"Marciano was the hardest puncher I ever seen" - Don Turner

That's quite a nifty system you have there. You get to ignore any and all quotes that you find implausible or disagreeable as obvious embellishments, while clinging to the quotes that bolster your preexisting views as important truths from a profound, highly-credible source. Turner could literally say dozens of patently ridiculous things and it would have no bearing on how much weight we should accord his vague claims about Marciano's greatness and punching power. That's either pure genius on your part or a stunning lack of self-awareness!

 

Ha. You don't have any idea what, if anything, Lomachenko thinks of Turner's interviews or his opinions about Rocky Marciano. Try again (actually, please don't).

And for that matter, what do you know about Lomachenko's work with Turner in general? Turner has had access to many great Soviet fighters because he befriended the then unknown Egis Klimas a while back. What exactly Turner does for/with these fighters is unclear to me, and more importantly, has little to do with how much weight we should place on his Marciano testimonials.

 

You haven't addressed the "elephant in the room" the glaring lack of chronological synchronicity between Marciano's career and Turners age and whereabouts during Rocky's fights. You may bluster and bluff all you want but the likelyhood of Turner ever seeing Marciano fight in the flesh is almost zero and, that being the case, his opinion is no more valid than anyone elses! Like wise it is extremely unlikely he ever saw Ezzard Charles fight.

Add to this there is no mention of him as being their trainer in either of the Klitschko's boxing cvs on Box Rec!
Lomachenko has had 10 pro fights, what input do you say Turner has had in his career?

His Father is credited as his trainer and once again there is no mention of Turner anywhere in his extensive cv!


All this adds up to a grumpy exasperated guy getting a bit carried away in an impromptu interview and exaggerating some things.

He doesn't actually say I saw Marciano fight in the flesh ,but seems content to imply some such by saying rather vaguely of the times " I was there," well if he was he was between 13 and 15 years old!

 

I didn't bring up that particular quote, but even if we assume he was speaking figuratively, the obvious underlying sentiment, that those guys would clearly be very easy fights for Marciano, is still ludicrous. Is he obviously exaggerating when he scoffs at the idea that Barrera improved after his loss to Junior Jones? When he says that Barrera was just an ordinary fighter who won a belt? When he scoffs at the suggestion that Chocolatito could have competed in any era, and then name drops the 39-31-6 Harold Dade as an example of a superior fighter?

 

Look man, I'm a huge fan of Marciano's memory and legacy. He was an ATG. But he was 5'10", 185lbs and had a 68" reach. He was a small/average sized man!
He fought guys similar in size to himself, which means they were cruiserweights by today's standards. The defensive skill level wasn't what it is today either.

To say he's the hardest hitting heavyweight ever is incredibly ignorant.

 

I see a lot of ideology in these arguments.

There is a bit of an unholy alliance between the cool Mr Kevin, and Sam Mcvea.

One is an arch proponent of the superiority of modern fighters, and the other is a stuck in his ways believer of boxing folklore.

They can both me counted on to attack Primo Carnera or Rocky Marciano, but I doubt that there would be many other points of agreement between them!

 

I feel it is entirely possible he was the hardest hitting man ever under 200lbs.
I can see only Fitzsimmons,Langford ,and Dempsey being rivals for that honour.

 

Your opinion , along with Choklab's and Reznik's totally ceased to have any relevance to me after the Carnera /Bowe thread. I would only begin to worry about it if I found you agreeing with me!

 

I'm ok with that argument.

 

I agree with you then!