Rocky Graziano - Do you think is fair to consider him just average....

Even the Sportswriters in the 40's called Rocky "the best MW in the welterweight division".

If the Superwelterweight division had existed back then....he would have challenged for the legit title.

He gave SRR a tough battle for the short period of time the fight lasted......Rocky had a heavy punch and a lot of heart.

 

I voted very good, but last description, not great but dangerous to anyone also is good evaluation of him.

 

People are too obsessed about the idea that old-timers were superior. There always have been lots of mediocre fighters with great punching power, 100 years ago, 50 years ago. There are plenty of them right now, fighters who are dangerous in case they can land cleanly. Some more famous/successful, some less. This doesn't make them anything more than average.

 

Well he hit the hof and compiled a resume which is good enough to class him above average.

After defeating zale he was the best mw out there (murderers row were all old and taken too many beatings by this point).

It'd have been interesting seeing him against robinson or la motta as champ and chances are he'd have lost to both, but that aside i'd say he earnt his reputation. Not great, but certainly very good.

 

Zale wasn't exactly what I would consider an ATG either. Graziano went 1-2 against him. His resume contains some well-known names, but they were smaller fighters at the end of their careers.

 

How can you say he was the best mw out there and then a sentence later say that he would lose to Robinson and LaMotta?

Look how easily Cerdan beat Zale, can you imagine what he would have done with Graziano? I dont know if I would even rate Graziano as one of the ten best middleweights of his time, much less THE best.