Ike Ibeabuchi v.s Rocky Marciano

All things being equal I would agree with that logic, but when a fighter is 40lbs heavier and 5-6 inches and has other impressive attributes, such as speed, endurance, good/decent fundamentals and a great chin there should come a time when commonsense overrides caution, especially given that he's not completely unproven.

 

Well if I'm a newbie, I'm an old one..lol

Size isn't the end all be all, but they do have weight divisions for a reason. If they don't matter fine, let's get ride of them, but don't pretend once you reach a completely arbitrary weight, the laws of physics are all of sudden suspended and once what mattered a great deal, now doesn't.

When you're dealing with fighters of comparable skills levels damn right size matters. I'd go so far as to say that a big man such as Lewis can (and did) use his size to negate better boxers then he was. Holyfield for example, if they were the same size, I think most of us would pick Holyfield over Lewis, but since they aren't we tend to reverse these picks.

 

Weight division count in lighter divisions. Much less so hwt. Boxing 101.

 

Against a one handed strong short heavyweight (who was still developing) ibeabuchi showed for four rounds he could beat the slower man to the punch without hurting him. Then as Tua got into the fight ike showed he wasnt hard to hit. Although he would carry on trading It was no dominating performance - just a tough fight.

As for the workrate it was good but the highest number of punches were recorded in rounds where less force was used. Ike was outworking Tua more in a defensive way to prevent david from getting set - he wasn't kicking ass or trying to. working his hands like that wasnt hurting anyone.

Now people can get carried away and say that kind of work against a 30lb lighter fighter would be "lethal" but the smaller man here is the proven man. That has to count.

Marciano as champion was operating at a higher level than Tua was when Ike met him, and let's not forget, that was not even a very decisive win for Ibeabuchi.

Let's assume Ibeabuchi could perform just like that one fight at a higher level. The level he never won at and win decisively. Then, and only then can we or anybody take that leap of faith and say we can put all that together and assume he can do all that against Marciano with the extra weight, big muscles ect, etc, etc.. But that is a lot to assume for a guy who could not hold it together mentally and had only one more decent win bellow elite level.

He went off and did a lot of weird stuff. Ike had serious mental issues that he could not overcome. He was already a man on the edge at the time he recorded two intresting wins. But that is all they were. Two intresting wins at prospect level.

 

When are we going to see the next 186 pound, 67 inch reach, slow-footed, powerpunching brawler dominate the heavyweight division?

Argument over.

 

that's gibberish.. I dare you to back this up with science.

Do you honestly think there was any scientific thought behind calling someone over 200lbs a heavyweight and someone 198 a cruiser weight? Give me a break.

 

To each his own, but I certainly would never label Byrd, or Tua for that matter, prospects, rather I would rate both of these as damn good wins.

 

The big misconception when picking fighters against Marciano is that they use tangible things to pick fighters over Marciano like power, speed, etc. Studying Marciano you can tell that it takes a very intelligent fighter to beat him and even that wasn't enough (Charles and Walcott). Marciano may have been losing the Walcott fight but eventually he caught up with Walcott. That's the thing. Eventually he's going to catch up to you. Marciano was the same fighter from the first bell to the last bell. He wasn't big in the technical department but he more than made up for it in brutality and relentlessness. I have never seen another fighter match Marciano p4p in that department.

I agree with Perry that weight doesn't matter so much at heavyweight. Just look at Max Baer vs Carnera, Louis vs Carnera, Dempsey vs Willard, Mike Tyson vs Golota, etc. weight doesn't matter that much at heavyweight. If weight didn't matter that much at the lower weights we would be seeing flyweights vs middleweights and light heavies.

 

Mr is an astute boxing fan. Very unlike most on here. Boxing history is littered with huge hwts beaten senseless by smaller more highly skilled hwts.

 

This isn't an answer. Louis and Dempsey were far more skilled than Camera and Willard. Hell I think Willard was out of the ring for a couple of years before fighting Dempsey. So this isn't much of an argument you're putting forth.

And Tyson - Golota is a pretty far cry from Ike and Marciano.

No. The question is why should a 187lb skilled fighter who just happened to fight 50-60 years ago be able to beat a 240lb fighter in todays era. By that logic, shouldn't we just abandon the cruiserweight division all together and say hey you're over 187 get the hell in the ring with Lewis. If that's your logic, then why aren't we doing it?

What changed except the passage of time?

 

Key words being highly skilled. What part of my argument is beyond your comprehension, because I've said repeatedly that if two people are of the same skill level, I'll pick the guy 40lb pounds heavier and 5in taller, most of the time.

Here I've increased the font just so you can now actually read what I write. Now skill level is somewhat subjective, but I don't think he's hugely more skilled than Byrd, Tua and Ike, but I guess that's open for debate.

 

Most of today's hwts can't fight. The division has been watered down the past 40 years via multiple champions and 40-50 top ten contenders. Fans, that's YOU, have been conditioned to expect ****py skills to the point that they don't know what good/ great boxing is all about. Fighters like Johnson, Dempsey, Louis, Marciano etc far outclass the huge but relatively unskilled hwts from today's inept era.

 

WTF are you talking about. I've been watching boxing likely before you were born. I know the diffence between skilled fighters and unskilled fighter, and I still think Tua, Byrd and Ike were skilled fights. Perhaps you should actually focus on the topic rather than continue to spew rhetoric.

 

You mean highly skilled guys like Baer, Burns, Braddock, Firpo, Tony Galento, Don ****ell?

Or 70's guys like King Roman,Terry Daniels, Coopman, Evangelista, Ziggy, Lubbers or Leon?

Tell more, oh wise one.

 

I wasn't so much answering who would win I'm saying what it takes to beat Marciano. I read a post that said that Ike was stronger, faster, and bigger. To beat Marciano it takes intangible things like previously stated. Ike couldn't even be the best of his own era, how is he supposed to beat the best of previous eras. Talk about fighters evolving is bull****. I watched a Carnera fight the other day and then watched Wlad vs Fury and saw the EXACT same moves/techniques being replicated. The reason they look different to you is because of the quality of film from the 1930s. Heavyweights from today are ****. They arm punch. No real power like fighters of yesterday.

The point of me using Carnera, Willard, and Golota as examples was because I was arguing the fact that size doesn't matter as much at heavyweight. Could a flyweight like Chocolatito beat a middleweight like Gabe Rosado? No but Rosado is far less skilled.