Don Turner says Marciano was the Hardest Hitter ever

That isn't a source of fight night weights, the article states the WBC asked their champions for their current weights after Covid. It's what Artur's current weight was when the WBC asked.

So far as I can tell, the only source of his fight day weight is 182lbs.

 

He hit about as hard as Carl Froch.

 

Dear me. Most heavyweights are finished at 25, he says. And then lionises the man whose most notable wins largely consisted of men in their mid to late 30s. Marciano had eight month training camps. Presumably those years he fought more than once had 16 months in them, then. He ruined Ezzard Charles when Ez went 15, and started the decline that saw him become a losing fighter (forgetting he'd already lost twice to Joe Walcott, including being sparked out cold - something Rocky never did). The Klitchkos can't punch down? They were 6'6", 6'7". How did they ever win a fight in that case? Did they only fight 7 foot tall opposition.

I posted in the 50s era thread that the decade gets some unfair criticism. This kind of stuff is the reason why. Its poster boy is Rocky Marciano and no fighter gets the same level of nonsensical hyperbole. It taints the views of more rational critics who don't think he could really eat lightning and crap thunder and they overcompensate by slagging him and his era off. Not so much because they believe it but are rather trying to give people like Don Turner a reality check.

Rocky was a great champion. He got up from being knocked down, he fought with a bad injury, he knocked most of his opponents out. Does that sound familiar? It should do. It had been done before, has been since and, who knows?, may even be done again though I won't hold my breath with heavyweight boxing being what it is.

But he was mortal. Can we just let his record be what it is and stop trying to attach additional supernatural qualities that didn't really exist? He doesn't need them. He was great enough to be master of his era. That's enough.

 

Given the utter c0ck he spouts, as I highlighted above, that's eminently possible and would explain a lot.

 

What is this nonsense you have filled my screen with? I never said anything about Marciano being the hardest hitter. I would disagree with such a statement and I think Don Turner was using hyperbole to get a point across. The user Barrf claimed that Beterbiev probably hit as hard as Marciano. I was commenting on this comparison to Beterbiev. Do you believe Beterbiev is the hardest hitter or something since I can't comment on it without arguing Marciano is the hardest hitter?
Again, this was a comment on a comparison of Beterbiev and Marciano, where I tried to point out that Beterbiev has not shown the same power displayed by Marciano and gave two different ways of showing it.

You don't think 87.76% K.O. rate is historically unusual for someone with a reach like Marciano? All you did was randomly list names without explaining why they hit harder. By Qawi I assume you mean Dwight Muhammad Qawi, how exactly does he hit harder than Marciano? Braddock as in James J. Braddock? He does not hit harder than Marciano. Are you just listing every boxer you know?

I can say right now that there are plenty of fighters who punched harder than Marciano. Sonny Liston hit harder than Marciano. But the same Sonny Liston failed to knockout Eddie Machen who had a broken right hand in their match, who in turn suffered a bad knockout by Ingemar Johansson. Did Ingemar Johansson punch harder than Sonny Liston because of this? How are you measuring it?

 

"You don't think 87.76% K.O. rate is historically unusual for someone with a reach like Marciano? I keep a list of HW contender KO rates. There are 32 HW contenders with a higher KO rate than Marciano. Including Stanley Ketchel a MW. There are 10 additional LHWs who aren't on the LHW list. These include Beterbiev. KO rate is an imperfect tool that favors short careers and low SOS and champions wiho have long fights against overmatched opponents like Marciano did. Many of those who I listed in the prior post have a lower KO rate for any combination of these reasons and Marciano no doubt hit harder than some who are ahead. But either way theres dozens of people ahead.


Beterbiev had a 100 KO rate until recently and has displayed the most power of a LHW champ since Qawi. Hes taller than Marciano with a longer reach and weighs about 10-15 pounds less. Marcianos era of HW was mostly bloated LHW sized guys. So yeah all the measurables point to Beterbiev hitting harder.

Braddock was 6 ft 2 fighting 20-30 even 40 pounds underweight for almost his whole career against much better opponents than Marciano and often bigger ones. Braddock has the same testimonials and ancedotes you can point to from Marciano and Braddock knocked down the real Joe Louis. Braddock was above 185 4 times and didn't knock out Max Baer, John Henry Lewis or Tommy Farr. Braddock didn't knock out 6 ft 4 Art Lasky weighing 182 pounds or peak Tommy Loughran weighing 170. Sue him. Anyone mentioned in this paragraph would defeat Marciano quite easy with the possible exception of Lasky who was 6 ft 4 and had an 85% KO rate btw. Didn't Louis say Braddock was the best he fought and possibly hit the hardest? I can't find the quote but can reading him say something to that effect?

Speaking of Farr, Farr coming off a 10 year layoff was top Marciano opponent Dan Cockells best HW win. Farr actually scored a knockdown in that fight. In the late 30s Marciano might have to be a MW at HW he sure as bleep wouldn't have no 87% KO rate.

This content is protected

The only other 2 times Machen was knocked out were in his last 3 fights. One was Joe Frazier who he almost survived against. The other was an undefeated Boone Kirkman who could have been champ maybe in Marcianos era. The only reason Boone Kirkman wasn't a factor at HW is the era he fought in hes very much the anti Marciano.

Machen was fighting to survive against Liston. Theres all sort of problems with using one fight to draw conclusion like that. Liston hitting harder than Ingo is based on a lot more. Quick knockouts can be flukey because theres so little fight time but getting them consistantly is not and Liston did that.

Reach isn't everything with power because its taking into account the size of the arm not how hard one hits but its a good indicator because the size of arms is not irelevant. And Liston has the same reach as a Carnera or Fury on a much smaller frame. While Marciano had the reach of Manny Pacquiao on a smaller one. Your smaller power hitters like Fitz, Langford, Qawi, Tyson, Ingo have at least 4 inches of reach on Marciano.

The point about you not agreeing with the article title is fair. But I mean I'm in a thread titled "Don Turner says Marciano was the hardest hitter ever" and you're touting Marcianos power, thinking you think Marciano is in that discussion is not the craziest conclusion to jump to.

 

Uh, you don't have to find Marciano, he comes straight at you , and he did hit hard,,,, for a 185 pound man.
The list of heavyweights who'd blow Rocky out of his shoes is a long one

 

That is quite a claim when nobody actually did it.

 

It would be very convenient on my end, if those punch tests gave any meaningful cross era comparisons.

I could have a lot of fun with that.

The reality is that they don't, or we must assume that they don't.

 

Top Post!

 

Good Stuff !

 

I'm not a fan of the Klitschkos but both of them would dribble Rocky like a basketball.

 

The people who put this guy on so high a pedestal are trying to recapture a time and a place that doesn't exist anymore. It's personal to them. I can't think of any fighter, even my favorites, even my man Floyd Patterson, who means a hill of beans to me on a personal level.

 

I'll apologize if I came across as rude, I got a bit irritable due to a migraine. I will try to address a few of your points.

I agree that K.O. rates are imperfect when it comes to determining who actually hit harder, I prefer it be used as an indicator instead. When it comes to figuring out who hits harder than who in boxing, we have difficult task in front of us, there are many factors and we can thus only hope to get within a reasonable estimate. However, when it comes to determining punching power, who is more likely to punch harder, the guy with a high K.O. rate, or the one with a low K.O. rate?

When it comes to Beterbiev as a comparison with Marciano; both forced their opponent to back away consistently, but Beterbiev is not launching himself forward like a torpedo like Marciano did when he threw big punches. This leads me to believe that Marciano generated more force since he is falling into his opponent with his entire weight behind his punch. And I disagree with your assertion that Beterbiev hits harder, at least on the basis of Marciano's era being just "bloated LHW guys" when there where sizeable opponents above the cruiserweight limit. Marciano did beat physically bigger fighters than Beterbiev have. "Beterbiev had a 100 KO rate until recently and has displayed the most power of a LHW champ since Qawi." Okay? What are you estimating Qawi's punching power from exactly? (Didn't Holyfield beat him and hit harder anyway? Edit: Got my divisions mixed up, it was Michael Spinks I was thinking about, point still stands) What spectacular show of force/K.O.s did Qawi have to prove he hit harder?

"Braddock was 6 ft 2 fighting 20-30 even 40 pounds underweight for almost his whole career against much better opponents than Marciano and often bigger ones. Braddock has the same testimonials and ancedotes you can point to from Marciano and Braddock knocked down the real Joe Louis. Braddock was above 185 4 times and didn't knock out Max Baer, John Henry Lewis or Tommy Farr. Braddock didn't knock out 6 ft 4 Art Lasky weighing 182 pounds or peak Tommy Loughran weighing 170. Sue him."

... This isn't exactly a great argument for Braddock's punching power you know. Can you link any of these testimonials where anyone of the opponents of Braddock praise him for his punching power? Oh and didn't Braddock suffer chronic hand injuries which no doubt limited his punching power?

"Anyone mentioned in this paragraph would defeat Marciano quite easy with the possible exception of Lasky who was 6 ft 4 and had an 85% KO rate btw. Didn't Louis say Braddock was the best he fought and possibly hit the hardest? I can't find the quote but can reading him say something to that effect?"

Whether or not they could defeat Marciano is entirely irrelevant for the question of who punches harder. Marciano had K.O. power in both of his hands unlike, say Tony Galento, who only had power in his left and was thus incapable of finishing Joe Louis off after he knocked him down in their fight. Joe Louis did say something akin to Braddock being one of his finest opponents right after beating him, Joe Louis also praised Marciano's power. Ezzard Charles claimed Marciano was the best puncher he fought.

"In the late 30s Marciano might have to be a MW at HW he sure as bleep wouldn't have no 87% KO rate." Based off of what, your biased, baseless assertion here?

"Machen was fighting to survive against Liston. Theres all sort of problems with using one fight to draw conclusion like that. Liston hitting harder than Ingo is based on a lot more. Quick knockouts can be flukey because theres so little fight time but getting them consistantly is not and Liston did that."

No matter how we try to measure and compare, there will always be problems. That is why we should try to avoid oversimplifying things, such as by claiming that a bigger fighter automatically hit harder than a smaller one. We should bring up points and counterpoints to see which are more valid, not just dismiss.
Marciano had several quick knockouts as well, he however also had a short reach, which meant that he could not just stand in the middle of the ring and throw K.O. punches at will like someone with a long reach. This is actually a problem for many punchers, as it leads to them becoming poor boxers skill-wise. (Sonny Liston had a very long reach, but it contrary to popular belief, it was not the same as Primo Carnera or Tyson Fury, it was exaggerated a bit, how much I am not sure). People often hold it against Marciano that he did not quickly K.O. Joe Louis since he was old, but why would he? He had a great opportunity to learn from Louis and he sure was not gonna underestimate him. Again, a short reach means that you might have to take your time to find the opportunity to K.O. your opponent, even if you have the power to do so.

"The point about you not agreeing with the article title is fair. But I mean I'm in a thread titled "Don Turner says Marciano was the hardest hitter ever" and you're touting Marcianos power, thinking you think Marciano is in that discussion is not the craziest conclusion to jump to."

Yes, I understand that, and you did reply before I gave my second reply in this thread where I was trying to clarify a few things. However, I should still be able to forward points or argument in favor of something without it immediately being presumed that I believe or argue for something else. P4P Marciano will be very high when it comes to his punching power, but it does not change that there are bigger fighters that can hit harder than him.