Rocky Marciano vs the 80s heavyweights.

I think his work rate over 15 rds would be too much for these guys but Weaver could make it exciting and Thomas may take the lead early but I think the pressure and work rate gets to them as well. His work rate and pressure also too much for Witherspoon

 

Just a reminder... He would be getting punched during those 15 rounds... and not by a bunch of old men or lightheavies. Workrate is great but when a lot of that work is getting within range, and your hand and footspeed are not particularly elite, and your defense a bit suspect... there is a hefty price to pay for workrate.

 

With all due respect you don't know everything.
Oh yeah, the Klits would have knocked Dempsey onto another planet, most of the 'big' boys would have had Joe Louis for lunch, Patterson would have been destroyed by everyone post-75 etc...
You CAN'T compare eras.
Had the Rock been born 30 years later, he'd have been a chisled 210-ish monster.
And none of you Gen-X'ers want to put your "bad-ass" fighters back a basically half a century and put what would have been their skills at that time, against the best at that time!
Next thread; I'm so sick of this ****.

 

IMO those "old Men" would have cleaned up the 80's, they were fit and not bottom heavy and soft like most of the 80's lard and lazy men

 

His ability to benefit from a fifteen round fight would be largely contingent on if he could "survive" the early and mid parts of a fight against some of those men.. If he went past round 12 against men like C00ney and Smith, then he more than likely wins. But getting to that point is the real trick. He'd be taking huge shots from those guys, possibly getting decked more than once, and would have to work harder than he ever did before to overcome the size and reach disparities, which would be taxing on him.. It should also be pointed out that there were a few 80's heavyweights who went 12 and beyond 12 on just as many or even more occasions than Rocky did.

 

Those "old men" who were at the very end of their productive careers. Walcott was done after Marciano… and no Marciano did not destroy him. He was done. Charles never had another significant win in his career and was under .500 for the rest of his pathetic stay.

In every sense of the boxing term "old", they were "old"… shopworn, tired, rusty with tons of miles on the odometer...

 

That basically sums it up for me. Others have said that those guys were in awesome form for one last night only against Marciano. And while I agree they gave a good account of themselves, I also think that a lot of those claims are an effort to bulk up the value of his wins over them.. At 33 years of age, being a former middleweight and having 90 fights of mileage behind him, its doubtful that Ezzard Charles would have been proclaimed as an elite heavyweight in the 80's.. Taken into consideration his age, size and wear and tear he would have been comparable to what Dwight Qawi was around 1986-87.

 

Even Bruno if he nailed the easy to hit Marciano cleanly would floor him 9 times out of ten. Huge power in his shots. Whether or not he had the nous to finish the job is another matter, but no way does Marciano take a full blooded shot from Frank and stay on his feet.

 

Agree. :good

 

Very much agree. Add in Tony's mobility and you have a tall order for Marciano.

 

At their worst, Greg Page and Tony Tubbs were horrendous. Ditto with Tim Witherspoon. At their respective bests, each posed problems for Marciano. The big key here for the 80's guys would be conditioning. They'd have to be at their best and in their best condition if their skills and size are to make the difference. None of them were George Foreman or Ernie Shavers, so giving Marciano the benefit of a great grill and subtle ability to get under some big shots, they'd need to be conditioned enough to have their best timing and chances should the match go deep and Marciano accelerate as they grew tired.

As for power, if Witherspoon put the sort of attack on Marciano that he did on poor James Broad, one wonders how Rocky would fare.

How about Gerry ****ey? Fast starting massive power puncher that often came up with his deadly left hooks. I'd be impressed to see Marciano get out of that one.

 

There's so many intangibles. At their best, every one of those guys could have given Marciano many problems, either based on ability or simply sheer size. But every one of those guys was unpredictable in that the majority of them had drug or weight problems, and the others were frequently unmotivated. Weaver was probably the best because he at least showed up in shape for every fight. Marciano wins two out of three against every one of those guys simply because he'd show up to fight EVERY time, unlike the opponents, who mostly couldn't even be bothered to get in shape to defend the title, which is why almost none of them had even more than one successful defense as champion.

 

This is a nonsense. Rusty. Who was Rusty? By today's terms who that Marciano fought was old? Shop worn? Name a fighter who had both just won his most significant win and was shop worn all at the same time. Name just one other faded, rusty, shop worn fighter who could still knock down and knockout a rated fighter. Just one.

Walcott and Moore just happened to be the size they were and the age they were. And they could beat bigger guys. They were not hand picked. they were at the pinnacle of their careers. Champions coming off their best wins. Charles was still capable of greatness, was the best possible challenger and had prepared well. These guys were not late substitutes, coke heads who could not retain alphabet belts past one fight they were ATG champions.

Rocky never had an easy fight and if he took on a handful of 1980s heavyweights he would not have an easy fight either. But the man was a winner with unique and awkward assets that he knew how to use to his advantage. He proberbly only ever had 6 great fights in him anyway but he was a guy who knew how to use what he had.

Outside of Holmes and Tyson the 1980s did not produce champions who could beat more than one rated fighter before losing again. Witherspoon, page, snipes,coetzee, Thomas and Berbick were no better than each other. With few exceptions (Bruno, Tillis) everyone who challenged for belt not owned by Holmes wound up being champion! Talk about pass the parcel!

 

The 1980's had a good amount of talent. What is lacking was the dedication and consistency of the fighters. The politics of the times did not help. Drugs were a problem with many fighters as well.

I'll assume the above are focused and in shape for Rocky.

I think Rocky beats Berbick, ****ey, and Coetzee. I like Rocky over Smith, and Weaver in wars. I'd take Rocky over Dokes too, but could see a UD loss for Marciano as well. Bruno is about 50/50. I'd slightly favor Tucker over Marciano. I'd make Rocky a live underdog vs Witherspoon and Thomas.

Best guess, Rocky is about 7-3 to 6-4 here.

 

I agree that Charles was done after the 2 wars with Marciano and I agree Marciano completely mentally ruined the 34-1-1 Rex Layne, Walcott was a picture of fitness in fight one but did not want too many rounds of the same in fight 2, and that right uppercut convinced him. Archie fought Ali 7 years later and still had some left....Archie was 38-4-2 after Marciano but yes he was finished as a heavyweight after Marciano's brutal beat-down....It s easy to say after the fact that B-Hop at 50 is shot after fighting Kov but 2 fights before that he was as good as anyone....These guys were in there 30's younger than 80% of the top 15 guys today and younger than Vlad Klitschko