, the conservative approach is the most affective and the one I believe in - I've gone for Froch in Froch-Dirrell based primarily upon level of competition, for example - but getting into the cut with Rocky and Vitali brings some difficult conclusions in what I agree is a slightly tasteless excersise. Still, i've no sympathy, at all, with those who see such a fight as uncompetitive, either way. We could find some things out about Vitali with Rocky in the other corner that we currently don't know. In fact, i'd submit that we'd learn something about almost every HW that's ever lived with Rocky in the other corner, those that haven't already fought him, and perhaps Frazier, at least.
It has just ocured to me that Foreman would have probably jumped about a hundred places up my all time list in under half an hour when he beat Frazier.
Here's a case... in 24 rounds Lennox Lewis had to fight a safety first fight against a 37 year old Evander Holyfield. He could not land his right hand with any sort of consistency because of Holyfield's speed, mobility and abilty to fire back. Image what Joe Louis would have done ? Lewis excelled against big, slow men. Golata, Ruddock, Grant or slow and/or one dimensional men like a Tua or a Bothra ... Louis, almost a natural physical clone of Holyfield but with faster hands and exceptionally more power would get inside behind his own killer jab and take the much slower Lennox out. A 37 year old Holyfield was able to make Lewis hang on for his life in the third round because Lennox could not deal with speed. The 1939-40 Louis would have KO'ed him.
Thanks mate. That was a convincing argument, more than I was expecting actually. I'm just quoting your last paragraph since in a way, it's the most pertinent. I've always thought to myself that a Louis v Lewis fight would be a chessmatch; perhaps even be a bit boring for those looking for blood and thunder, which both were capable of producing. I've never thought of Lewis coming out and actively trying to take the smaller man out of there quickly because, as you say, there are too many pitfalls and risks to make it worthwhile. To that end, I do see Louis, despite being smaller, being the one to force the action. He has to really, given that he's the shorter guy and also given that he was simply used to being the predator in there, even against much bigger men. So in essence it becomes a battle of the jabs and who can maintain their preferred range relative to the other man. Interesting fight in many ways...but a technical fight. Barring a bad mistake or slice of good fortune for one or the other, this could easily go to the cards.