Rocky Marciano vs Evander Holyfield

I met evander before he fought valuev. He looked slim and trim, a six footer but in a well tailored suit he could haves passed for a banker or mild mannered church deacon. He did not stand out as a six foot plus heavyweight. There were bigger men in the room.

 

Met him 4 times mostly in his prime. 6-1 or 6-2 seemed about right. And yes, there were bigger men in the room. I checked.

 

In shoes he might make 6,1… It's not that big these days. It dosnt pass for tall.

 

It passes for a few inches taller than Marciano if reports of his actual height are true. Also, Vander is bigger in all the posted measurables of both length and girth… bigger neck, 10" of reach, bigger chest… He was just a bigger man all around and found his best fighting weight in the 205-210 range… and again "total homo"

 

He didn't just find this range, he intentionally added muscle through hard work, dedication, injections..etc. because cruiser wasn't paying the bills and he wanted to fight superstar HW Champion Tyson for the megabucks.

He didn't just decide on a whim to add 20 or 30 pounds of muscle to his lanky frame because he thought it would make him a better fighter. From a physical stand point, he looked his best at Cruiser going 15 against Qawi.

 

Yes, he did find this range. He set out to find it. And he worked his ass off to get there.

His most impressive win from a boxing standpoint was not against Qawi. It may not even be in his top 5.

Tommy Gibbons, Stanley Ketchell, Jack O'Brien, Harry Greb, John Henry Lewis, Mike Spinks, Bob Foster... All these guys sought to fight with the big boys, too. And most failed where Holyfield achieved. Should we wag the finger at them, also?

 

I thought it was pretty much well known that Holyfield was a guy that LOST weight between fights. Most of his training was Callisthenics and other power / muscle building exercises, followed by sparring.

 

-Yep. Holyfield one day out of the blue, realized his best fighting weight was 20-30 lbs heavier and set out to correct nature's mistake. He certainly wasn't just adding as much mass as he could to compete for the Heavyweight title.

-That's absurd.

-Kay...

 

Well I know one thing.. Walcott never fought again after Marciano, Charles went into the abyss and never again recovered to be a top contender, and Moore was beaten even more emphatically by a 20 year old Patterson a year later.. In the meantime George Foreman went on to recapturing the freakin' heavyweight title nearly four years AFTER fighting Holyfield..In addition, Holmes lingered around in the ratings following his bout with Evander and later challenged again for a title as well. So yeah I'd say its a worthy comparison. The only two obvious differences that I see is that:

1. neither Foreman or Holmes had Holyfield on his ass and nor did they ever force him to seek a come from behind win.

2. They didn't go from being divine figures to totally useless in the course of one or two fights.

 

1. I see what you are suggesting but you would think Walcott was a decade younger than Holmes and Foreman instead of just a few years using the eye test. He looks remarkably quick of hand and overall movement. Contrasting to the filmed Louis and Charles fights, Walcott didn't look to have lost much if any speed or grace. At 38 Walcott was only 7 lbs heavier than when he first left the sport at 28 and appeared to be solid muscle. Foreman and Holmes were over 20-30 lbs heavier than their younger selves and rather flabby.

Holmes and Foreman had a longer run of course into their 40s but they started their comebacks at a much later age after much more time off. Walcott returned to the ring at 32 after a 4 year leave, his run lasting 7 years. Foreman returned at 38 after 10 years leave, Holmes at 42 after a 5 year leave. Foreman and Holmes were also more selective of their opponents during their comeback, while Walcott basically took on Black Murder's Row and most of the top fighters in that 6 year window.

2. There is a common thread of many of Marciano's victims rarely returning to form again. Look at the startling different outcomes of the Walcott and Charles rematches. Walcott went to war with Rocky in the first match for 13 rounds but folded from the first landed punch in the rematch.

Charles bravely battled Marciano to a competitive decision loss but in the rematch he was dominated in a one sided beatdown, and dropped multipe times. He cut Rocky but that was it. It's not hard to figure out why this happened, Rocky beat the absolute hell out of these guys.

 

All of the above is true. But in boxing there is a big difference between 42-43 and 37-38 ( in Walcott's case. ) Foreman taking 10 years off and Holmes being absent for basically 5 years may have saved them some wear and tear, but there is a trade off for being gone for so long as well. And Larry Holmes never looked particularly pretty from a physique stand point even in his prime. Its possible that the demise Walcott and Charles experienced may have been due to the beatings they took in their first fights with Rocky, but given that they were already coming off of disgustingly long careers with numerous wars and beatings, I think it was more of a cumulative factor and not just trauma sustained in one single match....That and old age... And we should remember that in addition to being in his forties and off for so long, Holmes was a veteran of some 23 or 24 world title fights ( including his defeats to Tyson and Spinks. ) Foreman sustained beatings from Holyfield and Stewart before taking the crown from Moorer at age 45.

 

If you are going to make a fantasy fight you have to make the fighters have the same stuff available to them. Without his GH and steroids Holy was 195lbs at best, Marciano would destroy him.

 

Not necessarily. By changing the dynamics of who these guys actually were, you're no longer talking about Rocky Marciano or Evander Holyfield, but rather two different people that you've some how morphed them into. Holyfield's heavyweight prime was around 210. Marciano's was 185. That's it.

Maybe and maybe not. Being 10-15 lbs lighter than his eventual weight at heavyweight didn't change the fact that he had a proven chin, stamina to go 15 rounds, great work rate, good power, skill and a ton of heart. Should Rocky be favored? Probably. But only because Evander had what? 18 fights at 190?

 

-And that is indeed the point.

-Sometimes you have to stare the obvious in the face. How else can one explain such a radical drop off in back to back matches. Whatever wear and tear you may assume Charles and Walcott had suffered in their numerous bouts was non-existant in their first meetings that have been noted as career best performances by people who followed them their whole career, yet somehow emerged as shadows of their former selves in just their next match with Rocky. And it wasn't just a single punch.

-Nothing like the beatings that Marciano gave Walcott and Charles.

 

Regardless of how gallant their efforts were against Marciano, I am reluctant to write off their abrupt decline to a single meeting with one man, given their lengthy careers and numerous meetings with hall of fame fighters, not to mention their ages. Sometimes aging boxers still have one or two good nights left in them, but that doesn't necessarily indicate prime. Its also possible that after spending numerous rounds with them in his first meeting, Rocky and Charlie Goldman figured out how to shorten things the next time around. For the record, I have Marciano ranked #3 all time behind Ali and Louis. I arrived at this rating based on legacy purposes. But head to head I think he falls short against the field. I believe him to be the product of a declining era going through a transitional phase in the sport, and what's more, he often had to give it everything he had to capitalize on it, and at times almost didn't make it. Walcott, Charles, Moore and yes even Joe Louis were still very formidable opponents when he met them. But I often think that fans and historians inflate their late career abilities as a safeguard to justify why he didn't just walk all over them in some of those meetings.