Marciano vs. Norton

My take on the original question is that Marciano is all wrong for Norton. Norton did better against boxers. He might defeat the Tunneys and Walcotts and Jack Johnsons, but I don't see him doing well against the Marcianos and Dempseys.

As someone put it, styles make fights, but style in this case favors Marciano in my judgement.

 

i think Marciano had the right style to beat Norton. Ali never worked that guy out but he had to be more agressive and fight coming forward like Marciano was great at. What you had here was simply two counter punchers cancelling each other out. Ali was outta shape for the 1st fight, he was in great conditon for the 2nd and he was going down rapidly for the 3rd and last fight. He was the dope-on-the-rope by that stage. Monrey was the only reason that kept him fighting by that stage. Sad!

 

In this matchup, I don't see almighty weight being decisive.

Rocky would not stop coming and Norton can never, ever, handle power effectively. If we begin to believe that Ali or Holmes could hit as hard or harder than Marciano, we are taking revisionism to the point of distortion of foregone conclusions safely accepted as true for decades. Marciano's right hand, thrown with great body torque and leverage, was more powerful than any single Ali or Holmes punch. As Frazier said in response to why his blows were more effective than Ali's at FOTC: he was throwing his whole body into the punches, something hardly true of any boxer.

And the Suzie-Q would not come alone. Marciano would crowd Norton all night and grind him and his muscles down before the final bell. It wouldn't be very close.

 

This is actually very wrong. Not only was marciano 10x more durable, stronger, and powerful than patterson..he also fought MUCH different style wise than floyd.

I have gone through a liston vs marciano prime for prime fight a billion times and I am 100% confident that this fight GOES THE DISTANCE with liston winning a close unanimous decision in a WAR! both these fighters were ALOT more patient and cool in the ring than frazier and foreman...so dont expect in rounds 1 and 2 for each fighter to come flying into eachother fists flailing right away...there will be alot of precision calculating jabbing and crouching in this fight. both will have alot of respect for eachothers power... Liston will be content to bust up marciano at long range, while marciano will work his way in slowly getting him some big licks here and there on the inside. GREAT fight

 

I dont agree with this list at all, and it seems to me your way to caught up on size. vitali klit 6? is that a joke? vitali never beat any in shape good fighter in his life

 

Well, size is important to me to a certain extent, but I do look at skills all the way......... I'm confident that my top-10 list could and would beat Marciano in a time machine.......:yep

MR.BILL:bbb

 

im sorry bill but there is possibility you might need to get the old noggin checked with your list. you say these things with confidence but you my friend are full of smoke.

 

Okay..... I ****ed up on the initial weight of Ken Norton against Ali in San Diego..... Norton was 210.......... 205 for fight # 2 and 217 1/2 for # 3 at Yankee Stadium.....

Again, Ali's weights were 221, 212 & 221 for fights 1 thru 3..... Cheers......

MR.BILL

 

Agreed with all due respect to Bill

 

Such is life..... Though I'd bet that my top-10 could and would beat Marciano........... :bbb

MR.BILL:rasta

 

Just finished reviewing "Ali-Norton 1." Jesus Christ that is a boring ass fight..... Actually, NONE of the three fights were all that great in terms of sustained action and thrills.... Peace...

MR.BILL

 

I tell you all who's full of ****.... Burt R. Sugar..... That's who......... I forgot all of Sugar's top-5 list, but I recall he had Marciano at # 3 and Ezzard Charles at # 4...... If he's only thinking prior to 1960, I can see his vision.... But he was talking from 1887 to 2008 I believe........ That's real hard to digest for me....... Cheerio.....

MR.BILL

 

What would be the purpose of pumping Marciano up with muscle when he had no problem knocking people out when he was weighing 185?

What would size do? Would it give him a chin?

Does Klitschko have a good chin? He weighs 250 lbs, but is considered a chinny fighter.

Does Lewis have a good chin? He was knocked out cold before by an a heavyweight who has decent punching power, but it's nothing to write about in the history books.

So what good would it do Marciano to make him bigger? It would make him slower, less conditioned, and less agile, which would make him a worse overall fighter.

He would be like today's straight up and down lugs that can't really fight for ****.

Some of ya'll put too much emphasis into size as if this was a wrestling match, when history has proven time and time again that size is not a determinate factor of power.

A guy like Louis for instance at 200 lbs was arguably one of the hardest hitters in the sport, but if he was 230 using some bull**** weightlifting program that may add an incremental percentage of punching power if any, MRBILL and severall other posters would be all over his nuts.

Size is good for strength, and strenght is good if you're object is to wrestle the guy, but it the way to get size without putting on fat usually takes weightlifting, and weightlifting can make you stiffer, slower, and more apt to run out of gas because of the oxygen required to utlize your muscles.

I think it might be psychological though. Perhaps people obsessed with size are scared of big men and automatically think that they would be beaten to a pulp if they were to get in a fight with them.

Well, I feel sorry for you because it's not true. Sometimes big guys can really hit, but more often than not it's very difficult to gauge whether or not someone has power, and often times you'll see these big guys on the back that push it rather than hit it, and that kind of power doesn't translate very well to a boxing ring.

In a wrestling match sure, but boxing.......

And furthermore, more importantly is BOXING itself.

Ya'll get so focused on size that you don't see or understand the styles and the skill of boxing itself. Marciano for instance would be a difficult target for many of the big men of today just like Archie Moore was and it's because of his style and his ability to get so low that it takes away the 1-2 punches that big men are opt to throw. It also makes it difficult for them to throw uppercuts because they are required to get low which is exhuasting and difficult because generally they are not as limber as smaller men who also have them beat in the speed department.

You show me a film of Klitschko bending at the waist, and I'll give you 5 bucks.

This is boxing, not obsessing over some guy's body. Ya'll have got to get off the gay **** and think about the skill actually involved in the sport. Use your eyes.

 

Mr Bill, if Rocky doesn't crack your top 10 heavyweights it's obvious that you don't really know much about the sport.

Rocky fought in arguably one of the hardest eras of all time, certainly one of the deepest, with the largest pool of tallent.

Explain to me how you go 49 and 0 with no skill?

Do you really think Rocky got that far with his heart and punch alone? I'm sorry, but guys like that end up as journey men.

Rocky had incredible skill and was an excellent counterpuncher that often forced his opponent to throw first because if they didn't, it would be too late as Rocky's crouching style would allow him to get inside and deliver his bombs.

And because that particular style is very difficult to hit against, his opponents would get flustered and tenative because most of the times they threw Rocky would duck and counterpunch.

It seems simple, but it takes a great degree of dilligence and fortitude to develop that kind of style and make it work in the ring with the ability to be agile enough to not just slip, but counter punch your opponents.

You not having Rocky in the top 10 leads me to believe that you need to learn more about boxing...

If you think today's fighters with their straight up and down Tysonesque style without the headmovement or the fight tall can't bend at the waist, keep your hands far away from your face and lean back technique of today is superior to the techniques from the past.........

I can't help you.

 

I do like size, but it does not determine my overall pick each and every time out...... Take Nick Valubum for instance.... The guy is a hulk, but his punching power sucks long pool stick.... Same thing for the late Primo Carnera, too...... Another hulk who punched like a wus.....

Then you have big ass dudes like Buddy Baer who had a power-punch from hell, but no defense or athletic ability....

George Foreman of the early 70s was strong and powerful, but the only proper punch he knew how to throw was a left jab....

Gerry Cooney was a tall dude with a left-hook from hell, but his right hand sucked and I hated his "Pawing" jab....

The list goes on and on........ Size is good, but it is NOT everything.......

MR.BILL

EXTRA:

I agree that Marciano was fine and at his best between 187 to 192 pounds...... Marciano up at 210 would NOT be a better fighter with more power or stamina..... He'd be slow as all hell.........