If Marciano Was 1. Black?2. Not Unbeaten?

Hey CP, I hope you are well :good

 

Thanks Mc, for some much needed sanity and understanding.
They say "old age isn't for sissies", and this is not doing me any good. Yep mate it seems it is time to pack my gear and move on...Pondering it strongly...:good

 

In a previous post you said douglas was dissed by where people rank him so i said it in that context. Although you don't go into losses and the beating tyson comment is helped by styles i can agree with your general point. I don't think douglas is good to compare to how marciano would be rated with a loss though, they were very different fighters who had very different careers.

I never posted in the prime marciano v tokyo douglas thread, haven't read it all either. I pick douglas, in the 60/40 range. I say that because douglas has the tools and was fully motivated but i believe preparation is vital in all sports and douglas was beaten by smaller hw's.

edit: what is wrong with picking arguello over saddler? you wont find anyone who appreciates saddler more than me but that is a hard fight for him.

 

60/40 is all you give Douglas over Marchegiano? Can you see Rocco winning 4 times in a 10 fights series against Douglas?
Really?

My post was heavily influenced by that thread, and while I do not recommend you to go in it (your benefit that you did not), it is most of where the context and the relevance of my post and this thread comes from. It was the inspiration source for starting this thread.

Nothing wrong with picking Arguello over Saddler, I just find it remarkably exceptional coming from "burt bienstock".
It is against my expectations of him, a surprise.

 

Sure am. :goodWhat about you?

 

I don't know about a decision loss, but he would certainly be more highly regarded and respected by most today if he were black and otherwise had exactly the same 49-0 career.

 

what if Marciano was Ukrainian and 6'-6"?

 

49-0 is still the boss statement IMO.

 

Poor Rocky Marciano.

His only resume failing was not being big.

He pretty much took care of everything else!

 

There was not even 1 quality big man ranked high enough during his time for him to prove himself against for some reason. The mafia cleaned out all the top big men for him. And I know people here would love to try to point that I suggest killings, but I do not mean killings. Bribery, misleading promises and life threats sufficed for most men then.

There was a reason to why it was one of the weakest, perhaps the weakest heavyweight division ever.

 

Discounting the "black" part of your equation, he would have been a different fighter who fought in a different style and who did not carry some of the vulnerabilities that Marciano carried.

 

Man, it is bad around here.

 

Burt, you are from an older era, a bread of the earth era that came up hard and what you forgot they will never know.

You are a few decades ahead of me but I used spend a lot of time with people of your era and lot of the old boxing sages. My advise would be to come on here and give your opinion, you actually saw a lot of these guys fight and do not have to depend on some old black and white film.

As long as you know you are right, dont let the TURKEYS get you down. I can tell you are not a quitter so come on give your opinions and dont waver and ruffle all the feathers you want. F--- em

As some of these posters learn they will come around to your thinking as they advance

You are a knowledgeable poster and one of the few who actually saw for himself. I met Dempsey in person a few times and he was old but a big solid tough looking old timers, hands and grip like a rock, he would have been great in any era....I know that's your guy but I see you have a keen eye for even the modern guys and that talent comes with years.

You are a 5 ***** poster dont let the maggots erode you

 

doing great :good

 

I agree with Bummy. Hope you stay Burt.