Give credit, Marciano left the heavyweight division ALMOST decimated.

who's that?

 

I take exception with calling the 50s a weak era. Far from it. I can give u a top 20 names hardly matches by any other decade with exception to maybe the 70s and 90s. Even the leftover holdovers from the 50s fought deep into the 60s and even early 70s. 50s was far from weak.

 

I take exception with calling the 1950's a thriving, strong era for the division. Ancient, shopworn fighters and lesser specimens were able to rule the roost. Finally, in Liston, we saw a real heavyweight and the birth of the true modern era of the division.

 

I don't think GazellePunch means that it was a great era, just that it gets too much heck for being a poor one.

 

Precisely. Wasn’t so different then any era. It was an era where the best were smaller fighters which is why it maybe gets its bad rap but that’s not the fault of the fighters. Good Bigger heavies like Baker, Nino, Abel Cestac, Embrell Davidson,old
Louis etc just weren’t good enough to beat the Marciano, Moore, and other great smaller fighters (Charles, Satterfield, Henry, etc). Seamus is obsessed with size.

 

You mean Charles old sparring partner? He was a hell of a fighter and a 50s product.

 

He should have hung around until 1973 to fight George Foreman. Of course Marciano would have turned 50 in 1973 but still....its clear he ducked George Foreman

 

His ascension didn't begin until the closing of the decade. He almost none of the stalwarts of 50's heavies, Marciano, Moore, Walcott, Charles, Layne... The one he did fight, Valdes and Patterson, he utterly destroyed.

 

He destroyed them not because they were bad but because he was great himself. Stepping stones like Satterfield and Baker who were good fighters but didn’t warrant a title fight were beating the likes of Williams and Chuvalo. Two title contenders of the 60s. Or someone like Harold Johnson who couldn’t beat men like Moore and Walcott but was beating 60s contenders like Machen long Into the 60s.
Patterson fought long and hard after that as well beating and competing with plenty of fighters from “better” eras.

 

Of this bunch, I fancy Willie Pastrano to have the best chance to beat a Marciano who is starting to show some mileage on those tires. Especially if Rocky had retired and come back, thus losing another step.

 

Men have been boxing with gloves for 140 years.

The vast majority of that time span has been what we would call weak eras.

There have been thousands of heavyweight condensers during that time frame.

During that time, only a handful of heavyweights, have been able to dominate a definable era, i.e a few years beating the best contenders.

Only one, repeat one, has done that and retied undefeated.

Marciano was what he was, but you have to give some recognition for his accomplishments!

 

My point was that of all of the weak eras, very few haven't been dominated by someone. So I was thinking it wasn't handful relative to the eras, whereas you were talking about it relative to the amount of heavyweights in those time frames. I get you.

What the likes Louis, Rocky, Wlad etc; have done is amazing. Those guys are without question top 10 HWs IMO. No one can take away the fact that they were unquestionably the best heavyweights in the world for extended periods of time.

Marciano being undefeated is what sets him aside and makes him both so controversial, and so special. However being undefeated is overrated IMO. I don't think losses take away from a legacy in anyway, shape or form.

 

Weak eras only get dominated, if there is a great fighter around, or if the champion milks the title.

If there is not a great man, then you get a shuffling of the pack era, like the early 30s.

Most great heavyweights, were great men, who dominated weak eras!

 

Agreed.

Short term dominance is easier to accomplish, than long term consistency.

Neither do I.

I would probably rate Roy Jones more highly, if he had taken more tough fights, and picked up a loss.

Being undefeated is vastly over rated, but Marciano still has one iron in the fire.

He was absolutely scrupulous in defending his title against the most qualified contenders!

That sort of makes him the exception that proves the rule!

 

The issue is that some of the more recent champs would cut thru Marciano's era like a hot knife thru butter. You refuse to admit one of the most obvious truisms of sport, that the quality of athletes, especially big athletes has progressed drastically over the decades.

And Jeffries retired undefeated. Jus' saying.