Not at heavyweight, no. He is a big puncher at heavyweight(a very good one), but not up there with Louis, Liston, Marciano, Dempsey, even johansson. I also personally do not believe archie moore was at his best against floyd patterson. I also do not think archie could beat floyd on his best night. Archie Moore is one of the 5 greatest punchers of all time p4p though, an ATG at 175lb. He carried his punch up to heavyweight too. Also, let's not act like archie landed anything meaningful against floyd. Had Archie nailed floyd with his big counter right hand, floyd would be done like dinner.
I would actually pick the heavyweight champion Jersey Joe Walcott of 1952 to knockout Floyd Patterson. If Walcott went after floyd like he did Marciano, Floyd would be toast. I do think Patterson beats a 1954 charles though.
Yes..Floyd's speed/power/combinations are incredible...but like u said Marciano is just too strong, powerful and relentless. Rocky is comparable to liston in terms of strength/punching power...and floyd's speed/combinations were hopeless against liston. Rocky would just bombard floyd with heavy crushing blows until floyd just drops.
I've got to be honest, even though i favour Marciano, i think Floyd's chances in realistic terms are being understated here.
Jersey Joe Walcott looked and boxed the best I have ever seen a 38 year old box in 1952for 12 rds against Marciano.... Had that been a 12 round title fight, Walcott would've gotten the UD win....... Come 1953 at age 39, Walcott was still in fine shape, but the starch had been zapped outta him, and he basically folded like a lawn chair at the beach...... The rematch effort was shameful........ Walcott pretty much blew the 10-count from the ref, but we cannot overlook that Joe Wally took his sweet-ass time getting up off his ass in '53.......... MR.BILL
Yes, but he's putting light onto the double standards. Frazier can beat so Wlad. But Rocky against so and so is too short and way too small of a reach. Like he have to deal with these factors when fighting. Obviously it's all to a lesser extent, but that can be said about many past HW fighters.
Your last sentence nullifies all the bull**** previously. Who cares if he's better... he would never ever trouble him more than a Walcott would. This is as good as a fact... without actually being a factor. Wrap your hand around that one.
It's pre-determined. Floyd would have to fight the most perfect fight of his life to beat Marciano, and even then it seems hard for the imagination to render. His style if awful against Marciano. If he was young and fought more like he did with his comeback style which implement movement more he would have a bit more of a chance. Even then, he'd lose.
No, he can't. That's why he's a bull**** poster. And clearly a Marciano hater. He can hardly ever make a complement toward him or just straight out make a pick. He has to talk up on Floyd being better than Walcott and Charles... all then to just expose his own bull**** by stating how style-wise is trouble for Floyd though. No ****, but you'll still couldn't resist spending time busting on Marciano.
I ask again, if he boxes more, like he did against some of the bigger fighters in his career, instead of his usual style, can you see you guys Patterson winning?
Well hey didn't you hear?? All marciano fans are "unrealistic fanatical fans who romanticize about him, and can't think objectively"
I mean, no. Because by that time(mid 60s), he had lost some of his speed/reflexes he would need against Marciano. Still, that version nearly lost to chuvalo..who is nowhere near the monster Marciano is. Marciano is just too strong and powerful for Floyd. Like Liston, on a slightly lower level.
We let the hero-worshiping get out of the way of any rationale thinking. What I've always found funny is at one point HeGrant picked Dempsey against Wlad and picks basically Frazier over any big men. While Frazier isn't Marciano, Frazier still is inferior or equal in many important categories. Not even worth going into.