Rocky Marciano Versus Oleksandr Usyk

I seem to recall another Marciano thread that was like 70+ pages...

For some reason Marciano is a controversy magnet.
Soon or later a Marciano thread becomes a free for all, regardless the specific issue in discussion.

To prove my point, I am planning a thread titled "Marciano preferred oranges to apples, or viceversa?", and then just sit to watch the fireworks.

 

The irony here is that you’re splitting hairs over phrasing rather than addressing the broader point I made. My claim was never that people explicitly say, word-for-word, that Ali was "literally untouchable." My point was that many fans effectively portray him as such through their statements such as claims like "Ali picks the round and gets it done," "very hard to land on," or "beats every version of Usyk from 1965 to 1975" clearly imply that he was untouchable in a practical sense.

You’re trying to argue semantics instead of engaging with the actual substance of my argument: that these exaggerated portrayals of Ali lead to overrating him in head-to-head discussions. Whether they say "literally untouchable" or not, the underlying overestimation of his abilities is the same.

So no, there’s no contradiction between pointing out the overrating and addressing this "untouchable" narrative—because they’re just two sides of the same coin. If you’re stuck on the wording rather than the clear implications of what’s being said, that’s on you.

 

Definitely oranges. Didn’t oranges show in the Godfather movies something bad was going to happen? Marciano is Italian so it got to be oranges.

 

The answer is 'lemons', surely?

 

Let me stop you right there.

I never said size doesn't matter. Ever. Not once in the post you replied to, throughout my history on this forum, or even real life.

Go back and actually read what I wrote and address that, not what you imagine my argument to be. This is part of your problem, you keep ASSUMING someone's position and then you attack THAT. It's the equivalent of building a house on a weak, brittle foundation. Doesn't matter how pretty the windows look or how well the roof is constructed if the foundation will fall apart in 6 months.

 

Literally nobody knows what the word "literally" means.

 

I gave up on this guy. Instead of showing me a single instance where someone claims Ali goes through fights untouched, he brings up completely unrelated posts, and changes goal posts. Then has the audacity to accuse others of manufacturing strawmen.

 

Actually, I didn't change the goalposts, I clarified my broader point, which is that many fans overrate Ali in head-to-head discussions, often implying he's untouchable in his prime. The posts I provided clearly show this sentiment, even if they don’t use the exact phrase ‘untouchable.’ You’re splitting hairs about wording while ignoring the obvious implication of those arguments. If you want to dismiss the point entirely, fine, but don’t act like I haven’t addressed your request just because the wording isn't the exact one you're looking for that's disingenuous

 

I’m not assuming anything, but if I misrepresented your argument, I apologize. My intent has been to address the broader positions others in this debate have taken, but it seems we’ve been talking past each other to some extent.

To clarify, I’m not entirely sure what your specific argument is, as the original thread was about Marciano, not Joe Louis, yet you’ve focused heavily on Louis. If I misunderstood your stance, let me try to steelman it:

You’re arguing that Louis’s career complicates the "size matters" narrative because he defeated larger opponents like Buddy Baer but occasionally struggled against smaller fighters. This suggests that size alone isn’t decisive and that factors like styles, skills, timing, and accuracy are equally, if not more, important allowing someone like Louis to overcome size advantages. Is that an accurate summary?

If so, I’d like to focus on where we might agree or disagree from there. Let me know if I’m missing something.

 

This was the post I made.

This was your response.

The posts you provided didn't convey the sentiment that he was literally untouchable like rockyjim was saying. Not one of them said Ali would go through fights untouched. One of them said he was extremely difficult to hit, NOT impossible.

Not sure how I can possibly clarify things further.

 

While I did use the term "untouchable" earlier, I realize that wasn’t the best choice of words, and I apologize for the refusal to acknowledge that. My intention wasn’t to argue that Ali was literally untouchable, but rather to point out the tendency I’ve seen in discussions where some overrate his defensive skills, often implying he was nearly impossible to hit (just to clarify, I’m saying "implying," not directly stating). In hindsight, I can see how that phrasing may not have conveyed my point accurately, and I acknowledge that I was too stubborn in not conceding that earlier.

I hope that clears things up. The larger argument I was trying to make is that some people overrate Ali's defensive abilities based on this kind of sentiment, which can cloud more objective assessments of his career.

 

Fair enough mate. I’ll concede I was being a smartass to and over focusing on a trivial matter. I’ll agree that Ali can get overrated, and there’s zero chance he’d win every round against Usyk like many were saying. He’d absolutely have his hands full and then some.

 

I'm glad we worked things out. Cheers!

 

Agreed mate.






You and Pugs next.