Rate their chins. Marciano, foreman or holmes?

He looks terrific. I think this fight above all others really displays how good he was and proved he was an atg fighter. He's 32 here and looks fantastic. His improvement from the time he won the title to his last defense is amazing. If I didn't know anything about these two fighters tbh I would have thought it was Marciano with 170+ fights worth of experience going into the fight. Not saying anything bad about Moore just how good of a performance Marciano put forth.

 

A) An incredible chin by heavyweight standards in name only or in more modern standards as experienced to Foreman and Holmes?

B) Rocky did look "shaky" and stumbling... to quote the commentator. He was not recovered as soon as he hit the canvas. And anyways, at that point we are not discussing chin but recuperation.

 

He had a great chin irrespective of time period.
I don't think anyone is standing up to that punch from Walcott.

Maybe, but he sure didn't look shaky compared to most fighters when they get knocked down and have trouble catching their balance. I think it's chin because he is absorbing lots of power instantly. The kind of power that should put him out but doesn't. Recuperating is more like what Joshua did against Klitschko.

 

Marciano really improved technically from his early days. Agree with this post. In the beginning he was doing it through sheer guts and power alone. At the end of his career he had the skills to back it up.

 

If that were cooney or morrison throwing the same hook, i dont think he gets back up. Even if he does theyd batter him till the ref stops it.

Tua would literally kill him.

 

They wouldn't even land their hooks.

 

Do they have the timing of Walcott and the sneaky delivery to land flush?

Marciano would terrorize Tua, who would go from intimidating to shocked during the first round when he realizes he's in the ring with a true warrior who will never stop punching with bone crunching power.

 

Who gives a damn.

You guys act like walcott was the greatest boxing specimen in the heavyweight division. A 39 year old 6'0 with a 45% ko rate, 18 losses and he never weighed over 201 lbs. Do those sound like the stats of the "ultimate heavyweight" who threw the best left hook ever? I dont care if he had the brain power of whittaker, the speed of camacho, and the skill of robinson, hed struggle to put a dent in almost any heavyweight from the holmes era onward.

Im not even attempting to downplay his greatness or ring iq. Im saying its blatantly obvious that in a discussion about who has the best chin, using rocky taking a hook from this guy is a pretty laughable example when you have

-holmes getting up from sledgehammer punches from snipes, shavers, and tyson and remaining on his feet against prime holyfield, Mercer, witherspoon and cooney

-or foreman never going down once after facing TWENTY TWO power punchers who ALL had ko% way higer than walcott (60% or higher) and ALL of them were taller, younger, and weighed more with winning records!

You are literally saying a single moment of rocky getting decked by a shop worn nearly 40 cruiserweight sized walcott is a more impressive feat of durability than getting hit by any of holmes or foremans opponents. And youd have to be literally stupid to believe that (or have a serious lack of knowledge on boxing and basic physics).

 

You're actively denying that Walcott was an atg counter puncher. It is posters like you who misrepresent fighters of the past like Carnera which sparks movements here in the classic section to bring justice to those fighters.

Cut the crap and give them a fair shake.

Holmes got put on his ass by the 14 fight green fat David Bey and fought the worst competition he possibly could. 7/16 of his opponents from 80-85 weren't even in the top 10 according to ring magazine. Most of the ones that were, were cans. If Marciano struggled with those types of fighters during his reign he would be cruicified on here.

Cut the crap and give him a fair shake.

 

I never he wasnt a good counter puncher.

Im saying no matter how good he was, he was almost 40, shopworn and under 200 lbs.

Quarry was an excellent counter puncher but he was more suited for cruiserweight with his smaller frame and struggled to hurt the bigger heavies in Ali, Frazier, and Lyle. Based on that it would be asinine to suggest Quarry could hurt 240+ pound heavies.

Tyson was an excellent puncher but age caught up with him and he struggled with danny freaking williams. He was 38, about the same as walcott, and buzzed williams a few times but couldnt finish the job.

Claiming rocky had the best chin because he recovered from a hook from walcott is just as stupid as claiming williams had a good chin for taking punishment from an old ass tyson.

 

Walcott looked just as good as ever in the Marciano fight. It doesn't matter if he was under 200 lbs. A perfectly timed counterpunch from a 200 lb counter puncher like Walcott could knock a 240 lbr out cold. Its the punches you don't see that hurt the most and Walcott was the master in that respect. It was said that if Walcott had the financial backing in his younger years that he could have been to boxing what Joe Louis was. He was that good.

Jerry Quarry was nowhere hear the counter puncher of Walcott and he was an outboxer first and foremost. Not some Joe Frazier type. He did fine with slower big men. Quarry wasn't even as good of a puncher as Walcott. Quarry does NOT equal Walcott. Not in a million years.

Why are you bringing up Tyson? Walcott and Tyson share no similarities whatsoever. I seriously don't think you have watched many of Walcott's fights. I'm sure you have seen bits of the first Marciano fight but I don't buy that you have taken the time to actually go back and look at all of his fights available.

 

1-listen idiot, unless walcott actually knocked out some (or even ONE) 230-240+ pounders you cant claim he could knock them out. Even a 220 pounder would give us something to speculate from.

Its not difderent from golovkin fans claiming he can ko heavyweights.

2-yes punches you dont see coming hurt. Foreman and holmes got hit by plenty of those and they both only have 1 stoppage loss to two of the greatest HOFers in Ali and Tyson.

The 2 best punchers rocky faced were shopworn 40 year old walcott and old light heavyweight archie moore. Both were short heaves under 210. Walcott took him to school. If it were a 12 round fight in the modern era he could have won or gotten a stoppage.

Im still waiting for you to address the fact foreman was hit by 22 punchers who all had very high ko percentages and never went down.

3-weight makes a difference in both endurance and power. F=Mass x acceleration. Therefore even if walcott had perfet punching technique, if would be quite a stretch to say his hook was more devastating than cooney or morrison.

Therefore its qure a stretch to give rocky more credit for getting up than holmes taking cooneys best shots.

4-i bring up williams because tyson was the same age as walcott therefore he wasnt hitting as hard as in his prime. Even if walcot is as amazing as you claim, he was obviously not the same puncher as his 25-28 year old prime self. So again, giving rocky all this praise for surviving the punches of a 10 years past his prime walcott is kind of silly if were talking ATG chins.

 

Why tf are you acting like a woman? I haven't even gotten onto the name calling yet.

1. By your reasoning if Anthony Joshua never knocked out a flyweight then he couldn't knock out a flyweight.

2. Holmes got floored plenty of times. Neither of them faced a counterpuncher on the level of Walcott. I already said that Foreman had a fantastic chin which you keep on glossing over. Comprehend what you read or **** off.

3. I never said Walcott hits harder than either of those guys. Cooney and Morrison had harder left hooks than Walcott. Here you are with the Strawman arguments again. A punch that a fighter doesn't see coming is going to be worse than a punch that a fighter does see coming. It may not be harder but it will do more damage.

4. What you don't get is Tyson and Walcott are nowhere near the same fighter. Tyson burned out in his 20s. But no, you think that because they are the same age that they automatically progressed at the same rate. Between 25 - 28 Walcott fought 4 times. He was nowhere near as good as he was when Rocky fought him. If you actually watched the tape you would see he was just as good as when he fought Louis.

Just watch the tape dude and you wouldn't look so ignorant.

 

Walcott knocked Louis down a few times, something most of his opponents couldn't do.

Walcott put Marciano down, knocking his body over and whipping his head around.

And he also delivered one of the greatest knockouts in boxing history with a beautiful counter punch on Ezzard Charles.

But no, Gerry Cooney wouldn't feel his punches. You know why? Because Walcott isn't even a real person. He is a cartoon character I read from Bert Sugar books and who I've seen in some black and white videos. Which means he poses zero threat, and is a shadowy, black and white harmless cartoon teddy bear.

 

I wouldn't say Quarry struggled to hurt Lyle, once more I have to question if you actually watch the fights you argue about. He actually hurt Lyle several times. Lyle was out on his feet and holding on in the last 10 seconds of round 5. And here in round 8, Lyle clearly was on his way down from that left hook but got held up by the ropes, he had no legs and was saved by the bell. This probably should have been ruled a KD.

https://gifs.com/gif/jerry-quarry-v-s-ron-lyle-oY16VB

Quarry actually could have took him out, but he listened to his corner's advice to coast the last few rounds because he had Lyle in such a bad way.

Regarding his inability to hurt Frazier and Ali. He certainly stunned Frazier a few times. And few people ever hurt Ali, oddly Henry Cooper who was lighter than Quarry is one of the few who can make such a claim.

Regarding the 240 plus claim. He dropped 235 Buster Mathis with a right hand in the second round, that's close enough.

Was the size of his opponents really the problem for Quarry?

He drew and struggled with Patterson who was roughly the same size.
He was outboxed by Machen who was only 5 pounds heavier.
While injured he was outboxed by Ellis who was only 2 pounds heavier.
He was outslugged by Frazier who was only 5 pounds heavier.
Ali was bigger...but come on..it's Muhammad Ali.
The Norton fight, the washed up Quarry reportedly didn't even train for.

He was KOed by Chuvalo who was in fact 16 pounds heavier. But on the flipside. He dominated Lyle who was 19 pounds heavier. He destroyed Foster who was 14 pounds heavier. He destroyed Shavers who was 8 pounds heavier. He KOed the 10 pound heavier London. He stopped 8 pound heavier Spencer. And he beat the rated 6'5 Middleton. He dropped and dominated the 40 pounds heavier Mathis.

It seems to me Quarry's best wins were against bigger men, while most of his losses were against similar sized men.