Marciano with modern training

in your opinion...whats the difference between them days and modern training ?

 

He'd be around 210 - 215 lb optimum fighting weight.

 

would he ?

 

Whenever I see modern training I think steroids, hgh, blood doping, trt, etc. You know the stuff that makes meat taste good.

 

Today he would be around 6"2 225lbs of brutal force, if he could keep the same mental strength which is rare these days

 

How is he going to train to be taller? He was not malnourished as a child.

 

He would still be an overrated bum.

Rocky Marciano is perhaps the most overrated HW aside from the Klitschkos. Overrated doesnt mean bad, it means that people give him more praise than he deserves. Being 49-0 in itself does not make you an all time great - just ask Brian Nielsen.

Let's look at Marciano's so-called "impressive" wins.

1) Joe Louis - in his prime, Joe Louis was one of the baddest dudes in boxing. But he had to take this fight because of IRS problems, and was a shell of his former self. The Joe Louis that KO Schmeling in one round would have beaten Rocky easy. This is not a win that makes someone into an all time great boxer.

2) Jersey Joe Walcott (x2) - Jersey Joe's two fights vs Rocky were the last two of his career - he was a washed up fighter at this point at 38 yrs old. He had already been in crazy fights with Louis and Charles, so beating up an old man past his prime is not impressive - especially considering the whooping that Rocky took in the first fight before the blind squirrel found an acorn and knocked out Jersey Joe

3) Roland LaStarza - had a padded record just like Rocky. Not impressive

4) Ezzard Charles - already been in tough fights with Louis and Walcott, way past his best and had over 100 fights. Rocky was too concerned with keeping his "0" so he only fought 49 times in an era where the best were good enough to keep going. And Rocky still struggled to beat this old man twice.

5) Archie Moore - was an old geezer at 39 yrs old by the time he got to Rocky. Is it impressive for a supposedly "all time great" to beat an old man with 19 losses at the time, who had already been through countless beatings? No. And Rocky still got knocked down by a natural light heavyweight old geezer.
I know certain people have prepared foolish arguments to defend Rocky's farce of a career, and I will dismantle them right now.

1) Rocky is 49-0 can't argue with that - Actually, yes you can. Fighting 49 bums/old people and winning is not impressive. Nielsen was 49-0 at one point. Joe Calzaghe was 46-0 (actually 45-1 cuz he got a terrible gift vs Hopkins). Padded records are meaningless. There is no undefeated fighter that is worthy of a top 45 p4p ranking (Mayweather is the best undefeated fighter - and he definitely does not deserve a spot in the top 45). Rocky is no different, and he is not a top 15 HW all time and not a top 50 p4p boxer all time. If Pinklon Thomas retired after beating Mike Weaver, he would have been undefeated - would you consider that to be the mark of an all time great? No

2) Rocky was so tough/had a great chin - Saying someone is tough is just another way of saying they are good at taking a beating. Just like he took a beating vs Walcott before becoming a blind squirrel that stumbled upon an acorn in the form of a KO. David Tua and Oliver McCall had great chins, but they were not all time greats.

3) Well there is no other HW champ that was undefeated - well Rocky fought bums and the great HW champs of all time didn't. Thats the difference. Rocky never fought someone on the level of Dempsey, Jack Johnson, prime Joe Louis, Ali, Frazier, Foreman, Norton, or even guys like Jimmy Young or Earnie Shavers. weak competition does not = greatness. And so what if he was champ? He only had 6 title defenses.

All these HWs in

This content is protected

are better than Rocky the Bum Marciano

1. Ali
2. Frazier
3. Foreman
4. Holmes
5. Jack Johnson
6. Bowe
7. Holyfield
8. Lennox
9. Joe Louis
10. Tyson
11. Dempsey
12. Tunney
13. Sonny Liston
14. Harry Wills
15. Sam Langford
16. Ken Norton
17. Sam Mcvey
18. Max Schmeling
19. Jimmy Young - because he fought actual competition

What has been written is IRREFUTABLE, UNDENIABLE, INCONTESTABLE, INDISPUTABLE, NONSUBJECTIVE, flawless FACT. Not opinion. I challenge any human being on earth to try and disprove the magnanimous insights of wisdom that I have been presented. Unfortunately for Rocky fans, it is impossible to disagree with these statements without demonstrating one's own incompetence and ignorance, much like Rocky demonstrated his incompetence in barely beating old people like Moore and Walcott.

 

Don't bother to take the bait folks. I am afraid the last paragraoh is not even communicated with any sense of irony & he means it. Sad.

Anyway Rocky of course would have the same genes & was not deprived of nutrition growing up so he would be the same height. Now he might very well be bigger due to the great stress on size & weight training.

He was naturally a little over 200, but trained down/catabolozed muscle to have greater endurance & work rate. But could he ever be bette rin absolute terms when larger, even though it is reported he hit harder? Would he stay at CW?

 

Yeah Rocky ducked all the best fighters of his era.

Or all the real talent was playing basketball and football.

I forget which it was.

 

You really didn't address the question.
What would the Rock be if he had hit prime in 2000?
Probably around a 210 or so more chiseled wrecking machine.
What would a 1952 Lennox Lewis have looked like?
What would have a 1952 Tyson looked like?
Another ridiculous comparison of eras.
I prime 2000 Rock may not have been unbeatable but you'de be looking at someone alot different than we saw stepping thru the ropes in the early 50's.

 

Then he'd be bloody useless.

 

With 25 extra pounds Marciano would be increasingly immobile, a sitting duck for power punchers. At 185 and fine tuned he was able to come forward bobbing from a deep bend from the waist, essentially giving a smaller target and one which Walcott and others commented on as not being easy to hit. Even at that weight he had back issues which in part led to his retirement. At 210, with his dwarfishly truncated limbs, he would just be a stiffer, more immobile bowling ball, easier to hit, quicker to gas and probably without late round power.

He just simply did not have the structure of a modern heavy in any way, shape or form.

 

He would undoubtedly have come in much heavier today, but I have absolutely no idea whether it would have made him better or worse.

 

I don't know if being "bigger" would have helped him. He'd still be well outreached by most modern day heavys and with an extra 20-30 lbs, he'd be slower as I doubt he was made to carry that kind of weight well. In all honesty, Rocky would be best suited as a cruiserweight today.. a few decades ago when the minimum weight for heavy was 195 he might have made that cut and been competitive against certain opponents.