How to rate Rocky Marciano? (Fair Anaylsis)

I'm sure similar threads have been done, but this subject is likely a common one I think one worth revisiting. I've both overrated and underrated him at points through my learning and would like to hear some more unbiased opinions to help me form a fair analysis. I've more recently gotten into this era in greater detail and would love all comments that seek to give a fair analysis and helpful context.

Top Opposition (my own analysis and questions).

When beaten by Marciano, Walcott was 38, had a fair loss ratio (49-18 pre Rocky), and appears often overrated as a HW, was the Walcott who lost to an aging Louis really that much better than he was when Marciano beat him? I've heard the idea that Walcott was better in his later career and it appears somewhat true, considering his Charles fights, though this may be overstated.

I consider Ezzard Charles his best wins, while Charles was a bit past his true best, he was both close in age to Rocky who some argue was also past his tip peak(not sure myself), and was not near as advanced in age as Walcott, Moore, or Louis. Charles who fought Rocky appeared hungry, tactical, and fierce as in many previous fights. How great were these victories for Rocky? Would the Charles of 48-50 have been too much for Rocky?

Rex Layne should be remembered among Rocky's better wins. He was perhaps the biggest skilled man he fought (in his prime). He beat Walcott, Ezzard Charles, Bob Satterfield, and a surprising number of other top-rated men. A quick, sharp and accurate puncher though not a hard man to hit who often left himself open. Rocky broke several of his teeth in their fight.

LaStarza while not on the level of say Charles was nonetheless among the finest heavyweights of his day and appeared to be a smart boxer though certainly not a power puncher. He also had a notable weight and height advantage over Rocky. Marciano was one of two men to KO him in his 66 fights. Certainly among Rockys better wins

Moore was certainly past his best and put up a great fight knocking Rocky down, and giving him major trouble. Marciano considered this among his toughest fights. How over the hill was this version of Archie Moore? How would a younger version of Moore have done, having to put on the extra weight for HW against Marciano?

Don Cockell, younger and bigger than Marciano also appeared a durable and smart boxer though still not a hard puncher. His best wins against LaStarza, Harry Matthews, and an old Tommy Farr. Marciano pulled more fouls here than usual, headbutting and perhaps a few low blows mixed in, though I doubt Cockell would have done better had Marciano played nice. Not near as good a win as Charles or Layne in my view.

Lee Savold was past his best in his late thirties, coming off a loss to an ancient Joe Louis. His best wins were near a decade before his Marciano fight, and he suffered a fair number of losses in his prime years as well. Not a very noteworthy win.

Joe Louis was obviously past it. The often-cited 8 victories he achieved beforehand were not against great contenders and would have been early easy KOs in his prime. How great an achievement was this? Even the ancient Joe was still a force in the ring who still would have beaten many heavyweights of the period. In my view Rocky winning against him was a stepping stone both to the title, and which showed he was above the level of most HW's of his day, though this win was not so impactful on his overall legacy as Louis was a shell of his former self, no doubt.

Conclusions

Based on the level of opposition and performance, I consider his second win against Charles as his best win. After competitive rounds going to each fighter, Charles cut Rocky's nose in the 6th and thus targeted the wound causing it to gush blood. Despite the injury, after being told they might have to stop the fight he relentlessly pushed through the pain and delivered the KO with less than thirty seconds left. While some might believe the importance of this event is overstated, I think this shows Rocky's ability to perform under pressure which is among the hallmarks of any great fighter. This fight was also not like the first Walcott fight, which was more one-sided in Walcott's favor until Rocky landed his Suzie-Q. I rate his other best wins in this order. Charles(1), Layne, LaStarza (rematch), Moore, and Walcott.

 

Ability/Skill (my own analysis and questions)

The three things Rocky is most praised for is his power, stamina, and ability to take a punch. However, I have my questions on some of these.

Power
Rocky was a hard hitter, no doubt. His one-punch power is no better shown than with his first fight with Walcott, where that overhand right changed the outcome from what seemed an inevitable decision win for Jersey Joe. However, when ranking Rocky's power, some compare him to the likes of Shavers, Foreman, Lyle, and others. I find it very hard to rate Rocky's power against the top power punchers as he generally fought considerably smaller opposition than they did, and in many cases, it took him the majority of the scheduled rounds to take his top opposition out, many being Light Heavyweights. For comparison, Jack Dempsey was of a similar weight and generally fought both larger and harder-hitting opposition (Fulton, Morris, Gunboat Smith, Firpo etc) and yet he ended these fights and many more in the early rounds. Was Dempsey a harder puncher, or was his superior accuracy, and combination skills to credit for finishing these fights so early? Could it be both? Could this be a style difference as Rocky often targeted the body? Who would you compare to Rocky for punching power?

Stamina.
This attribute of Rocky while often brought up does not appear to be overrated. The man was one of the most well-conditioned of any HW. His training included running five to seven miles every single day (ten or more in the month leading up before a fight) and using a 300 pound heavy bag (100 pounds more than the standard) among other things. It paid off, as he appeared to be as energetic in the 15th as in the first according to many of his opponents. This furthered as he was easy to hit yet seemed to lack the fatigue boxers often get after being hit so many times, and would just keep coming forward. While lacking the quick footwork and defensive body and head movement of great swarmer/punchers like Frazier, Dempsey and Patterson, his ability to keep coming forward and pressure his opponents was still very impressive and hard to match. I wonder how he would have done with this training in the old days of 30+ rounders?

Chin
This is the most dubious of Rocky's alleged qualities. Of course, Rocky was never knocked out, despite being flatfooted and easy to hit, thus showing he had a good chin. However, as we know, Rocky never faced a real prime power puncher, and while taking some very hard shots, its hard to evaluate his chin. For Comparison, Joe Frazier was only knocked out by George Foreman, a far bigger man and harder puncher than any who Rocky fought, so can one really say Rocky had a better chin than Frazier? This creates an issue of how Rocky might do in hypothetical matches against larger, stronger opponents. Would Rocky have been able to remain standing against a man of Foreman's caliber, or Shaver's, Liston, Baer, etc?

Other skills and attributes
Rocky was never a defensive master, while fighting out of a crouch, he didn't really bob and weave but rather simply pressed forward sometimes bobbing up and down. One defensive trick he would use would be bending down to the side, rather than the front which suited his slow footwork better than the forward bend used by fleetfooted swarmers Dempsey and Frazier. This also was useful to get Rocky closer to his opponents due to his astoundingly short reach, while the forward bend requires longer reach to effectively counter. While these techniques served to Rocky's style, he was generally an easy target to hit. Rocky did not possess the foot speed seen by most swarmers and generally had awkward footwork in general. He did use the falling step in his gazelle punch for weight transfer, an awkward derivative of the falling step jolt developed by Dempsey. Not only did his training help, but he was genuinely skilled in techniques for generating power in his punches, even if this meant those punches were telegraphed. While seeming a cliche, its true Rocky never lacked heart and fought everyone who came his way, and no matter the circumstances of the fight, he tried his best. I have no doubt that if a prime Rocky went against Prime Liston, Foreman, Tyson, Fury, etc, he would not give up until he was flat on the canvas.

Legacy.
Rocky's record plays into his overall legacy, though some believe this makes him nearly invincible in h2h matchups. Nonetheless, he remains the only HW champion to retire undefeated, and not be tempted back into the ring. While he did not fight many big skilled men, he did fight everyone he could and ducked nobody, (claims of Patterson are false as Cuz guided Patterson into avoiding Rocky and waiting until he retired to challenge for the title, and claims of Liston are made by people who genuinely don't know anything as he wouldn't be ranked for another 2 years, and Rocky probably never even heard his name before retirement.) While three of the four all-time greats he beat were old and at the tail end of their careers, this was not his fault. However, this does not mean it can not be ignored when evaluating how he would do against other fighters in hypothetical matches. He sold his fights well, and was often viewed as an underdog by fans due to his size and reach. Outside of the ring, Rocky was apparently a friendly well-liked man, who managed his money very well, and was generous in charity and helping some of his former foes, including a sickly Joe Louis in the 60's. He was a modest, kind man to the public and in the ring had undeniable stamina, a great right hand, and an incredible will to win.

Head to Head
This is where I have way more questions than answers. It's hard to rate Rocky against many of the bigger men of the 1970s and onward as he never fought men of their power and size, as well as the great power punchers of the previous eras (Dempsey, Baer, Langford). I have ideas of how he would do against guys like Gene Tunney, Joe Louis, Jack Sharkey, or Floyd Patterson, but I am not sure how to fairly evaluate him against other guys with so many question marks on his power and chin. While I believe he would lose to guys like Foreman, Liston, and Tyson, I wonder if would he remain on his feet. Would he get stopped on cuts? Would they knock him out?

Open to any and all contributions and fair discussion, as well as anything I may have got wrong. Thanks!