I respect and admire Rocky both as an icon and as a fighter, but I always think of him as one of the biggest overachievers in the sport. His toughness, raw power and supreme dedication allowed him to reign over what was perhaps the least competitive time in the history of the division, but I'd back most major champions since Dempsey to beat him, aside from the quartet that followed Tunney's retirement and maybe Patterson. And I wouldn't be surprised if say Schmeling or Floyd pulled of the upset.
I gotta go with Liston. Too many physical advantages. Rocky could really hit so I wouldn`t be that surprised if he pulled the upset but I can`t pick him because I never saw him face a big heavyweight with the kind of power Sonny brought to the table. The jab woud be the obvious problem for Marciano. The power it carried as well as the punches that Liston could put behind it.
No skills whatsoever. Yet he was able to knock out Louis, Walcott , Charles and Moore. Impressive for someone with no skills.
They were all way past their prime. It's fairly common knowledge Rocky wasn't exactly the best boxer.
Still pretty impressive for him to best these way past prime boxers whilst not being exactly the best boxer according to common knowledge.
Arguably the best p4p swarmer in history. Who else was willing to give and take in close, have a great career and not get bombed out in humiliating fashion?
I would tend to agree with you there. Rocky Marciano was unequivocally the greater champion of the two. However, Liston likely had the style to beat him, and likely knew it. I think that this one would be more interesting than many Liston advocates suspect however!
They are both boxers, I think Rocky was better. The reason I think Liston wins is because he's bigger, not because he's better.
Rocky had certain moves and subtle skills that nobody really ever figured out. I wouldn`t call him the best boxer but to say he had no skills is crazy.