Andy Ruiz v. Rocky Marciano

Yawn.
Marciano career and H2H > Wlad

 

"Ouch!!!"...

 

Let's see.....that fat guy who KO's the untested Joshua...and caught lightning in a bottle for one night...OR.....the best conditioned fighter who ever set foot in the ring......Hmmmmmm......I dunno.....

 

It’s difficult to talk Wlad of owning things when Fresh in the memories of those of us around at the time were the crushing knockouts Wlad suffered against Sanders and Brewster in important fights.

If AJ is spotless from here on till eternity he will still go down as the guy knocked out by some fat bloke.

 

He was before his prime, that is by definition, green.

Errrr, yeah it is. That would knock his consistency of dedication. Not dominance.
He also, definitely was slipping. It's clear to see he was moving sphere's away from the stuff that made him so great.

Holmes's competition>
Tyson's competition>
Wlad's>
Easily.

Tyson was prime, he wasn't peak. At his peak, he was more dominant than Marciano.

Holmes's competition was trash at points, but he did fight the best, and outran the era he was in.

. Imagine a Marciano fan criticizing another heavyweight's opponents age.

First of all, Shavers definitely isn't one of his top 2 best wins. Mercer >>, Witherspoon >>, Weaver >>, Berbick >>> ect.
And he was coming right off his biggest fight to Ali... He wasn't old.

Norton wasn't old either, he was champion, and 3 fights removed one of his best fights.

Now of Marciano's top 5 most notable wins, 3 are old, one is shot and the other is either Layne or LaStarza, both of whom are shocking in an all time H2H sense.

Nah, they're really is no argument imo that Holmes (or Wlad, for that matter) is below Marciano all time. None. Zilch. Undefeated or not.

H2H all 3 **** on Marciano, stop him and do better against other fighters. Tyson in his first 8 years as a pro (obviously extrapolating for what would've been his 8th in 93) would demolish any one who Marciano beat.

 

Marciano was far better then Brewster Purity and Sanders I find it laughable to think Marciano loses to him. I won’t give Wlad crap for Fury or AJ he was old but honestly he’s arguably the lesser of the two brothers. He had a nice run but his best wins are Byrd and Barrett...not the most impressive list.
Holmes has a solid case against Marciano as does Tyson. All great fighters but most historians edge it out to Marciano as he has no slips and ironically the three fighters picked here to put up against Marciano ironically all had poor competition within their eras only difference is Marciano didn’t let any slip.
And get over it Tyson was prime and even his trainers said when he faced adversity he folded and tried to coast. He looked so good against terrible competition. Still a great warrior but maybe the most over rated fighter ever.

 

#1, he wasn't "far" better than Sanders. And he wasn't tougher than Purity or Sanders, which is why they beat Wlad.
And #2, so was David Haye, Alexander Povetkin, Chris Byrd, Sam Peter ect. That logic doesn't work and we know it.

Barrett? Monte ****ing Barrett? That's great you think Wlad's second best win is?
Wlad's best wins are Haye, Byrd, Peter, Povetkin, Pulev, Ibragimov or Chagaev. With loads of B-Level contenders as well. That takes a **** and wipes it's ass with an finished Ezzard Charles, Jersey Joe, an old Moore, a shot Louis and Rex Layne.

Wlad's "nice run" was better than Marciano's whole career lol.

This is a good point. But. Résumé > Consistency. If you fight better people, you're more likely to lose, it's simple. Hence why I have Marciano below the 3 of them and much lower than Holmes and Wlad.

Sorry, did you miss where I explicitly stated he was prime, word for word?

At least he looked good...

 

Lol none of the fighters for Wlad were nearly as good as Charles Walcott and or Moore. That’s why you won’t find a historian worth a damn that would list Wlad above Marciano. Byrd was his best win period. You can stop there and his losses honestly take him out of the top ten let alone listing him next to Marciano whom I place anywhere from 3-6 depending on the day.
Knock on Marciano was his competition but don’t list the HWs with arguably worse wins on their resumes. Tyson and Holmes were just as good and top ten fighters as Marciano was so any argument for them I understand but Wlad jusg isn’t in the same league. He’s more of a tier 2 guy. Not a knock on him he was what he was. A great champion but no competition mixed in with some crappy losses.

 

Haye beats a shot Charles, a shot Louis and any version of Moore or Layne.
Byrd beats those two, as does Povetkin, Peter, Pulev, Ibragimov, Chagaev ect. Peter beats all of them and Walcott as well.
Plus Wlad has more good wins. His résumé is better. It's not close either.

Not yet.

Wlad not top 10? But Tyson is? Lmao we're done here.

 

So was Layne and Haye was better than Moore and Charles at that point

 

Dear lord George c'mon I know you're British but............

That's baaaaaad

 

Wow, you have an odd take on things. Haye doesn’t beat Charles Walcott or Moore. Byrd has a chance at a win or two in there. And those other third raters you names shouldn’t even be mentioned

 

Wow, you have an odd take on things. Haye doesn’t beat Charles Walcott or Moore. Byrd has a chance at a win or two in there. And those other third raters you names shouldn’t even be mentioned

 

Then you have to ask why he didn't match himself more ambitiously, back when he was ranked!

I have learned one thing about boxing over the years.

The match making tells you as much as the results!