As Marciano was never beaten, is it reasonable to pick a >200lb fighter over him?

Unless i misinterpret your post, don't you mean <200lb?

I would not make any fighter in the history of the sport below 200lb a favorite over Marciano. In a head to head sense, Marciano is top10 p4p for me.

 

I'm not saying he would win, but I think Jones at 198 would give the Rock some trouble.

 

Jones over Marciano? As soon as the"Suzie Q" lands,...say"goodnight"

 

His record is overrated to me, it consists of 36 tomato cans, 2 blown up light heavyweights that were past thier best and an old joe louis with about 5 contenders. Joe Frazier would have been undefeated if he fought during that era too.

 

Yeah, he had a lot of trouble with a mediocre contender like Bonavena, but he automatically beat HOF like Walcott or Charles...

 

Bonavena would have been a top 5 contender in that era. Ezzard Charles and joe walcott are boxers that stylistically are good for frazier, i would easily see him beating both. By the way, the rock fought the 1954 version of charles anyways, he was 3-4 years past his prime by then.

 

Be honest, you never saw a prime Charles, so you can´t judge how the Charles was who fought Marciano...

 

You sound like the Walcott or the Charles who fought Marciano were bad versions like the Holmes who fought Tyson (IMO Tyson beats also a prime Holmes btw), but that isn´t the truth, I saw both Walcott and Charles (especially him, because Walcott peaked very late) and the versions who fought Rocky were very good.

 

He lost 7 times within a 3 year span prior to losing to marciano, i think that suggests his prime was over.

 

I think Frazier would've definately dominated the era as well, though he may have suffered a loss.

 

I never said anything about his walcott win, thats his best win.