Expert opinions on Marciano VS Liston

Iv trained in many gyms for nigh on 20 years, if any coach had any opinions on 'style advantages' I never herd it.
Sure everyone talked about different styles but it was always about how to overcome a particular style. The talk was never about which style had a advantage over another.
That said if a short kid is up against a tall rangy kid the shorter boxer can be at a disadvantage but only if he try's to 'box' him.
If he can successfully work his way inside in theory he can cancel out his apparent disadvantage and,again in theory, gain a advantage.
I take it in your opinion the tall rangey kid has a 'style advantage' and I can see where your coming from but I don't see it that way.

 

Very good post.....not a huge Marciano fan but he should beat liston

 

it is not a fair fight. Punch for punch would be interesting same weight. As they were? Liston was just a bigger heavyweight. Hard to judge it. Sort of like the Klitchkos vs. Tyson.

 

This is a very good post. There are different styles out there but it is a nonsense about one always having an advantage over the other. It applies only to who can implement their style most successfuly on each occasion with each occasion being an individual case. in the purest sense one could say a box-puncher has a bit of everything. John Conteh once told me “all a fighter can do is fight but a boxer can box and he can always fight too” but this is a very general comment.

All fighters fight to their strengths. A swarmer isn’t going to do well trying to box with a taller boxer, but a good swarmer can still beat the hell out of the tall boxer if he is successful. And they often do. A puncher/slugger can lose to every style of fighter. A boxer can lose to every style of fighter. All it takes is for each style of fighter to be good enough to stop what the other guy is good at doing whilst being able to do everything he is good at doing. And that’s what good coaches tell their kids. They might say “I don’t want you fighting a puncher because your defence is bad” or “I don’t want you giving away that much height” but who on Earth discourages kid by saying you are a boxer, you won’t ever beat a puncher or whatever. That’s total ball-hang.

 

My sentiments exactly!

 

No tall is not a style but a tall rangey boxer (which is what I meant) is a style and therefore,in your opinion,would have the 'style advantage'

 

This would assume that said tall rangy fighter fought in a way that maximised his physical advantages.Six feet six Ernie Terrell didn't, he fought leaning forwards giving away his height.Not every tall guy fights tall.

 

It has long been recognised by boxing coaches that a boxers body type and physique should have a strong influence on his style. maximum protection for his target area with gloves held in position to attack, defend, counter, counter attack with minimum movement at Maxim speed. A tall boxer should maximise the advantag his height and reach give him. He should therefore stand more sideways with his body weight further away from the front foot. Ideally.

 

Yes lets just assume the tall rangey boxer maximised his assets! I thought that would of been obvious to the argument.

 

The more you post, the more mistakes I can point out.

I said " Jeffries actually fought an African American as champion and came back years after retirement to meet Johnson "

True, he fought Hank Griffin as champion flooring him multiple times. Suppose Griffin some how won via KO, who's the new lineal champion? DUH Mcvey.

Jeffries also returned as Lineal champion to fight Johnson, six years removed from the ring, and badly out of shape.

I'll stand on my points. You can opt to remain bigoted on yours.

 

I agree with this. However, there are exceptions. It's not a clean cut game of Rock, Paper, Scissors!

And the assumptions seem to change around 160 pounds or more.

The puncher's chance and durability are factors. Height and reach also play a role, combined with the wills of the fighters to take the hard road for victory if needed.

 

I understood perfectly what you meant. At no point could what you have said been confused with calling being “Tall” a style in itself. What you said was..

Why wouldn’t a short guy be disadvantaged trying to box with a tall guy? He needs to get past the longer arms and fight. Regardless of the style the tall guy has. I think sometimes, Some people just want to get the wrong end of the stick.

 

Yes but it’s not cannon, or inarguable that styles are as clean cut as Rock Paper Scissors among the boxing fraternity is it?

Even Joe Frazier himself regarded himself as a combination of swarmer and puncher. These styles are not even a guide. They are tactics. Certain fighters predominantly use swarming tactics or slugging tactics, they may even use them for entire fights but it’s not cannon. That’s just poppycock.

This is what joe Frazier wrote “unless you have a very strong, defined style that most fighters can’t deal with, it’s best if your able to adjust to your opponents style. Don’t do what your opponent is good at.”

“A winning strategy is about doing your job and not letting your opponent do his”

• Swarmer beats Boxer
• Slugger beats Swarmer
• Boxer beats Slugger"
• The above is nonsense.

 

Ideally, but it isn't a given.