Marciano's Thoughts on Sonny Liston

Moore wanted the tiles and deserved the shot over everyone at the time, he was also dangerous( with his experience and power).

He certaintly looks solid and muscular and vibrant (not a middle aged man) He Grant your Bias always comes out" when you get a chance to undermine Marciano's acheivments

I am convinced that the Moore that fought Marciano was a at his best weight, best win streak ever and against most of the top fighters of the Day included a KO over #1 contender Bob Baker, Ko's over Satterfield,Harold Johnson, and 2 wins over # 1 contender Nino Valdez,Alberto Lovell KO 1,Clarence Henry,Jimmy Slade,Bert Whitehurt KO6(who Sonny Liston could not KO in 2 fights) Embrell Davidson,Oakland Billy Smith,Abel Cestac,Phil Muscato,Joey Maxim,Bo Bo Olsen,and Jimmy Bivins

In fact Moore was on a 57 fight wins steak only marred by a DQ loss to Clinton Bacon and a highly disputed decision Loss to Harold Johnson who he Ko'd in a rematch. I would have to challenge anyone who thought this was not a peak Moore or that he was better at a previous time.. It was at this point in time Archie put it all together

 

I like Moore and often praise his accomplishments but he was one sore loser. He later wrote an article claiming Marciano received a long count and the ref was to blame for his loss. A load of shite. He suffered a beatdown against a better fighter that night.

 

Marciano is one of the most complicated fighters to really judge. Apparently similar to Dempsey, Frazier and Tyson, he was instead a very careful offensive fighter, very difficult to hit, and who could throw punches non-stop for 15 rounds (see first fight with Ezzard Charles, where the ref never once had to break them up).

The problem for his opponents was, he always managed to get on the inside when he wanted to, and his short arms meant great power. From the outside, he threw the lunging overhand right (see his fights with Rex Layne and Joe Louis, both of whom were betting favourites to beat him). In other words, he was either too close for his longer-armed opponent to hit him hard, or he was too far away (but watch out for the lunge!)

Marciano also had a unique way of dehumanizing his opponent. Before a fight, it was prohibited for anyone in the gym to mention the name of his opponent. And when the ref gave both men instructions in the center of the ring, Marciano always looked straight to the floor, while his opponent was staring at him, hoping for at least a glance, which he would never get.

 

Man, I wish I could see one of Eddie Booker's fights. That guy fought Archie Moore 3 times without losing. He was also never KO'd in his career.

 

Bummy it's not bias. I just don't place Rocky in the rarified air where logic, physics and track record do not apply like many of you do. I don't consider him a great defensive fighter, I do not feel he fought great competition at the time or weights at which he fought them, I do not feel he punched on the level of the best all time punchers and I do not think this 5' 11"/187 pound man with average speed, short arms, cut prone skin had the style or skill set to compete or belongs with the very best in the history of the heavyweight division.

I think he was a top ten cruiserweight , which is exceptional in it's own right and I base that on his huge heart, excellent condition, strong chin and terrific cruiser power. I think without question that there could easily be twenty men who would have beaten Rocky head to head. Not better pound for pound but would have beaten him straight up. I just do not feel he had the skills to compete against bigger men and refuse to romanticize him because he retired undefeated, or was italian (which I am) or was white (ditto) ...

Archie Moore was at least 42 years old in that clip. Look at the folds of his skin in his face and compare them to a man in his twenties. He looks like a well conditioned middle aged man. Only a Rocky fanatic would make the statement you did ...Moore looks great ... right ...No one who gains and loses that much weight in so short a time looks great even if they were 25 which he surely was not.

 

There is really no point in trying to have a discussion with you if this is how you open up. It's one thing to disagree, it's another to believe on side lives in fantasy land and has no validity in their arguments. When the coin gets turned on you, you would respond in the same fashion.

Yet another double standard. You'd pick Dempsey or Frazier against both Klitiscko brothers. Size advantage isn't too great in those cases. I guess it's Rocky's skills that you underestimate, and not just the size. Or it's a double standard.

It's important to note that I don't think Moore was at his best. I do think he was better than some might give credit for at that time, however.

 

Moore's alleged bitterness at Marciano does not explain away Ed Fitzgerald's appraisal of the Rock...

 

I have noted the trend for Marciano being evicted from the top 5 heavies...then from the top 10 heavies...then out of the top 15...and now you say

This content is protected

." ("Easily"...wow)

OK...I am not going to get into that argument now...but to say he is in the top 10 Cruiserweights is damning him with faint praise! Top Ten Cruiserweights??? He has a serious claim to be the top cruiser of all time...or certainly within the top three. Five at the outside, if you take an unfavourable view. But only a top ten cruiser?? (And how long before he slides to being just a "top twenty cruiser"?)

As for "ageless Archie"...he truly earned that title. Archie was an exceptional man and the pre-eminnent example of sombody who fought at top level at an advanced age. He was a freak of nature (especially in that period) who could do amazing things with his weight, too.

I don't think you can use such an exceptional man as an example of someone who was "too old." If you see a fighter putting in consistent poor performances, then that is the time to say they are no longer the fighter that they were. As has been mentioned, Archie was cleaning out the biggest and best heavyweights of the time...except for Rocky, of course.

 

Peter say what you like. I see it that way. I find that many are simply not realistic regarding Rocky , more than I see supporting any other fighter. I constantly see reference to heart and dedication , which he did have, except with Rocky it's as if he had another gear which separated him from the other GREATS. Here I disagree. I do not feel Rocky had more heart than an Ali, a Dempsey, a Frazier, a Holyfield, a Charles, a Louis or any of the other greats. However, Rocky fanatics have to justify placing him so high and cannot do it on skills alone so go to this argument and I find it flawed. If you don't want to debate, don't contradict yourself by then addressing a whole long critique ...

Allow me to clarify the top ten cruiser point, by that I mean all the fighters 200 or less., not cruisers since the division began in the 80's .. I include Corbett, Fitz, Dempsey, Tunney, ect ...

I will attempt , again, to clarify to you regarding matchups ... Dempsey, Marciano and Frazier were all not the same fighter, this is why I say some may defeat fighters others may not. I hope this clarifies your question ?

As far was Moore goes, he was a terrific light heavyweight fighter past his prime but taking advantage of opportunities that were finally open to him based on timing and circumstance. He was bitter at the road he had to climb and the tremendous obstcles he had to face. Without question he had resentment toward Marciano who he felt got a much easier path, right or wrong. He was also bitter after the fight as he felt the ref cost him a shot at a KO in rd 2. However you want to position Moore, no one rates him as a great heavyweight.

If Archie was ageless in 55, he must have still be ageless in 56 when Patterson destroyed him faster and more impressively than Marciano did. How do you rate Floyd ? Rocky seems to defined himself as an all time great v.s. ageless opposition as his best core opposition, Louis/Walcott/Charles/Moore , averaged 37.5 years of age. Have any other all time great had his resume based on this advanced vinatge level of opposition ?

 

That's what I meant, too.

I could say Dempsey, Louis and possibly Holyfield are sub 200lb fighters who would give Marciano a hell of a fight, and have a fair shot to pull off a win.

After that, I find it hard to think of anybody under 200lbs who would have a 50/50 chance to beat the Rock.

 

Nor does it explain away the contracitions of many other writers and opponents. Everyone has an opinion, but just focusing on Fitzgerald and Moore's comments is erroneous and misleading.

 

:good

Exactly. Disputing Moore's credientials leading up to the Marciano fight is preposterous. Difficult to think of a more deserving and qualified number one contender.

"no one rates him as a great heavyweight."

This is a sad truth as his accomplishments at the weight are greatly underappreciated. However, a huge part of his legacy is his simultaneous success at both weight classes.

 

Chaney: That is your opinion. I simply disagree. No harm or foul in that. Where do you rate Rocky all time ?

Mongoose: Moore's prime or best weight was heavyweight ? That's a first. Was post forty his best age ? No one disputes his right to the title bout. Do you rate Moore as an all time great heavyweight? If so how high ?

 

Sorry, I don't see the point in debating you. Your sarcasm is not witty or even of substance, it is just obnoxious and makes you look stupid. You know very well that I did not write "his prime or best weight was heavyweight." You seem to have a bad habit of this and I really don't feel the need to begin each response to you with "I did not say that." so I'm dropping out of this one.

As for your only relevant question? I believe Moore was a great heavyweight contender, he just couldn't get over the Championship hump. All time greats Patterson, Marciano, and later at the true twilight of his career against Ali is a very bad hand to draw in that regard. Patterson himself was a former Light Heavyweight, as was Tunney before his domination of Dempsey, and next to Walcott, Joe Louis' greatest foil was Billy Conn. Holmes dropped two close fights to Spinks in contemporary times. Tyson's greatest legacy scalp was a win over Spinks. Before getting their Heavyweight title shots, none of these fighters proved or did nearly as much as Moore did at the weight. These are facts that should be noted before you try to use this argument to discredit Marciano.