Does A Prime Marciano Beat The Joshua Of Today?

Why?...The "Rocky Syndrome"....a club fighter has a chance at the Heavyweight Championship of The World".

 

Ah - and no response, yet...

It would be interesting to see if a strong case could be made for AJ not being in there.

 

He showed some skill vs Stiverne.

But like Joshua, he's untested.

I'm not fooled by the power, although its a great thing to have.

 

As did i (asked Perry for his top 10) prior. It sure ain't happening.

 

Sorry but i really do not follow that.

 

He dove head first into that punch to give it way more force and he is kayoing Szpilka. I'm not impressed lol. He would get crushed by Vitali at 45 right now.

 

You know, I agree with this. Parker has been brought along better. He can do the distance.

First rule of clever matchmaking is never let a super heavyweight go for a title unless he can at least first win a decision over ten rounds.

Nobody gets better the easier the fights are. But Who knows, Eddie Hearn might be lucky enough to have the one special kid to prove history wrong, but it's never happened before. Even a young joe Louis had his Max Schmeling comeuppance.

 

The issue is we have 40 or more top ten contenders and how many who can call themselves hwt champion? In such a watered down world who can really be considered as anything? In such a watered down hwt scene why is anyone trying to compare true ATG champions to watered down talent hwts? Why is anyone trying to compare true ATG hwts to any fighter with only 18 pro fights? Why is anyone trying to compare true ATG hwts to an 18 pro fight hwt who has fought only nondescript hwts in a watered down hwt era? THESE are the questions you should be asking yourself.

 

Yeah, because that never happened back in the day...

 

He doesn't watch enough boxing to have a current top 10.

 

There are a lot of questions being asked there - in answer to a question put to you, I might add. I shall treat them, in the main, as rhetorical - the core of your point seems clear enough.

I do not see a problem with speculative fantasy match-ups. We are not comparing legacies, in such cases. We are comparing what we know/have seen of each of the fighters in question.

Rankings do not really come into it but, on that point, I would suggest that the expanded breadth of rankings, created by the various governing bodies, distract from the Ring Magazine's Ratings - which have been available for over 90 years. Most people I know focus on these, as their guideline. Although, the Transnational Rankings have been around for several years now, as a second opinion.

But the rankings are not what's really important.

Isn't it still about what we can see and evaluate, through our observations?
As fans, can we not use these observations to speculate on the potential success (or not, as the case may be) of the competitors in the running?
Can we not apply the same to fantasy match-ups that will never happen - no matter how odd the pairings might seem?

 

I agree with this.

As it stands why should Joshua be any more than 50-50 in a match with Jess Willard or Primo Carnera? What in the world has Joshua or any of the current young SHWs done to ellipse either of those two?

Yet Who would give Carnera or Willard more than a 20% chance versus Marciano?