Lewis and Marciano both get a bit of hammer in this month's Boxing Monthly

Sure.

Its worked for me all these years.

 

Well if he's joking then he's really good at hiding it, because he appears to be dead serious about it every time. And dead wrong.

 

Really? I can't stand it.

'This fight is like a game of chess, both boxers are trying to move their pieces without putting themselves in a position to be countered.'

'Fighter A is fighting like he's fishing. He's trying to cast his rod and catch a fish right in his mouth.'

'Fighter B's plan is similar to what he'd do if he was making a phone call. He's making sure he sees what's in front of him and is pushing all the right buttons.'

'This fight is like two men in an Indian restaurant. They both know they're in a dangerous place and that things could get spicy, but they're making sure it's not too hot before they go in and take a bite - but it's not food - it's each other!'

Etc.

 

Yeah, Teddy is annoying as **** in that game.

In every one of my fights if it lasts past 6 rounds and I'm leading he makes this ******ed speech about how I have to push away from the buffet table and not be a glutton

 

atsch

 

By throwing him in with Jameel McCline straight off his bad KO loss to Lewis, rather than build him up slowly and take time to teach him new things (which is what he was hired to do). Then he tried to say it was HBO's fault, because HBO requires fighters to fight a certain quality of opponent on their broadcasts, or something to that effect.

 

That's because it's a load of ****.

The hw division is the division that allows one fighter to dramatically outsize the other and really use size as a tool. It's the nature of the division.

I would really like to see his list of 20 heavyweight who would kick the **** out of Lewis.

 

He is essentially a caricature of a boxing writer, all cliche and tired stories everyone has heard, no real substance or unique insight. Only the mouth-breathing masses fall for his schtick.

 

I agree with all views here on both Lewis & Marciano actually tho he does make my top 10 at around no9 TBH but I dont include men like Dempsey or Johnson due to dodgy footage.

 

ok thanks, that sounds abit stupid.

 

First of all to say that Lewis had a size advantage and that is all, Dumb statement...There were many big fighters and Lewis was the best of the bunch...Not many champs his size ( the Klitschko's, Willard, Carnera) but Lewis had a lot more than a right hand and was adaptable in the ring. As far as his losses, everyone has them. Burt Sugar another Knowlegable idiot and I am not suprised with his phoney left handed compliments of Marciano. The size thing is over played and big deal he has him in his top 5 ( how could you not. Atlas gets into the mind of a fighter using his mind as a Template....he is only a boxing trainer ( half ass) not a genious....opinions are like assholes, everyone has one.

 

And like I've said before as well, just because you might be an experienced and respected sports journalist...doesn't mean you can't be a total bonehead some times.

People are people, and it's tough not to let personal bias and predjudice creep in. Everyone has their favourites, in everything. I try to stamp down on that myself here and be balanced, but I know it's hard and I don't succeed every time. I've probably given some fighters shorter shrift than they deserved some times.

 

Dont know what more people can ask either Lewis or Marciano to do in there run.

They both clean out there divisons.

I think both are top ten.

 

I don't think the fellow who argues Lewis wasn't great because he won by simply "outsizing" people is being reasonable; within one's own weight division, size is as legitimate an advantage as any. It's comparable to saying "Ali outsped guys. So what?"

I would put a little more stock in Goldman's statement that Lewis underachieved in some ways; both of his losses were unnecessary, and his title reign was not among the most impressive the sport has seen, largely because he didn't fight terribly often and was haphazard about actually getting in the ring with the best opposition (eg. Wlad and Byrd were #1 contenders for substantial stretches of time during his reign, but never received title shots).

Sugar's anti-Marciano argument is obviously inconsistent, as some of the guys he does have in his top five (like, say, Dempsey) also never beat any fellow historically-elite heavyweights who were in their primes. Hauser's comments simply represent the standard checklist of an anti-Marciano diatribe, and don't even do especially well in that regard- Marciano was never as light as Hauser's 182 pounds for any of his major fights, fighters the same natural size as Marciano have definitely competed successfully with "modern"-sized heavyweights, Louis, Moore and Walcott were old, but were still very good fighters (Walcott and Moore were arguably as good as they ever were), and Cockell is a cherry-picked example of a Marciano opponent, ignoring the more dangerous young contenders he did beat, such as LaStarza, Layne and Matthews. The generalized arguments used against Marciano's historical standing would also destroy virtually all other champion's legacies if applied equally.

 

Yeah, Sugar annoys the heck out of me too. What's with that damned cigar as well? Just smoke the thing or stick it in your ear Bert.

Boxing writers with an 'image.'