Rocky Marciano vs the 80s heavyweights.

Discussion in 'Classic Boxing Forum' started by Ken Ashcroft, Apr 12, 2014.


  1. Seamus

    Seamus Proud Kulak Full Member

    61,630
    46,268
    Feb 11, 2005
    In today's game, smaller heavyweights (who still outweigh Marciano by 30 pounds) need handspeed to dominate.
     
  2. Foxy 01

    Foxy 01 Boxing Junkie banned

    12,328
    131
    Apr 23, 2012
    How the hell does Marciano's low crouch equate to Tyson bobbing and weaving? They are nothing like the same.
     
  3. SuzieQ49

    SuzieQ49 The Manager Full Member

    37,077
    3,733
    Sep 14, 2005
    That's because the big men today are more athletic stronger faster and groomed to be champions through extensive amatur careers.
     
  4. SuzieQ49

    SuzieQ49 The Manager Full Member

    37,077
    3,733
    Sep 14, 2005
    Seamus

    But trust me, Dempsey having more handspeed reach and knocking out a few more big stiffs of the 20s doesn't give him any advantage over marciano against modern heavyweights, I'll go with the more proven Marciano

    That said, marciano is a cruiserweight today. Not a heavyweight . How do you see him doing vs Huck, Hernandez, lebedev, drozd, usyk
     
  5. Seamus

    Seamus Proud Kulak Full Member

    61,630
    46,268
    Feb 11, 2005
    I also see him as a cruiser... and in whatever era he is put in, he has the same short career he had in the 1950's. His style and the physical shortcomings upon which it was based are not made for longevity.
     
  6. SuzieQ49

    SuzieQ49 The Manager Full Member

    37,077
    3,733
    Sep 14, 2005
    Nope. But who beats him at cruiserweight in A 4 year span?
     
  7. The Mongoose

    The Mongoose I honor my bets banned

    24,478
    128
    Aug 13, 2009
    Yes.

    No. His jab feint right cross he was using in the mid rounds wasn't nearly as well executed as Marciano's.

    Tyson after round 5 could be slower and more off balance than Marciano ever was.
     
  8. Seamus

    Seamus Proud Kulak Full Member

    61,630
    46,268
    Feb 11, 2005
    Probably no one if he maintains some of the luck he had during his actual career.

    He was really a terrific fighter.
     
  9. Seamus

    Seamus Proud Kulak Full Member

    61,630
    46,268
    Feb 11, 2005
    In so much as they both competed in the sport of boxing.

    No. His jab feint right cross he was using in the mid rounds wasn't nearly as well executed as Marciano's.
    For being an all time great (which he was), I have never seen a boxer of that status, or even an echelon or two below, be so completely off balance and out of position. You would have to go to Tyson vs. McBride to find a similar situation in Mike's career.
     
  10. The Mongoose

    The Mongoose I honor my bets banned

    24,478
    128
    Aug 13, 2009
    And both we're aggressive short armed fighters, and one admits to studying and copying the other. I have listed one specific move...the jab feint overhand right out of the crouch. Tyson tries this on Tucker alot, and executes one fully in the last minute of round 6. This was a Marciano favorite.

    Aggressive fighters will have those moments, and Marciano was always quick to recover from a miss and fire back, reason he was so overwhelming and impossible to potshot
     
  11. Seamus

    Seamus Proud Kulak Full Member

    61,630
    46,268
    Feb 11, 2005
    So impossible to potshot by a collection of over-the-hill lifers on their last legs and less than imposing figures in guys like Layne and Matthews and Lastarza.

    In Marciano's career we have the brief flash untested by a wide array of talents, of athletic types and styles and in particular fresh versions of said.

    He passed the test, but were the questions really that difficult?
     
  12. latineg

    latineg user of dude wipes Full Member

    22,077
    16,731
    Jun 4, 2009
    were the questions really that difficult?

    well Rocky took a ton of punishment so I would say yes they were. The way that Rock could get hammered and walk through it was of championship calibre even if his speed and agility weren't.
     
  13. SuzieQ49

    SuzieQ49 The Manager Full Member

    37,077
    3,733
    Sep 14, 2005

    I think moore and walcott were very difficult questions to answer. Despite each being 38 years old, both were coming off there most significant career wins by knockout over prime versions of Ezzard Charles and Harold Johnsom. Both were also reigning world champions at the time they fought marciano. You have to think about that stat Seamus.

    Was Bernard Hopkins a difficult question to answer at age 38 in 2002? I would say Yes


    No, moore and walcott were not similar size length and style to a tony tucker. However, both were GREAT fighters the night they fought Marciano. It would have taken a great fighter to beat a 1952 walcott and 1955 moore
     
  14. choklab

    choklab cocoon of horror Full Member

    27,674
    7,654
    Dec 31, 2009
    Today's game is a different kettle of fish. We have a system where shorter heavyweights are so bulky they cannot overcome a reach advantage at all. and why should they? Most HW prospects are taken along so slowly, matched with every advantage they barley face competitive opposition until challenging for a belt. speed and work rate is rationed out in short bursts of activity. The pace suits tall fat guys with long arms. Nobody develops the art of slipping longer jabs in the heavyweight division because there isn't the competition on the way up. It's unnecessary anyway. Nobody gives away reach unless a title is at stake or they already know the guy is a habitual loser on the down slide. You just wait until the next guy stops punching. HW boxing is almost a disgrace now. Just a power event for giants. jab and grab. Outside klitchko Willard and Carnera would dominate today. Nobody ever says Carnera would beat Louis or Dempsey yet some realy think Marciano loses to ANY super heavyweight. It really is laughable.
     
  15. mcvey

    mcvey VIP Member Full Member

    97,745
    29,099
    Jun 2, 2006
    That's the truth!:good Dempsey would have more chance today or at any other time simply because he was quicker of hand and foot, less prone to cuts, and rangier.