Joe Frazier vs. Rocky Marciano

Folley loses to all four of them in my judgement. So does Terrell. Terrell did not have much power. I don't know if being a tall jabber wins him fights against these type of fighters. I don't think so. Spinks I would definitely favor over Terrell. Frazier is going to have more problems with these men than he had with Foster. That I would bet on. He would be in a track meet with Tunney and I don't see Frazier outjabbing him from the outside.

Spinks might well give Ali a very tough fight. It is by no means an obvious loss off his performance against Holmes. Frazier would seem likely to be too strong, but I certainly think Spinks does better than Foster.

I think Terrell is grossly overrated by some moderns when lumped with Ali and Frazier. He edged Williams in a dubious decision, beat Folley in perhaps his best performance, ko'd Foster for what that is worth, and then had a championship reign of decisions over the over-the-hill Machen and Jones, and over a Chuvalo who was outboxed by all kinds of people. After losing badly to Ali, he lost a one-sided unanimous decision to Thad Spencer and then lost to Manuel Ramos. He was still in his twenties. I don't see anything in this record to justify considering him a likely favorite over any of the top men you mentioned.

 

"bigger reach and an excellent jab"

Sure but we are talking great fighters here. Thad Spencer, who was 5' 11" and did not have much mobility because of a bad leg, managed to defeat Terrell badly in a one sided decision. There is nothing else in Spencer's record to indicate he was much more than a second-tier contender at best. He best win other than Terrell was over an old Doug Jones. He had been ko'd by Big Train Lincoln and Bill McMurray (!). He was absolutely slaughtered by Quarry in his next fight and then lost to everyone.

Terrell was 28 when he fought Spencer. I just don't see favoring him over outstanding champions of the past.

Folley and Tunney--Folley looked slow against Cooper. I think Tunney outspeeds him to a decision, but it very possible Tunney with his good right cross stops Folley who was always vulnerable to an overhand right. If Folley could be knocked out by Jones and Lavorante, he certainly might be knocked out by Tunney.

 

Fair enough. My point was very poorly stated.


What I meant is that those defending Foster often list Ali, Frazier, Folley, and Terrell together as top heavyweights. There is a tremendous gap between Ali and Frazier on one hand and Terrell and Folley on the other. I favor Spinks, Tunney, Moore, and Charles against those two.

 

A trick question because while he beat Walcott, whom I would definitely consider superior to Terrell, he didn't prove himself ultimately superior to him.

Bivins and Ray. Moore was superior but Charles fought him at lightheavyweight. I would also take Layne at his best over Terrell. I think he would press the fight enough to get past that jab and win on points. I would also consider the Louis of 1950 as still a good bet against Terrell.

"He was a heavyweight champion"

Because he beat Machen who had lost to Patterson who in turn lost to Liston and Ali? Terrell was a heavyweight champion in exactly the same sense that Lee Savold was a heavyweight champion.

Machen was far past it by the time Terrell got to him.

 

:good

 

I think Frazier was faster, bigger and a bit more skilled.

 

Depends which skills you mean.

Frazier had more natural talent for my money but Marciano was a bit more polished in terms of his methodology.

Marciano was the better raw athlete by a country mile.

 

Frazier by stoppage. He had everything Marciano had, but was bigger.

 

You can really toss overall skills, superior punching technique, hand speed, and all that rubbish out the window in ths one. If they had fought it would probably look alot like this: Lots of wrestling, smothering, pushing, in a grueling battle of wills. It would be a fantstic brawl with Marciano having the slight edge in my view because I think he has the stamina to consistently back Joe up where as Quarry gassed after a few rounds.

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RqGZIYpOF9M&feature=related[/ame]

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P5chxdyedNw[/ame]

 

1. Terrell was a strapholder--He beat a past it Machen who was coming off a more decisive loss to Patterson, and would go on to draw with Rush and then lose to Mildenberger and Ramos.

2. I don't think Terrell was ever more than the #4 heavyweight, if that high. Ali was better, obviously. Liston was better. And I think Patterson was better, or at least there is no evidence at all he wasn't. As for Williams, Terrell was stopped in their first fight and won a very close and disputed decision in the rematch. I don't think he proved himself better than Williams.

3. Yes, Terrell lost to the great Ali and was eliminated as "champion". But if some idiot alphabet organization had seen fit to recognize Johnny Paycheck as their champion going into his fight with Joe Louis, Paycheck would not have become some sort of major fighter because he had lost his "title" in a fight with the great Joe Louis.

4. In the two fights after the Ali fight, Terrell was beaten badly by Thad Spencer and Manuel Ramos. Both jumped high in the ratings because they were able to defeat the overrated Terrell and both were subsequently slaughtered time and again.

5. on the forties, I think Murray takes Terrell anyway, but I would point out that in 1946 and 1947 Bivins did lose to Murray twice, but he turned it around to win the rubber match. He only other losses in the 1946 to late 1948 period were to Walcott, Charles, and Moore, all of whom take Terrell in my judgement.

6. Louis was not at his best against Charles and said so. Still, I have a hard time seeing Louis lose to a jab and grab type myself, even in 1950.