1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Could Marciani carry Holmes jock strap? Holmes vs Marciano

Discussion in 'Classic Boxing Forum' started by heizenberg, Oct 28, 2016.



  1. mcvey

    mcvey Boxing Junkie Full Member

    77,278
    4,185
    Sportsbook:
    1,000
    Jun 2, 2006
    Please provide reasons for your statement, as I have.Or are you just parroting something you read?

    ps Holmes has an all time great uppercut, the perfect weapon for the short croucher.
     
    Last edited: Feb 13, 2018
  2. Seamus

    Seamus Boxing Junkie Full Member

    36,188
    2,152
    Sportsbook:
    1,000
    Feb 11, 2005
    This is where it just gets to Twilight Zone material... Apparently, Holmes is the one who is overrated in this match-up.

    Furthermore, I like how Marciano is always "crowding all night" in these match-ups, even when he would be facing an offensive arsenal the likes of which he never experienced, and even tho he eeked out his best wins against Walcott and Charles and tasted the canvas against Moore, even tho he was cut and bruised in every major fight he had... he would still wade through what was arguably the greatest jab the division ever saw and one of the greatest uppercuts it ever saw and a guy with a highly functioning right hand... even though...

    And Holmes is the one being overrated.
     
  3. swagdelfadeel

    swagdelfadeel Boxing Junkie Full Member

    6,519
    220
    Sportsbook:
    500
    Jul 30, 2014
    Styles make fights. Boxer beats slugger beats swarmer beats boxer.
     
    Combatesdeboxeo_ likes this.
  4. Combatesdeboxeo_

    Combatesdeboxeo_ Active Member Full Member

    1,362
    458
    Sportsbook:
    1,000
    Nov 19, 2016
    Except for 67 Ali ,Leonard and robinson they would beat any swarmer the most of times
     
    swagdelfadeel likes this.
  5. mcvey

    mcvey Boxing Junkie Full Member

    77,278
    4,185
    Sportsbook:
    1,000
    Jun 2, 2006
    I can provide dozens of instances where this is proven false.
    You've made a statement, now explain specifically why a swarmer must beat a boxer?
     
    Last edited: Feb 13, 2018
    Seamus and mrkoolkevin like this.
  6. mcvey

    mcvey Boxing Junkie Full Member

    77,278
    4,185
    Sportsbook:
    1,000
    Jun 2, 2006
    Add to those.
    Loughran
    Giardello
    Driscoll
    B Leonard
    Mayweather
    Pender
    And a couple of hundred more!
     
    JC40 likes this.
  7. swagdelfadeel

    swagdelfadeel Boxing Junkie Full Member

    6,519
    220
    Sportsbook:
    500
    Jul 30, 2014
    Not saying you can't overcome your stylistic disadvantage. Just saying it will not be a walk in the park.
     
  8. swagdelfadeel

    swagdelfadeel Boxing Junkie Full Member

    6,519
    220
    Sportsbook:
    500
    Jul 30, 2014
    Going to steal a post from @McGrain

     
  9. mcvey

    mcvey Boxing Junkie Full Member

    77,278
    4,185
    Sportsbook:
    1,000
    Jun 2, 2006
    Saddler
    Armstrong
    Greb
    Marciano
    Were more than swarmers, they regularly added illegal tactics to their repertoires. Saddler beat Pep 2 out of three but in their other fight he was comprehensively outboxed .How could that happen?
    How did Giardello beat Tiger,Fullmer,Hank Carter?
    How did Loughran beat Greb, Walker, Lomski?
     
  10. janitor

    janitor Boxing Junkie Full Member

    56,545
    2,026
    Sportsbook:
    1,000
    Feb 15, 2006
    Of course a swarmer will not always beat a boxer.

    It generally holds true however, that a swarmer will over perform relative to what he is against a boxer, and a boxer will under perform relative to what he is against a boxer.

    If this was not the case, then there would probably never have been a successful swarmer in the history of the sport!

    I also feel that we have to distinguish between a pressure fighter (a fairly broad category), and a full on swarmer like Armstrong or Marciano.
     
    swagdelfadeel likes this.
  11. mcvey

    mcvey Boxing Junkie Full Member

    77,278
    4,185
    Sportsbook:
    1,000
    Jun 2, 2006
    It was this quote that I objected to. And if the reverse was not just as often the case no boxer would have ever beaten a swarmer and we know that is not the case!
     
    Last edited: Feb 13, 2018
  12. Reinhardt

    Reinhardt Active Member Full Member

    1,266
    687
    Sportsbook:
    323
    Oct 4, 2016
    Holmes by UD , Rocky wins maybe a couple rounds
     
  13. janitor

    janitor Boxing Junkie Full Member

    56,545
    2,026
    Sportsbook:
    1,000
    Feb 15, 2006
    My point is that all of the major styles have prospered, precisely because they are effective against another major style, and therefore offer a potential route to the top.

    If a swarmer under performed against every style, as you seem to be implying, then nobody would invest time and effort in becoming a swarmer.

    The swarmer has prospered as a type, precisely because of their ability to disrupt the game of a classic boxer.
     
    choklab likes this.
  14. mcvey

    mcvey Boxing Junkie Full Member

    77,278
    4,185
    Sportsbook:
    1,000
    Jun 2, 2006
    I'm implying nothing, I am categorically stating a swarmer does not have an inherent advantage over a boxer just because of his style.Clear enough?
     
  15. janitor

    janitor Boxing Junkie Full Member

    56,545
    2,026
    Sportsbook:
    1,000
    Feb 15, 2006
    Clear, but completely wrong.