I think you have a toxic hatred of Ali that amounts to a phobia. And your posts irrefutably confirm this.
If what I post is the truth, then where is the problem? If the truth about Ali turns out to be negative, I don't think the problem is mine.
Ali IS rated by every known expert and historian and at least the top two all time hwt champion. Predominantly he is rated No 1. He is ALWAYS rated over Marciano. If they had fought it would be a great fight and I lean either way day to day. Rocky would give Ali hell. That does not mean however that Rocky deserves to be rated over Ali. Ali's career far surpasses that of Rocky in terms of resume.
Let's see, another newbie with a Rocky moniker... Would you like to explain how Frazier did not KO half of the opponents in his first 20 fights with his right hand? Please educate me. (bonus points for "diddly squat")
I think you need to understand what in boxing terminology the phrase "not having a right hand" means. Unfortunately you are not close enough to the game to understand so you misinterpret. Not having a right hand does not mean said fighter has no ability to use his right hand. It means there is little coordination between left and right hands, limiting via good boxing one hand greatly diminishes said fighters ability to fight to win etc. Frazier himself stated early in his career his right hand was not developed. Very late in his career he developed a better right but still it was not a weapon he used well in combination with his left. Explanation as to why? Frazier was a converted Southpaw so the great majority of his power and coordination was within his left hand.
Nice dance around but again you are wrong on almost every point. Footage of Joe early on show him mixing in right uppercuts and rights to the head and body quite well... and in combo. And again, he KO'd half his first 20 victims with the right. The Mathis fight alone refutes everything you say above. Joe is landing quick left-rights... rights to the head and body, hooks and uppercuts and body shots. How does this jive with your narrative?
I absolutely agree that the Rock was a great fighter. However, he was not the greatest. There are in fact other fighters who train hard... even incredibly hard. He didn't invent monastic training.
I'm not sure anyone is saying that he is the greatest here, though an argument could be made. The question is, under the specific criteria laid out in this thread, who would take this fight, Ali or Marciano? To argue that because other fighters shared similar traits to Rocky, Rocky was mundane would be to argue that because other fighters had speed, Ali should be relegated to mediocrity. I just can't follow that logic.
Again, prove me wrong about Frazier KO'ing half of his first 20 with his right hand. Watch the Mathis fight and tell me you see no right hands... effective right hands. He is absolutely brutalizing Mathis with rights to the body. Three of those almost crumble him in the final round, setting up the coup de grace. The old "one handed fighter" yarn about Frazier is tired and incorrect. Just because a fighter has a great punch in his ****nal does not mean he lacks other, effective and even KO yielding punches. Your contention is patently false.
Frazier and Kooney were 2 guys who used there right hand for holding stuff and wiping there behind, it was little more than an ornament but 2 actually hands they had. The hands were not effective such as the the 2 hands that guys like Marciano, Louis and Ali's were....Bummy Davis was another and Cyclone heart was another converted Southpaw the were powerful lefters but right hand for as- scratching
No, he wasn't. Ali was greater, as most Marciano fans acknowledge. That is not the argument that you have to field here however. The argument being put to you (I hope), is that Marciano might well defeat Ali on stylistic grounds.