Fighters That Would Probably Stop Marciano?

Discussion in 'Classic Boxing Forum' started by mcvey, Dec 29, 2017.


  1. mcvey

    mcvey VIP Member Full Member

    97,745
    29,122
    Jun 2, 2006
    All three of whom were past prime, two were former light heavies, none of whom were great at heavyweight,and the other was fighting purely to pay off the IRS.
    It's not just who you beat ,but when you beat them.
     
    Glass City Cobra likes this.
  2. mcvey

    mcvey VIP Member Full Member

    97,745
    29,122
    Jun 2, 2006
    I was replying to Berlenbach's observation re quality of opposition.Save your sarcasm for those who appreciate it.
     
    Gazelle Punch likes this.
  3. Cojimar 1946

    Cojimar 1946 Well-Known Member Full Member

    2,766
    1,723
    Nov 23, 2014
    I've always found the complaint that Marciano's opponents were past their prime a bit odd.

    Walcott for example scored the best win of his career in 1951 when he kayoed Ezzard Charles at age 37. If he wasn't in his prime why is he scoring by far the most spectacular victory of his career and subsequently beating Charles in the rematch?
     
  4. mcvey

    mcvey VIP Member Full Member

    97,745
    29,122
    Jun 2, 2006
    I said major opponents,and Im right! Moore said he was 38 his Mother said he was 40.
    Box Rec says 39.
    "Marciano was 32 and Moore was 39"
    CBZ says
    Archie Moore
    (Archibald Lee Wright)
    (the "Old Mongoose")

    BORN December 13 1916 (or 1913); Benoit, Mississippi (Recent sources report Collinsville
     
  5. mcvey

    mcvey VIP Member Full Member

    97,745
    29,122
    Jun 2, 2006
    Walcott retired after the Marciano fights do you think a fighter in his prime does that?
    Let's be clear ,is it your contention that;
    Louis37
    Walcott 38
    Moore 39/40
    Charles 33
    Were prime?
    Yes or no will suffice.
     
  6. PhillyPhan69

    PhillyPhan69 Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    18,105
    15,585
    Dec 20, 2006
    Oddly enough, this is not any more ridiculous than some of your other takes...although in this case you were likely being facetious.
     
  7. Gazelle Punch

    Gazelle Punch Boxing Addict Full Member

    7,110
    8,817
    Aug 15, 2018
    So We convienently leave out Rex Layne La starza and Cockell (ok DC wasn’t that good) Harry Matthews? Rex Layne was the number one contender at the moment in his early 20s coming off a win off of Jersey joe. Revisionist history to down play the accomplishments of an ATG. The question you should ask is were all the fighters the best at the moment and deserving? The answer is yes. Joe Luis wasn’t half the fighter he was I’ll give u that but he was still coming off eight wins in a row. Jersey Joe was the champ Ezzard had a lot of mileage but 33 isn’t ancient by any means. Moore although older beat the golden Calf Nino to earn his shot. There was no one he avoided and beat all comers to think he’s lose to some of the b fighters being mentioned is absurd. Also mentioning he had “close fights” in his developing years is absurd well at least he didn’t lose to lesser fighters like Foreman and Liston and Lewis did (in their primes no less). He’d prob be at the bottom 100 had he done so. That’s not a knock on those great men either all amazing fighters
     
  8. Cojimar 1946

    Cojimar 1946 Well-Known Member Full Member

    2,766
    1,723
    Nov 23, 2014
    Walcott and Moore were in their primes, Charles and Louis were not.
     
  9. mcvey

    mcvey VIP Member Full Member

    97,745
    29,122
    Jun 2, 2006
    Do you want to argue that I picked out his major opponents correctly,Cokkell was a gimmee,Mathews was a lightheavy ,Lastarza was a protected fighter who was steered away from the iron of the division and he only got his shot on the basis of their close fight years earlier and a close decision win over a terminally diminished Layne.
     
    Last edited: Dec 19, 2018
    Seamus likes this.
  10. Gazelle Punch

    Gazelle Punch Boxing Addict Full Member

    7,110
    8,817
    Aug 15, 2018
    You picked out mostly the best except Rex Layne who may have been better then most at that time. Before he really let himself go. Light heavies have moved up and been successful even in recent times so that’s not really an excuse.
     
  11. mrkoolkevin

    mrkoolkevin Never wrestle with pigs or argue with fools Full Member

    18,440
    9,579
    Jan 30, 2014
    And I'd wager that Rahman hit more than a wee bit harder than Marciano.
     
    Pat M likes this.
  12. Gazelle Punch

    Gazelle Punch Boxing Addict Full Member

    7,110
    8,817
    Aug 15, 2018
    I think any boxing historian worth a damn would take that bet. Marciano was called the most powerful puncher in history up up through the 60s...I’m not sure Rahman ranks top ten in his era lol. Amazing how history revisionists on here try to take the man down several notches. Rahman wouldn’t beat Walcott Charles or Moore Guy was b fighter that landed a nice punch.
     
  13. young griffo

    young griffo Boxing Addict Full Member

    6,497
    7,263
    May 18, 2006
    Rahman and Marciano = Much bigger man vs much superior KO %

    Rahman stopped some bigger men (yet couldn't dent a short, obese former middleweights chin) and Marciano stopped a higher level of opponent than Rahman (aside from Lewis and if you include Sanders who was always chinny and if we're honest not that good).


    Really you could wager all you like but it's impossible to prove one way or the other conclusively and Marciano's fans and critics could argue back and forth with facts and counter facts for eternity. Probably what this dog whistling thread was aiming to do.
     
    PhillyPhan69 likes this.
  14. mrkoolkevin

    mrkoolkevin Never wrestle with pigs or argue with fools Full Member

    18,440
    9,579
    Jan 30, 2014
    People who think Marciano was the most powerful man in history probably need to watch his fights and wean themselves off of the hysterical hyperbole of the so-called historians and the highlight reels of his knockouts. Lots of small and/or relatively unimpressive fighters sustained a lot of punishment from Marciano before succumbing to fatigue and the cumulative impact of his punches. He hit very hard for his size but the hyperbole around his punching power should be obvious to anyone who actually watches his fights and evaluates his career objectively.

    And I'm not here to argue about which 180-200lb men Rahman would beat or whether he was a b-fighter who got lucky (at least not in this thread). I'm just talking about his punching power. He was certainly one of the ten hardest punchers in his own era, and he hit hard for his size.
     
    Last edited: Dec 18, 2018
    PhillyPhan69, Seamus, mcvey and 2 others like this.
  15. Farooq

    Farooq Member banned Full Member

    231
    96
    Nov 13, 2018
    Lol Marciano still stopped 190 pound guys or less. If you want to believe they were better for their size who gives a damn. You say Rahman couldn't knock out James Toney a middleweight? Well Rocky Marciano fought 160 pound Ted Lowry 2 times. Neither time could he floor him and in the first fight Marciano almost got knocked out by this 160 pound middleweight.

    You Marciano fans are so delusional and biased that it isn't even funny anymore.