Marciano deserves a lot of respect

Why don't they then?

 

Are all of them wrong? I can’t say that. Are a lot or maybe most of them wrong? Absolutely from what I’ve seen.

look at Tyson Fury’s 250 kg deadlift. His form is absolute horse ****. Not to mention his strength coach is having him use straps with an alternate grip. Entirely defeats the purpose of an alternate grip. I’ve seen so much garbage like using cable machines instead of barbel movements. Check out the links I provided a few comments above and you’ll see individuals smarter than myself that have been training athletes for decades giving the same information but with much more detail.

 

Because they’re dead.

 

If you’re referring to modern fighters there’s nothing to say they aren’t doing that Holyfield bulked up, Haye bulked up, Roy Jones Jr bulked up, other have bulked up.

Boxers aren’t prolifically using Starting Strength because it isn’t sexy and it doesn’t make S and C coaches tons of money. Starting Strength costs $20 on Amazon. So does Practical Programming. In those two books you get decades worth of experience, data, and science based training that works. All for $20 each. That doesn’t make these boxing S and C coaches thousands upon thousands of dollars when these athletes can do something for so much cheaper without much supervision except maybe a form check uploaded to Reddit.

 

Maybe when he fought them, but there's no way Marciano was naturally the same size as both of them. Both of those guys' best weights in their prime was clearly a good ten pounds below Marciano's.

 

Both began as middleweights and grew into light heavies.Three things prompted their entry into the heavyweight division, age , money, and the shallowness of the talent pool there .

 

In fairness, I think the lure of being heavyweight champion was a big reason too.

 

When these men met, they were roughly the same size. Marciano held no "size" advantage...natural or unnatural. What he did have was a power and durability advantage.

Rather they were "better" in other fights or not, is another far more objective debate.

What isn't objective. Arguing Marciano held a "size" advantage when he was shorter and even outweighed in one of these three fights. Facts don't care about feelings. I'm not entertaining this crap anymore.

 

I'm just gonna leave this here:

Ezzard Charles was 27 years old when he moved to HW full-time and KOed Elmer Ray.

He stopped cutting below 175 because he secured a win over the #2 HW, and was denied a LHW title shot against Gus Lesnevich and others. The HW title was vacated with Louis out and he was in the running after beating Ray. A big opportunity.

Charles' athletic prime did not end in his 20s or even early 30s, or by fighting in the low 180s.

He was less dominant at HW then at LHW because he had to face bigger opponents more frequently like Walcott and Valdes which sparked his decline, Marciano was not a bigger opponent, but he was massively stronger and more durable despite weighing the same.

Charles was only 32 when he challenged a 30 year old Marciano. Assuming "Wear and tear" based off number of fights is very flawed. Writers commented Charles/Marciano I was one of Charles' best performances, and he looks impressive on film in a losing effort.

 

I don't see what being shorter has to do with being bigger. Was Hearns bigger than Hagler? Was Robinson bigger than LaMotta?

Someone at 38 years old, has more fat than they do at 30. Moore was known to fluctuate his weight, yo-yoing up by ten or even fifteen pounds. In his fight right before Marciano, he weighed 175lbs. Charles was also clearly thinner than Marciano around the arms, legs and back. He also was way more pudgy about the belly than he was when he was younger. He weighed the same as Marciano, because he'd gotten older, and fatter.

What I'm saying, is that if they wanted to lower their weight, they could have done. Marciano couldn't have. I'm not disputing that Marciano was better when they fought.

 

Charles was inside the light heavyweight limit when he beat Ray.Charles and Moore were great light hevaies but not great heavies,imo.Writers commented Walcott's Ist fight with Rocky was one of his best performances do you think he was prime at 38? Or did Marciano suit him stylistically until he ran out of steam?Maybe Moore.39/41 was prime too?

 

Good work, Sherlock. Here's what actually happened.

In high school, I raced Al in an All Comers Meet associated with a top flight track camp. He had already won his gold. Being a triple jumper, he was out of his element doing sprints. but obviously was world class talented. I did pretty well. I faced a few of the Joyner/Kersee clan and did pretty well.

Quincy is closer to my age. I got to "race" him two years later. I say "race" because he destroyed the field. Still, I earned my way on that track thru regionals and heats and had a helluva good time. But he was a few years away from being Oly Champ.

Look, buddy, there have been hundreds as fast or faster than me since I competed. I don't hold any illusions. But I was good enough to get carted around the states to compete and share the track with some great racers and look like I belonged.

 

Awaiting the retraction/apology.

 

I consider both height, reach, and weight. All physical attributes that can effect a fight.

Hearns was certainly bigger than Hagler when they fought, they were equal weight with Hearns having a significant height and reach. Hearns even went on to have success at higher weights that Hagler never attempted. Hagler was still more durable than Hearns at MW and physically stronger. Hearns hit harder. LaMotta had a significant weight advantage over Robinson, but was certainly at a length disadvantage. Do these answers clarify my thinking?


Moore didn't yo-yo. He cut weight for LHW title fights infrequently, but fought regularly at HW by the 1950s. This is stuff that shouldn't be debated. It's all laid out in black and white.

Yeah, Marciano was stockier than Charles. Different body type. Happens in boxing all the time. I don't agree that Charles or Moore were flabby in their bouts with Marciano. Age doesn't equate to being fatter, especially as young as the late 30s. Moore always a soft gut over his surgery and scar tissue, this goes back years.

Moore had stomach ulcers as a young man that hindered him from digesting food, real reason why he fought at MW starting out, the surgery corrected that, he could eat and train better, got much stronger.

 

Charles himself, who knows more about him than either of us, was quoted saying he didn't have any pep, any fire at the weight, after the fourth fight with Jimmy Bivins. That was just over the light-heavy limit, at 176. If Charles didn't like being that heavy, imagine how he felt years later and ten pounds heavier.

Given that a lot of the fight is on film, I don't have to go off what the writers said. That isn't one of Charles' best performances. Even if you consider that his best moments in the fight were in the early rounds, which aren't on film, that doesn't change much as if Charles couldn't maintain his success and faded in the late rounds, then that's definitely not his best, or one of his best, performances.