Who DOESN'T Rocky Marciano beat in a H2H match?

Top 10 H2H Marciano wouldn't beat anyone. ATG Top 10 Marciano would either beat no one, or only beat Frazier on points. Regardless, Marciano deserves all the praise, or even better:

 

Dude, nobody wants to sit there arguing with irrational fanboys all day. I have favorite boxers and can easily admit who I think can be bad matchups for them. If you think that's "poor taste", oh well.

I'm not guilt tripping anyone, I'm telling you that you're WAY off the mark attempting to gauge my intentions for the thread and you don't know me at all. How on earth am I being dishonest? I've been very direct with my intentions. You just refuse to believe them. I have behaved more or less the same way for years in this forum.

You are attempting to lecture me telling me how to spend my time, said I was "arrogant", "childish", and "distasteful" in the very post im replying to...those aren't insults? I really don't care either way, I'm just saying lol. You seem to be trying to take this moral high ground policing this thread when a mod replied multiple times and said nothing. If you don't like how I post, you can simply go somewhere else. Put me on ignore, idgaf. Or you could, you know, get back on topic?

He was lying about details of Spence's career and cherry picked facts. He was lying by omission and then just went ghost mode when I called him out. He is incredibly biased, but uses very well articulated, long winded posts to hide the fact he's biased. He's very charismatic and can convince people he's simply "calling it like he's sees it" and doing the same thing when analyzing every boxer's career, but he doesn't. I wasn't the only person to call him out in that thread, and on multiple occasions he simply dismissed what people were saying or questioned their boxing knowledge.

The issue wasn't about whether Spence was a truly high quality elite fighter, it was about the fact there was pretty much an overnight campaign to assassinate Crawford's resume and say he should get little credit for the win and that he isn't a p4p great because Spence wasn't all that. My main argument was that even if for the sake for argument Spence had a "carefully manufactured career", he beat who he was supposed to beat to win all the belts. He was undefeated and cleared out much of the division. He fought Crawford for undisputed and Crawford destroyed him so Crawford absolutely SHOULD get credit. We can argue about the details of how impressive Spence's career was, but it's a FACT he beat several of the best fighters at 147.

It isn't just Chris, guys in the general forum do this sort of thing all the time and are super quick to elevate or dismiss a fighter the minute they struggle or lose. Rather than give a guy credit for winning, they simply say the loser wasn't all that. You're not a real boxing fan if you think that way. He tried to legitimatize his stance by saying "oh I've been saying Spence wasn't all that for years, here's some quotes from years ago" as if that changes the fact his arguments were weird. Perfect example was him criticizing the Ugas win saying Ugas was feather fisted and yet wobbled Spence so the "writing was on the wall for Spence to eventually get brutally KOd by an elite fighter". This is an incredibly disingenuous argument because 1) Ugas was a belt holder, would he prefer Spence fight some lower ranked nobody who can punch just to prove he can take a punch? 2) That was one of the rare occasions Spence got hurt and he managed to turn things around and win...yet this is a mark against Spence? This is how you know someone is biased, when they never give any credit and have absurd criteria.

 

H2H most of the past guys would not beat anyone. That is the reality.

 

Seems like I struck a nerve. Nice world play and dodge of what I have said. I have a quote from you that makes it clear that you wanted this thread to happen because some Marciano fans were hyping their man more than you wanted them to. I called it out, which was directed both to you and Hotep Kemba. He responded to me, and managed to convince me that he made the thread to learn more about the sport. You on the other hand, asked for it purely out of spite, you've literally mentioned the Ruddock thread at least twice. I point that out, and then you get mad at me as if I said something wrong or offensive. I call that out and say you're just trying to guilt trip me, and now you're asking me why I think you're being dishonest ? That is not policing a thread mate, or trying to take some superficial moral highground. It's just calling something out that I don't like, and I was planning to leave it at that at first, before you ended up trying to escalate this further and further every time I answered your posts, like you're doing again right now.

Also, really ? The words ''childish'', ''arrogant'' and ''distasteful'' are insults now ? Grow a pair, seriously. Hell, I outright tried to be civil with you in my last post, and leave this back and forth for good with both of us on good terms, since as you had said, we have barely even interacted here, if at all. I outright stated that I don't want any drama with you, and most posters would have left it at that, or would have had the last word with a sort of mutual agreement. And here you are, instead of accepting that, you'd rather opt to act like a jackass, rambling for 3 goddamn paragraphs about an exchange between you and a mod about Errol ****ing Spence and your hate boner for the General forum. Just take your own advice and don't read the **** they write, put the posters you dislike on ignore, or just never go there again, if you don't like what you're seeing. This is a free forum and anyone can say what they want to say and call out whoever they want to call out, as long as it's not out of line, or heavily derogatory towards other posters. If you want to have the last word, go ahead, but I'm calling it quits here, I won't bother responding.

 

I always imagine him at Light Heavyweight.

5'10" 175 with an engine that never stops running.

 

I've never really thought about Marciano's h2h abilities too much. I'm not a big fan of the heavyweight division. But I guess I'll give it a go. To make things easier on me I'll be going with Marciano's era's ruleset for every match. So I don't have to worry about how Marciano would adapt to the 1890s ruleset or whatever. I don't consider myself a Marciano fan or hater. I usually just grab the popcorn when he gets brought up and watch people lose their minds.

Marciano vs lineal champions. W = win for Marciano. L = Loss for Marciano. * = not totally confident

Sullivan W
Corbett W
Fitzsimmons W
Jeffries W
Hart W
Burns W
Johnson W*
Willard W
Dempsey W*
Tunney W
Schmeling W
Sharkey W
Carnera W
Baer W
Braddock W
Louis L
Charles L* A past prime Charles won on some ringside cards in the first fight. I think he can pull it off but it won't be easy.
Walcott W
Marciano Black Hole appears
Patterson W
Johansson W
Liston L
Ali L
Frazier L* Man this is one of the best heavyweight fantasy fights out there.
Foreman L
Spinks W
Holmes L
Spinks W
Tyson L
Douglas L
Holyfield L
Moorer W
Briggs W
Lewis L
Rahman W
Klitschko L
Fury L

I guess that seems good for now.

 

1-You brought up my debate with CST you idiot. Had nothing to do with this thread (that you derailed) and you continued to further go off course defending CST. Of course I responded to it.

2-I asked you several times if you'd like to actually address the topic at hand. You refused and continued attempting to size me up. I even suggested you simply stop reading the thread or put me on ignore. You refused and continued doubling down with your crusade to paint me in a certain light. And now you have the audacity to wonder why I keep responding.

3-You didn't strike any nerves, you are genuinely hilarious for all the wrong reasons. I don't know who you are, nor do I give AF at this point or what you think of me. It's quite obvious you've made up your mind that I'm out to force others to change their minds about Marciano to be some sort of forum bully. Now you want to put on your cape to defend random people when literally nobody was arguing or getting into any squabbles until YOU showed up.

4-Yes I suggested the thread to be made because of the Ruddock thread, wtf is your point? This somehow "proves" I'm not actually interested in a genuine discussion? What else do you know about me Professor X? What's my favorite color? Do I prefer dipping my fries or pouring ketchup on them? Please cut it out with the armchair psychology crap, you suck at it and I'd rather stick to boxing. I don't care what you think of me and you're hilariously well off the mark...again.

5-idk how you grew up, but telling someone they're arrogant, childish, etc would absolutely be considered insults. They're certainly not ****ing compliments...! You are delusional AF. Grow a pair? On a forum? Do you think I'm afraid of you or something? I literally used to work at a prison and actually took boxing, I'm certainly not intimidated by Mr. Forum Police. You do not have the stones to actually fight me, but I would gladly debate you (and destroy you) in any subject. How about starting with this one? You ready to actually engage in the topic at hand? No? Then **** off.

 

You make some good points. I've seen people claim Walcott was a "late bloomer" and was in fact in his prime when he fought Rocky.

Statistically, that just doesn't make sense. Walcott was 38 in an old school era where they were fighting several times a year in grittier conditions. Walcott had more than a dozen losses and plenty of mileage on his body. He wasn't like today's athletes who get plenty of rest, supplements, proper conditioning, etc to be able to age gracefully. The fact he was destroyed in 1 round in the rematch and then retired is further evidence he was going out with a bang for his last hurrah, not that he turned back the clock and was in his prime somehow.

 

It's fair to say the passion to keep Marciano down in his supposed place has long since surpassed the popularity of hoisting him up into the stratosphere in here. I don't see many "consistently claim that Marciano beats pretty much every single person that he's ever been matched up with". This is likely what is driving Loakeim.

Marciano threads usually flare up from one thing or another

 

Totally agree mate.
Those bigger guys would hammer Rocky, just too much.
If a guy like Walcott can drop him, then what s Lennox gonna do!?

 

Call me old timey but I go Johnson Dempsey Tunney, and Louis.

 

I can't think of an athlete who was considered to be in their athletic prime at 38. Certainly not a fighter who was fighting their last fight.
The problem is that when you admit that a worn 38 year old was out fighting Rocky, you will inevitably have to face the fact that past greats in their primes had a little more than what Walcott had in 1952, and that doesn't favor Rocky at all in H2H ranking.

 

I'll repeat something I've said before. I rank Marciano No. 5 on my ATG heavyweight list because of the greatness of what he accomplished in the time frame he fought in and with the variables that were in front of his face at that particular point in time. I think multiple people I have ranked below him would've taken him out H2H. Call me strange, but who would win H2H is not the determining factor of how I rate fighters.

A while back I also posted a thread asking, sincerely, why folks place Marciano on such a high pedestal and why he is so beloved by so many boxing fans and for the most part it was really good and positive and enlightening conversation.

 

Jack Sharkey