Marciano's 49-0 vs. The Rest

I might be able to, but I don't know how many others would agree.

Muhammad won the olympic gold medal, then became champion at a very early age, and with less than 20 bouts. There are some on this thread who rate Jeffries undefeated record ( pre-jack Johnson ), as being "every bit as good as Marciano's", despite having very few recorded bouts and two draws to boot. I wouldn't go as far as to say that Jeff's record was as good as the Rock's, but I think a 31-0 Ali, with 10 title wins and some pretty big names who were somewhat close to prime could make a case.. When we look at the fact that he defeated rated contenders in Doug Jones and Henry cooper before fighting for the title, and Quarry and Bonavena post-exhile, with 10 championship fights inbetween, Ali had spent nearly 50% of his career in the ring with rated opposition.

 

Add that he was just a style nightmare for both ...

 

Yes, he is. Not above Marciano though. I don´t like Ali but as a fighter he can´t be appreciated enough.

 

On the topic: I think Frazier, Ali and Tyson would get closest. Frazier would probably have the best achievements on paper. Ali and Tyson would be on par in a mythical head-to-head sense, because both of them were absolutely awesome up to then. Ali had only two close shaves against Cooper and (somewhat) against Banks. Tyson had Tillis, which is probably on par with Ali vs Banks and Frazier vs Bonavena I. Frazier "avenged" the win, though.


Still, none of them can claim to have faced the #1 contender five times and the #2 contender as "worst" title defence, nor can they claim to have stopped every single ranked contender they ever fought.


Last interesting trivia: Ali would actually be very close or even with Tyson KO percentage, although the nature of their stoppages obviously differ. Before Vietnam, Ali was very very good at stopping his opponents. Off the top of my mind, only two fighters went the beyond 12 rounds - Chuvalo and Terrel.

Good point and I've asked this question several times. This is one of the reason that Marciano is a lock for the top5 HWs, and should rank high on a pound-for-pound basis as well.

 

every1 of those guys you listed except spinks are better then maricano

 

I'd say Frazier, Holmes, and Tyson are most comparable on those lists. Frazier really impressed with that Ali win regardless of how inactive and rusty you can claim Ali to be (I do) but it was Ali.

Tyson is right up there, maybe even ahead. Holmes has a nice streak, and his resume looks comparable. However, it does leave a bad taste that he didn't unify nor always fight the absolute best. But he has... what 20 defenses or something?

Ali might be up there too. Sometimes his 60's resume gets overlooked. However, the Liston fights would leave a bad taste in people's mouth, and people would always have questions. I could see it now... Liston was never that great and those fights weren't right, and Floyd Patterson had a bad back. The rest were just ham and eggers. I think Rocky sits ahead, still.

Tyson, Frazier, and Holmes are definitely the front-runners. Frazier with his awesome win against Ali, and wins against great fighters like Quarry and Ellis. Tyson with his solid wins over good fighters and some great names like Holmes and Spinks in such a dazzling reign.

Holmes with consistency, and longevity.

It's tough.

 

Marciano comes out on top.

 

Very good thread Ironchamp, very interesting

 

joe louis is the only fighter who was past his best. even so, old joe may have been on the way down but he was actualy going up the ratings! Louis earned his way back up the ratings and was still a genuine contender. a fighter "on the way down" is not a fighter who is no longer as great but still winning.

nope.

yes. Moore fought with no fire at all that night. simply his poorest display. This was AFTER marciano retired and AFTER moore had a busy 11 fight schedule in a year and AFTER moore had been through the courts with some kind of woman trouble.

still beter than coopman, avangelista, wepner, terry daniels, jack roper, frank scott. On paper both cockell and lastarza had fair credentials and were rated high.

Those losses were not back to back!! Charles also won 13 times against hot opposition during that time most recently wiping out bob satterfeild and coley wallace. charles was an still an astonashing fighter. 4 of those 5 fights were close and disputed.
in Charles first 18 fights as an ex champ in just 36 months he faced 11 at that time rated heavyweight contenders a far higher ratio than 14 contenders in 4 years and 42 fights he met from the war to losing his title. he was 14-4 in these 18fights and knocked out 4 of the 7 rated contenders he beat.

So what? Charles was a great fighter! walcott was the only guy in years to decisivly beat charles in over 40 fights charles had since the war!

great until they lost to marciano. how did he pick them? Louis was above him in the ratings. walcott was the champion- he had to fight walcott - a great fighter defending a title. Charles charles was the #1 contender and a serious threat to marciano. he was coming off two spectacular knock out wins of rated contenders. in the previous year 1953 charles fought 6 rated contenders, imagine that?. since losing closly to walcott ezz only lost a hometown decision in utah against layne (who he knocked down 3 times in a rematch) a split decision against hall of famer harold johnson (many poster on here belive charles deserved to win) and another "home town" loss to valdes who would not rematch him. Nobody but walcott (who he beat 2 times) had beat charles beyond dispute in over 50 fights since the war.

 

Liston was a great fighter but those fights were very controversial andistob was likely past his best

 

Didn't I basically say this Tommy?

 

I thought you said he wasn't a great fighter and that those fights meant nothing. the first fight was a legit win over a past prime ATG fighter. since Ali was all wrong for Liston it made it even a worse matchup for him.
pretty much anyone else wouldve been knocked out. But it took Ali to really stop him like that.

the second fight is just bull****. however the first fight is probably equvilent to rocky's wins over Charles or Walcott.