Rocky: A Face Forward Fighter?

Passion is not a defense. Your feelings don't mean sh*t to your analysis. Don't rely on that.

Make logical, defensible arguments (which you do at times).

 

I said 6 jabs total, not in a row.

Fleischer was a boxing historian and writer, not a mathematician. He didnt count every single punch before making that statement. He didnt literally mean rocky landed exactly 33%. Youre being anal and missing the entire point on purpose.

Your reply doesnt negate my post.

 

Yup in the photo i posted rocky got a black eye and stitches against a shopworn chubby old fighter. The only HW champ to have that honor!

But i guess he must have secretly been a defensive wizard and were overlooking something.

 

So do you just copy everything from Wikipedia without verifying whether it is indeed factual or not? Because I can't find any record of this quote other than Wikipedia and they don't provide a citation so its most likely false.

 

I see you have no response when called out.

Calling a muscluar and fit man "chubby" doesnt help your argument, it makes you look like a desperate basketcase that cant possibly be serious.

Who cares if he got a black eye or stitches? Those things happen in boxing, they are often unavoidable.

Of the fighters you championed, i pointed out far worse performances against fighters 35 to 40 who werent at the physical disadvantage Marciano was and were favored to win impressively.

Lewis vs Mercer; Holyfield 2
Tyson vs Holyfied 1 & 2
Wlad vs Sanders
...etc

Yet you find some bruising and stitches in a dominating win against a larger favored fighter so distressing.

 

He also posts some excellent footage but insists on interpreting it for us.It's a bit like the tv commentator at a fight.
We don't need him telling us Joe Blow just landed a nice left hook we can see it for ourselves !We aren't listening to it on radio! Why would anyone feel that they are privy to some subtle nuances of a fighter that the rest of us aren't comprehending? It's at best egotistical ,at worst arrogance in the extreme.Still ,if you want to view the footage it appears to be the price you have to pay.There's no such thing as a free lunch!lol

 

Yes, you missed my point completely again and went on a tirade about how im "judging rocky too harshly" and that so did nat apparently! I guess his trainer charlie goldman was being too harsh when he talked about rocky having two left feet, uncoordinated, wild, crude, and laughed at him while watching him spar and hit the heabybag? I guess haglers trainer, while watching a rocky fight when his record was 24-0 doubted rocky would ever win the title by citing the same exact criticisms and claiming he was too crude and wild?

Was joe louis, who actually foughy rocky, full of it and simply unable to grasp how incredibly technical rocky was when he actually fought the man and described him as a "street fighter"? What about walcott talking trash and saying he would drop rocky because of how flawed he was and proceeded to do just that in the first round?

Apparently all these people simply didnt have the incredible, keen eyesight and analaytical skills you have and didnt realize rocky was this incredibly fighter whobhad criminally underrated defense and the boxing world was being way too harsh. You know, two champions, two trainers, and a world renowned boxing historian...they had no clue what they were talking about and unqualified.

Never mind little ol me whose seen at least 8 rocky fights multiple times along with several highlight reels, documentaries, and read his biography. Apparently i need to see an eye doctor for failing to catch all the "subtleties" and "underrated, masterful defense and technique" of the brilliant Marciano. Ive had it wrong the whole time until you were able to brilliantly point out to me all these things no one has been able to pick up on about Rocky for the last 70 years.

I had no idea that a fighter with superb defense

-gets dropped in the first round twice against two older, shopworn fighters
-gets a black eye and stitches against a chubby washed up ex champion
-barely scrapes by a decision while swinging for the fences and getting tagged all night against contender lastarza
-gets his face disfigured and nose shredded open against a skinny shopworn light heavyweight.

All signs of a fighter with incredible defensive skills, right? But keep telling me about how much im not appreciating him and i cant trust these foolish eyes of mine.

 

You can't be serious.

 

It seems fairly obvious that the reason he "interprets it for us" is to make it clear why he's posting it and to highlight what he thinks it evinces. You know, like when medical students attend a cadaver dissection the instructor doesn't just cut the stiff open and say, "Well here you are, this is all the **** inside of us. I won't ask if there are any questions because of course you can see it all for yourselves."

It sounds as if you're suggesting he's trying trying to bias the observer by planting a suggestion, when clearly he's just straightforwardly stating the contention he wants you to evaluate.

 

We obviously haven't Reznik's eye for the subtle little nuances and feints he employed.I guess you have to be 20 years old to appreciate them.

 

I was fighting, and watching fights 35 years before he was born ,pardon me if in my conceit ,I think I can interpret them for myself.

 

Well yeah, that's kind of implied by the very fact that he presents them for your interpretation.

 

He gives us chapter and verse with them, pointing out often non- existent qualities.