Marciano Vs. Cockell

Not a chance. Walcott was actually very durable facing the greatest heavyweight punchers of all time(in fact walcott faced the 3rd most punchers out of any heavyweight champion), and only getting stopped near his prime by louis and marciano after it took them many rounds

This is where you are totally wrong. You claim James J Corbett was in his prime going into the Jeffries fight, yet corbett showed NO LEGS after the jeffries loss. This is a double standard.

1. You have to take into account what walcott and charles did BEFORE they fought Marciano rather than afterward. Look at Roland Lastarza and Rex Layne, both under 25....yet they accomplished NOTHING after marciano beat them....does that mean they had no legs either?

2. Marciano was the best ruiner of all time. When fighters got knocked out by him, they were NEVER the same again. History proves this to be true of marcianos young and older opponents.


Walcott was heavyweight champion when Rocky beat him, and coming off his two biggest wins of his career over Prime Ezzard Charles. Walcott also fought the fight of his life vs marciano. This was Marcianos best opponent by far. Would Archie Moore had beaten the versions of Jersey Joe Walcott, Ezzard Charles, and Joe Louis that marciano beat? I highly doubt it.


Charles was 11-2 in his last 13 fights, and coming off two knockouts over top 10 contenders Coley Wallace and Bob Satterfield. The Satterfield fight is Charles best film kayo. This shows me charles was still very dangerous top boxer going into the marciano fight. Charles put up a memorable performance in the june 1954 fight. Boxing and Wrestling July 1954 said "No fighter in the world could have lasted those 15 rounds with that version of ezzard charles, let alone with the decision."


Bottom Line is Charles and Walcott had good legs GOING INTO the marciano fight as proven by there most recent fights. Marciano RUINED THEM. Louis, Layne, Lastarza all had good legs going into the Marciano fight. After the fight, they were suddenly ruined. I see a pattern developing here. Marciano broke these men physically and mentally. He ruined these men.

 

I think it's a combination of Cockell being better than he looked, and Rocky trying to end it too early -- to much head shooting, not enough body work to set it up. After a few rounds Rocky wised up.

 

Marciano left his mark on many fighters,they were diminished after being in there with him.

 

Mvey,

do you agree corbett was nowhere near his prime when he fought jeffries?

 

Corbett was still a top fighter, but not in his prime.

 

A lot of people were no good after they fought Marciano.

 

Marciano's power was sometimes hard to gauge. He had some fights where he would pound on the guy all night long before finally stopping them, or perhaps not even stopping them at all; but then in between, he'd have fights where he would shockingly KO the guy with one punch out of the blue, like Layne, Matthews, and Walcott (twice).

Cockell had already been stopped by blown up Randy Turpin only a couple of years before fighting Marciano, and he was absolutely crushed by Nino Valdes afterward, so it is a bit puzzling that he would be able to take so many of the Rock's punches before going out. But then **** happens. :conf

 

I think Marciano not sparking some guys out is due to his very imprecise punching. When he did connect flush on a guys jaw like with Matthews and Walcott, he could spark a guy out.

But he was pretty wild a lot of the time, punching out of that crouch and what not. And from what I've seen he wasn't always very accurate and would hit you wherever the hell he could.

 

All fighters have that unpressive night.

I would not used this fight to judge the Rock as a great.

He is mostly rember for his battles with Walcott and Charles, and Moore. The Cockell fight was just a nose test.

 

My2sense,

I agree on the whole about cockell. But a few points....

I think this is the key word. History shows us once a guy took a beating from marciano, he was never the same again. I think Marciano took alot out of cockell. Cockell was vomitting blood in his corner between rounds 4-8. He refused to quit only because his country was rooting for him. Cockell showed up a career high 218lb vs Valdez, compared to 205lb vs marciano. I believe Cockell was washed up by the time he got in the ring vs Valdez. Valdez did impressivley knock him down and stop him on cuts early, but I think cockell was just plain ruined at that point. I dont think Our Don ever recorded another win after that Marciano beating. Prior to fighting Marciano, Cockell was on an 11 fight winning streak and had vaulted himself into the # 2 rated contender.


Marciano didnt just ruin and end the careers of "Old" guys like Walcott, Louis, Charles....but He also ruined the careers of young guns like Layne, Lastarza, Vingo, Matthews, and Cockell as well. Look at all of these guys records before fighting Marciano, and compare it with there record AFTER they fought Marciano. You would be shocked at the difference.

 

Out of all those guys, Cockell is the one that I don't see a clear cut difference for. He had already been destroyed by Jimmy Slade and Randy Turpin not too long before fighting Marciano. He wasn't one of those guys who had shown a proven solid chin prior to fighting Rocky like those other guys had. There was reason to question his sturdiness coming into the fight.

 

Cockell would give Frazier trouble, lose by decision. He was good boxer, great chin, and tough.

I saw the show that Marciano used to do, forget name. He was host. He talked about Cockell fight, and said problem he had was people saying that if he didn't ko guy right away, or totally dominate, he (marciano) was overated. On top of that, no matter how he performed, he was damned if he did, damned if he didn't, I'm para phrasing comment. Marciano said just before fight in his dressing room Al Weil, his ******* of a manager, repeated it again.

 

Weird things happen in boxing. Remember Foreman's bouts with Peralta? He had a hell of a time knocking him out, but at the same token, just a few years before Peralta was knocked out early by Willi Besmanoff, who had one of the lowest kayo percentages of an elite fighter I ever seen.

 

Corbett ,when he fought Jeffries the first time had been inactive for 2 years,he was nearly 34 years old.Corbett had lost his last 2 fights prior to the Jeffries one ,and drawn the one before that so he had not won a fight in 6 years.
Corbett's style was based on his speed and reflexes, 2 years of inaction at what was then an advanced age for a fighter,and one who depended so much on his athleticism, was a mighty steep hill to climb.
Add to this disadvantage the fact that Corbett was conceding 30 lbs to Jeffries,if the fight had been 15rds, reports suggest that Corbett would have won back the title,he gave Jeffries a boxing lesson.
However that does not mean Corbett was in his prime or even near it, it means he HAD been a marvellous boxer ,whilst Jeffries was NOT.
The rematch was a more emphatic result by all accounts ,Corbett was nearly 37 years old had not fought in 3 years, a fixed fight with Kid McCoy being his only outing ,and this time was conceding 37 lbs to the Champion.
Jeffries NEVER beat a great champion in their prime, not his fault ,thats how it panned out ,but to suggest that the Corbett who faced Jeffries was the same as the one who had wrecked Sullivan and slaughtered Charlie Mitchell is silly.imo.

 

I do think that Cockell upped his game somewhat after the loss to Turpin.

Look at the change in the quality of oposition he was fighting and beating over that period. You have wins over Harry Kid Matthews and Roland LaStarza going into the Marciano fight.

The subsequent stoppage loss to Valdez was caused by a cut incidentaly.