Rocky Marchiano vs Alexandr Povetkin

I think you have to be a great fighter to beat a great fighter. Even with a size advantage is Povetkin that great a fighter? Did his size help that much against Huck??

 

willie ritchie, buster douglas, johnny griffiths, joe shugar, iran barkley, rex layne, roy lazer, dal hawkins, ect.

 

Huck would have been a bonafide heavyweight in Marciano's era and very likely one of his best opponents.

 

Close fight. Rocky would be best off with a 15 round match, and would need a stoppage to win.

Povetkin for has better skills, was never stopped as a amateur, and was only floored by Wlad ( Who hits at least as hard as Rocky, but much better range ).

Since Povetkin as a better chin that say Walcott a come from behind KO is less likely for Rocky.

Povetkin was not always on, but he's smart and has good heart. He looked beatable vs Huck, but that was just one fight. Rocky had his share of close call decisions too.

If they fought three times, I like Povetkin to win twice on points ( UD and Split Decision ), and Rocky to win once via TKO

I would be a very good fight.

 

Marciano is a couple of classes above Povetkin. Anyone going life and death with Huck isn't beating Marciano

Huck was worse than Layne, HW or not

 

No he doesn't

 

Oh yes he does. Marciano has no jab, to set up an offense. He's a hooker and uppercut type, with a over hand right. Rocky misses as much on film as any great fighter I have seen. I counted 17 clean whiffs in one round vs Archie Moore. With Marciano he swung for the fences.

Povetkin can throw every punch in the book, and string combinations together. Povetkin won 13 of 14 major amateur tournaments, and was only out boxed once as a pro.( Klitschko )

If you look at Povetkin's resume he did well vs good boxers in Donald, Byrd, or Chambers.

There is a difference in accuracy and skill here. I do think Rocky hit harder and had better stamina. Chins are close to even. Maybe Rocky by a shade.

 

Skills compromise many talents. Marciano has much better head movement and punching slipping, far better counter puncher, better right hand, better left hook, better at using feints, better bodypuncher, better timing. It goes without saying the leverage he gets in his punches creates far more power than Povetkin manages and this takes skill. Povetkin style is very different, to say he's more skilled isn't accurate though, Marciano's skills are very underrated.

I don't think Rocky misses much either, he is pretty accurate when you consider he generally throws bombs and part of the reason for his success is he makes his punches count.

 

Rocky takes some hard counters but outworks him to earn a grueling decision.

 

Did any of these guys beat champs who were at their best on the night?

All the examples we have of Rocky at world level are those of a prime champion who was well prepared.

Maybe if Rocky continued past his prime and we saw him decline and struggle we might find a poor enough version of Rocky for Povetkin to defeat but that isn't the case.

Marciano ..and Charles, Walcott, Moore, even Rex Layne for that mater, were better than Huck.

 

I doubt it. The versions of Charles and Walcott that Rocky fought would have picked off and hurt Huck pretty bad. Different class. Too much experience.

Huck possibly has the pace to live with 1950s heavyweights but not the craft. He would have been a handful back then like Cesar Brion. No better.

 

they beat great fighters, well before they were shot, can't confirm it was their best night as not all on film, but the guys they beat weren't shot or known for being out of shape for fights.

agree, that is the main reason he was great despite the obvious limitations.

true enough.

marciano is better than huck, layne? not to my eyes. it is not marciano v huck anyway, it's marciano v povetkin.

I don't like to get drawn into discussing fantasy fights, i gave my opinion and explained it. i do however disagree with what i quoted, but if you limit it to great fighters on their best night you will obviously be right because if they lost it probably wasn't their best night.

edit at their best on the night, and their best night, mean different things, i meant the first.

 

Yes it is marciano vs povetkin but if povetkin had life and death with Huck a fighter who on film I don't think was any better than Cesar Brion then the Huck factor is relevent.

I've seen film of Brion, a tough handfull for top fighters in his day, I really don't see Huck any better than him. I really don't see Marciano h having life and death with Brion but I do see Brion/Huck giving Povetkin life and death. Marciano has the edge. It's about levels in my opinion.

 

i see where you're coming from, and it's not like i picked povetkin ko1, but

x > y
y≈ w (squigely = is approximatley equal to, it didn't show up well )
w ≈z
x > z is attractive, but not necessarily true

 

Hmm, you've lost me there but we shall agree to disagree.

Marciano was too great a fighter for Povetkin. Size can overcome mediocrity but not greatness. Then there is the issue of pace that fatigued Povetkin the one time he came up against a 1950s sized heavyweight trying to win.

The trouble with Povetkin (and most present day two fight a year eternal prospects) is you can count on one hand how many times the opposition came to win. A lot of tired contenders turning up to go through the motions having been found out at elite level.

Rahman? Donald? Chegaev? albeit as good as it gets these days but its not much of a resume to challenge ATG champions with is it? even with a size advantage.