Marciano vs. Norton

Walcott and Moore both much better fighters than Norton.
Norton did not have much of a defence or chin.
He wouldnt be competative against the Rock.
Norton KO by Marciano in 2 rounds (at the most).

 

Marciano isnt in the same dimension as Shavers/Foreman, hes an accumulation puncher, he could bang to a degree but at 185lbs his biggest strength was accumulation and stamina, which isn't necessarily a knock as hard hitting accumulation can do some serious damage. He wasn't an explosive puncher but he was a strong puncher.

As for Ali and Holmes, Ali is the only man to KO Foreman out of Frazier, Holyfield, Moorer, Lyle. And when Holmes sits on his right hand it can smash an opponent nicely

The Cooney and Garcia losses are irrelevant to a prime Norton who ofcourse beat Garcia and ALi.

Not to mention its not unfeesable both Foreman and Shavers may KO Marciano himself early

 

Your full of **** because Marciano's bodyfat in the ring looked to be around 12-15%. If he was leaner you'd see much more definition, he doesn't even have solid upper abbs definition let alone lower abbs, so probably 15%. Thats all fine because boxing isn't bodybuilding but Marciano wasn't a 200lb fighter as he wasn't particularly lean at 180lbs at 200lbs he'd be well overweight. He was a very fit and stong 180lb fighter though.

The 185lb Rocky could easily have made 175lbs by losing bodyfat and dehydrating to make weight, he could easily lose 10lbs in water alone. There are plenty of fighters bigger than Marciano who make 175 today, Marciano could bulk up to HW but otherwise hes fighting at 175 or perhaps Cruser but allot of trainers would have him down at 175 at least to start his career

 

I'm no expert on bodyfat but I'm pretty sure Rocky's was closer to 5%. My friend's was around 8% years ago. And from looking at photos Rocky looked more cut.

 

Man, you're just being disrespectful to the minority of people who are huge punchers but not big men, so they also have speed, mobility, and better defense on average, as well being more able to diversify their style and angles they take in the fight.

Just because maybe you can't punch doesn't mean that you need to channel your insecurity to the rest of the world with biased bull**** assumptions when there is obvious proof on film that Marciano punched very hard, and that it is difficult to KO a fighter clean if you don't land directly on their chin, which is also testament to the skill level of opposition Marciano faced.

****, of course you can KO a guy when he sticks his chin right out there. Marciano's opponents had the advantage of actually knowing how to box.

 

I saw the Garcia fight. It was weird. Norton was young, inexperienced, cocky, and unprepared. Garcia was hot for spell. Norton had some trouble with the tall and gangly Garcia. But the decision to stop the fight was highly unusual.

But that's not my point with this post. I want to respond to a few things.

First, Rocky was not that cut. He could have lost down to 175 lbs easy. I already proved that he struggled to gain weight in training by citing actual articles that documented it. I will keep repreating the facts, though, since people keep making it seem like Rocky could have easily made 200 lbs in training. Of course he walked around heavier than his fighting weight. Most fighters do. Duh. The question is his fighting weight, and Marciano ate like a demon to keep weight on, not take it off.

Second, Rodney and his rdicidulous claim that Marciano knocks out Norton. He wants to base this on a claim that Walcott and Moore were better than Norton. I don't think anybody would argue that Norton was technically better than Moore. Moore was an all-time great. He was a master. But Walcott? No way. Walcott was cute, but no master. Tragically overrated Walcott is.

But their abilities aside, the problem either Moore or Walcott run into is a 6'3" 210-220 lbs heavyweight with knockout power, great stamina, and a tough constitution, a guy who hung touch with Ali and Holmes, heavyweights far superior to anything the late 1940s-early 1950s had to offer.

Norton's defense was more than decent. And Rodney is way off base on the chin comment. This is a myth. I already explained why. But if you want to see if for yourself, look at how Ali, Quarry, and Holmes drill Norton and he keeps coming. Ali and Holmes were no Foremans, but they weren't featherfisted either. Ali and Holmes had knockout power, as they proved on many occasions. Ali was big and strong and Norton went 39 rounds without getting knocked out. If people think Cockell could have stayed upright against Ali, well, I don't know how to help you. You're clueless. Quarry nailed Norton and the look on Norton's face was simply where do I hit this guy to close the show.

Norton is better than Marciano in every category that matters.

 

I respect your takes usually but by appearances, Rock's bodyfat looked to be around 6 -7 percent. He was lean and ripped with little subcutaneous fat and apparently no visceral fat. Now realize that muscle shapes and construction are different from person to person, giving differing depth to definition, and pigment also effects the "look" of defined muscles (i.e. why body builders tan so deeply before competition). Quite simply, there is no way Marciano makes 175.

Back to some other points, I don't think Norton's chin makes him vulnerable here but his durability would be an issue. I do not think that the versions of Ali that Norton fought or even Holmes match the grinding attack that Marciano pursued. With a couple exceptions, the 70's Ali did not like to fight full rounds, and not even each round, stalling with antics, holding on the neck, the ropes, clinching, shuffling... et. al. Norton did not fall for this (nor did Frazier) and those became his toughest fights. I think when Norton meets someone with the intense pursuit of Marciano, the results are very different. Just thoughts here.

 

Honeslty man, you are not an expert on the 1950s heavyweight division, and I highly doubt you have personally discussed with Rocky's brother what Rocky's natural weight was during his career while not in the ring

Probably the dumbest most uninformative statement you have ever said. No one on this forum will agree with you.

Marciano was built like a brickhouse...If you have Ali vs Marciano DVD, take a look at behind the scenes footage of Marciano throwing heavy rocks over his head...Unbelievable muscle defintition

Again one of the dumbest statements I have ever heard....Rocky's midsection was rock solid...you could Iron a shirt on his stomach it was so flat

Dumb

He was a natural well above 200lb and he cut down to 185lb

Rocky weighed in for a couple of his fights at 192-193lb in 1950, didnt look overweight to me

When in Rockys prime did he ever weigh 180lb? More like 185-190lb

He already did non stop road work and non stop training sucking down to 185lb, he did not have an once of fat left on him to lose.....Rocky would have a much easier time bulking up to 205lb with modern supplements/training/nutrition.

Marciano had the bone structure of a heavyweight, so I would have to disagree with you here.

Rocky could not make 175lb if his life depended on it, he would lose all his muscle mass

 

Hmmmmm.... Norton looked pumped and sharp in hammering a 207 pound Jerry Quarry into submission up in New York in 1975...... Christ, Ol' Norton was a ripped solid 218 1/2 pounds......... I think Norton handles the smaller Marciano....... You know, Marciano would've thought Jerry Quarry was a monster.... I think the Norton of 1975 / '76 beats the ever lovin' **** outta the 1954 version of Marciano....... Cheers.....

MR.BILL

 

I am not saying that your prediction is necessarilly off, but there is no wayh that marciano has any sort of trouble with Quarry. He isnt in the same class.

 

Norton could not fight off the back foot. that is why he was so horrible against punchers. Norton never ever could beat a big puncher, let alone an ATG puncher like marciano. Ill be shocked if norton sees the 3rd round.

 

I can't cut Quarry short against Marciano...... Why? Because Quarry only had trouble for the most part against tall guys who could box & punch and weighed over 200 pounds....... Quarry was a brawler who had a good two-fisted attack... Against a slightly smaller dude like Marciano, I see Jerry Quarry landing a lot of shots that he missed "Ellis, Frazier, Ali & Norton" with...... Although Quarry did hit Frazier with the kitchen sink in '69, but Frazier was just too peaked to get beat then..........

MR.BILL:bbb

 

I am NOT saying Quarry would beat Marciano in a time machine.... I'm just saying that Quarry would be very tuff for Marciano...... Quarry was better and bigger than "LaStarza & Cockell." I'm guessing Rocky Marciano would have some fits with Quarry........

Ken Norton only backed up against BIG MOTHERS like "Foreman, Shavers & Cooney." Norton attacked Quarry & Bobick....... I don't see Marciano at 187 to 192 pounds pushing Norton at 215 to 220 pounds backwards... Oh, Marciano would surely try, but then he'd eat lotsa leather in the process........ Norton would not be forced to fight off his back foot that dragged...... I think Norton could and would force Marciano to retreat... Marciano on the retreat, would be dead meat........ Peace...

MR.BILL

 

For the record, Quarry had a severe back injury and a good drug habit going into the Norton fight. His doctor suggested he did not fight but Jerry was going through a lot of tough mental as well as physical stress, issues with his father and whatnot, so he stepped into the ring in bad shape.

And when referring to Shavers as a "big mother" is far from reality. At his peak, he was 6 feet, 205 lbs. and not exactly rock hard.

 

Quarry was great when he fought Lyle, looked great. He had the ability, not the size, but ability, when he was right, he was fantastic, but he would fight one way for one fight, then another for another, you never knew which. Quarry would show up.