rocky marciano vs jack johnson

Johnson all the way here, dude...... Jack see's Marciano's attack from the getgo..... Marciano is on the prowl looking to force the issue, but gets tied up, held and popped on the return like he's never seen before.... J.J. at 6' 2" tall and 209 to 212 pounds is easily big enough and strong enough to stifle Marciano's attack and frustrate his ass for 15 rds and take the decision..... Marciano only has a punchers chance here....... On the whole, I favor J.J. in the end........

MR.BILLbbb:hat

 

Johnson could never endure the pace and pressure of Marciano, the Rock stops Johnson in the last 3rd of the 15 rounder in a fight where he must expend himself earlier than usual the holding is not as effective and he had trouble timing the Rock because of the rhythm braking style of the Rock Johnson hit the deck hard in the 10th and suffers a beat down therein

 

Johnson lived and dominated an era fighting guys like this

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rFWA5xjJ0-4&playnext=1&list=PL2856D38A77554A06[/ame]

the so called boxing experts should be ashamed of themselves for giving Johnson more then a snowball in hell chance

 

Are you kidding?

Flynn would dominate the division today!

 

:rofl :rofl:rofl @ 1:31

Flynn makes Marciano look like Pernell Whitaker

 

Marciano was a different kind of animal...a force of nature...very high workrate...power in both hands..a "kill or be killed"attitude...go with The Rock...

 

Maricano who had a propensity to being cut, would be cut to shreds by Johnson who made a living doing just that. I see the docor stepping in to stop the fight by the 8th. As someone stated earlier.. Johnson made a living and a name for himself beating fighters just as tough with the same game plan as Rocky.. This fight would be no different

 

I think that Flynn video speaks volumes. The era was full of ham and eggers with scant evidence of anything that could be recognized as modern skills. The fighters in the footage extant from that era would be laughed out of a gym today. Johnson stands a pioneer who not only possessed real skills but had significant physical advantages over the twerps of the day.

 

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

 

I regard Marciano as a great fighter, but isn't it a bit of a stretch to argue that he would beat a fighter from a previous era because he benefited from more sophisticated boxing technique?

Is he going to outbox Johnson?

 

Marciano had outstanding technique in exploiting his physical assets (and shortcomings. He was never going to be a stick-and-move sort, but he closed the distance very well, avoided enough punishment to inflict punishment and got great leverage on his punches.

 

Marciano's aptitude for breaking down technical boxers is not in dispute.

What I must dispute is the argument that he would beat technical boxers of an earlier era because he represented an evolution in technique. I would submit, that his style was the oldest in the history of boxing, and the lest changed.

There was no Marciano in that era, but there were smaller pressure fighters, who were as good or better pound for pound.

 

Johnson didn't resemble Charles or Walcott that much. Walcott and Charles were smooth, mobile, modern boxer-punchers who could glide around the ring to avoid a slower opponent like Rocky. Johnson was more of a stationary boxer-wrestler who squared up on the outside in preparation for infighting and relied on his glove blocking and skip-lunge-jab to bring the fight onto the inside, where he mauled the other guy with uppercuts. It is possibly the ugliest style I've ever seen, and bears no relation to the "slick master boxer" stereotype that everyone seems to apply to Johnson.

That being said, it's hard to pick a winner. Johnson's skillset probably threatens Rocky more than Charles or Walcott's more modern, aesthetically pleasing approaches.

 

This is only true in the most general sense.

Johnson was capable of being mobile when it suited him, and could also outbox opponents on the outside when it suited him.

 

Once in a while, sure. Johnson didn't prefer to fight that way, though, and it isn't as if the rules were the main obstacle, since Corbett beat opponents with mobility during the same era. Even against a mummified Jeffries with no spring left in his step, Johnson chose to stand still.

I see no reason to attribute the same mobility to Johnson for this fight that I would expect of Charles or Walcott...nor do I think that Johnson would move around much even if he could.