One punch power: Marciano vs Tyson

When Tyson beat them they were not up to much. I am talking Thomas, Holmes and Tubbs. There was no proof that they were ready to beat a rated contender the night Tyson fought them. It was so long since either of them had a win at contender level. These guys were hand picked to make Tyson look good. They should not have been rated. Holmes was retired. Tubbs and Thomas were not coming off wins over recognisable opponents. As well as that Thomas had eye, shoulder and drug issues. Tubbs had a trainer walk out because he was too ashamed to put his name to how under prepared Tony was to fight. I don't think any prime champion has a problem with these guys the night Tyson beat them.

 

Can I say this, in his prime Tyson fought two types of chalengers in title fights. This is the first group:


Berbick
Smith
Tucker
Williams
Douglas

These were prepared for Tyson. They all had beat rated fighters in their previous fight. These guys were good opponents.



The other guys had better names but were at a disadvantage because they were not as well prepared because they had not beat rated fighters for a very long time or in Tyrell Biggs case ever before. This is the second group:

Thomas
Tubbs
Holmes
Bruno
Spinks
Biggs

Now, you said Spinks was a reigning IBF champion when he fought Tyson. He was not. He had beat Holmes around the time Tyson turned professional but had not fought anyone approaching world class since. At the time I thought this was a land mark win, the pinnacle of TYsons prime (and it was performance wise) but how well prepared and confident could Spinks be knowing it was so long since he had beat a world class heavyweight?

Tyson was a great puncher but in title fights (in his prime) he knocked out less of the first group of fighters who were winning fights against relevent opponent's to the world scene.

 

Dude, just because someone beat a rated contender in their previous fight doesn't necessarily mean they were better prepared than someone who didn't. You need to get that out of your head.

 

To make a strong challenge a man's opposition has to be relevent to the world scene.
To be a rated contender you have to beat a rated contender other wise the fighter can drop to the level of his opponent and the rating is bogus. Now I know that a fighter can be well prepared physically without beating a rated fighter in his last fight because many champions did this but the stronger challenger has to be one who recently beat a rated fighter rather than a guy unproven at that level for two years. There ought to be a law that to stay rated a contender must beat another contender within a year. Trouble is unbeaten guys get top ten rated bottom feeding on has beens when the top ten should be reserved for men who beat a top ten guy.

 

Berbick was only stopped twice once when he was caught cold by big punching Mercado and once when as reigning champ he was destroyed in 2 rds by 20 years old Tyson.

Tucker was a reigning champion and undefeated.

Thomas ,Tucker and Tubbs were not skilled guys?
All were young full -sized heavies with good names on their records.

All were better than ****ell and Lastarza who was a cleverly managed fighter who never beat anyone very good.Wallace was briefly ranked for couple of months and never beat anyone of note Satterfield was not ranked when Charles beat him.Charles was past prime.Walcott was 37 & 38,a fighth away from retirement .Moore was 40 and past prime the fact that he was on a winning streak just emphasises the dearth of heavyweight class in the 50's.

 

This is a specious interpretation designed to bolster your argument and I don't buy it.
What had Lastarzma done to deserve a title shot? A split dec over Layne who had lost to hyped and exposed Harry Mathews, and a win over blown up lhvy Bucceroni who had also beaten him. Lastarza had been beaten by178lbs Rocky Jones 15-8-2 just 9 months prior to challenging Marciano for the title and Jones floored him.
Anyone making a match between Jones and Tyson would be locked up.

****ell? 3 wins over over -hyped and under-matched Mathews, and a dec over carefully managed and vastly overated Lastarza.

 

Any of Tysons challengers 40years old? How about 38?

Spinks had taken the title from Holmes in 1985 and had 3 winning fights since, how was he not still champion? He had beaten Holmes in the return, was he not world class?
Tangstad was the reigning European Champ and had lost just one fight Cooney had only been beaten by the then reigning champ Holmes and had given him a good fight. You put your own"interpetations" on these events and attribute emotions to those men that you have no scrap of evidence is correct. It's silly.

 

Tyson had better one punch power than Marciano. Both fighters were great and Marciano ended up having a better overall career, but Tyson gets my vote on power. Young Tyson cut through the vast majority of the division the likes of which were not seen since Dempsey. Rocky often out worked and wore down his opposition with grit winning by attrition. Tyson took a lot of tough durable opponents and blew them away, quickly. Too much over analyzing on Tyson's opposition and nit picking. On a whole the guys he beat were way bigger than Rocky's challengers and while the Rock would likely beat most of them no way is he bombing guys out in 1,2,3, and 4 rounds like Prime Mike.

 

I rated Spinks as the linear champion at that time. Spinks was the man Tyson needed to beat but Mike Tyson had established himself as the best heavyweight in the world already. With hindsight Spinks was out of practice at top level. He had no interest in fighting curent chalengers. He wanted no part of Tucker, Douglas or Williams. Thats why he gave up the belt to fight Cooney.

Cooney was a part time fighter, pretty much came out of semi retirement. It was a long time since Cooney lost to Holmes. Even longer since he beat Ken Norton. It was also a long time since spinks beat Holmes, and a lot of folks think he barely scraped past Larry, who was the only world class heavyweight on Spinks resume.

Great win for Tyson but another KO win over a guy years away from a win over a curent heavyweight.

 

The over analysis of TYsons opposition cannot compare with the nit picking that goes on with Marciano opposition.

Marciano only fought guys for the title who could still beat rated fighters. They all came into fights with Marciano beating a rated guy in their previous fight. You are as good as your last fight.

Half of the men Tyson fought for a title did not have that kind of form. That half of his challengers had not beat rated fighters for two to three years. They were younger than Rockys guys but on the night Tyson fought them that half could not beat rated fighters.

If you compare how Tyson and Rocky did against only the chalengers who could still win at world level (who beat contenders in their last fight) Rocky knocked more of them out.

 

Love all the Tyson nuthuggers trying to claim their idol was the bigger puncher because he fought bigger opposition.

Tyson fought plenty of fighters early on in his carreer well under 200lbs and very few if any were knocked out cold, size is overrated. Evander Holyfield wasn't very big but he walked through Tyson's punches as though he was featherfisted.

 

Honestly, the tread is hilarious .. I am convinced other than possibly Bummy who I disagree with but believe is sincere, no one here believes for a second that Marciano was a bigger hitter than Tyson .. when the rare times that Tyson even fought small guys , the size of the men Marciano fought, he destroyed them in seconds like a Michael Spinks who at the time he fought Tyson was as good as anyone Marciano ever fought .. give Rocky the hall of fame respect he deserves and then get real ..

 

The underlined is pure supposition on your part and has no basis in fact.

The statement that"they all came into fights with Marciano beating a rated fighter in their previous fight is total bull****.

Archie Moore's previous opponent was middleweight Bobo Olson ,who was never rated as a heavyweight
Ezzard Charles previous opponent was Bob Satterfield and he was not rated when Charles beat him.
Don ****ell's previous opponent was Harry Mathews he was not rated and I dont think he ever got a rating as a heavyweight.

That's 3 out of Marciano's 5 challengers having their previous fight against an unranked man.

 

Holyfield was not very big in a contemporary sense, but he was still much larger than Marciano* and most of Marciano's opponents. He also had a granite chin.

*Holyfield weighed what? 214 for the first Tyson fight? (Maybe it was 218, can't remember now.)
With due respect to Rocky, whom I absolutely love, how many world-class heavies did he beat that weighed over 200 lbs?

I don't get your reasoning at all.

 

Marciano....the "Suzie Q" was one of the most dangerous weapons in the history of boxing.
Marciano ruined many a fighter...it took some guys...MONTHS...not weeks to recover from a Marciano beating. He almost killed Carmine Vingo....Roland LaStarza had blood clots and bone chips removed from his arms after his KO loss to The Rock...he was a destroyer...
The right hand that felled JJW in 1952 for the title was the best right hand ever thrown.