Rocky Marciano vs the 80s heavyweights.

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


  1. choklab

    choklab cocoon of horror Full Member

    27,674
    7,654
    Dec 31, 2009
    And a lot of people still thought Tucker good enough to beat Lennox Lewis AFTER that fight. Norris was robbed.
     
  2. Foxy 01

    Foxy 01 Boxing Junkie banned

    12,328
    131
    Apr 23, 2012
    :lol::lol::lol::lol:

    Revisionist history has got Marciano beating every Heavyweight from Liston to the K2 brothers. It doesn't get much more stupid than that.
     
  3. mcvey

    mcvey VIP Member Full Member

    97,727
    29,077
    Jun 2, 2006
    Marciano would not be beaten by any ordinary fighter, but the best of the 80s would be tough asks for him imo.
     
  4. N_ N___

    N_ N___ Boxing Addict Full Member

    6,204
    93
    Oct 1, 2014

    Rocky moved forward and depended on exerting energy and breaking opponents down. Norris was a conservative counter puncher with more slickness than Rocky. Rocky would be smart to mimic Norris if he were fighting today but that's an "if" that didn't exist in reality. Beyond that, Tucker was a lazy fighter who was tough and hell but basically incapable of dominating a rated opponent.
     
  5. The Mongoose

    The Mongoose I honor my bets banned

    24,478
    128
    Aug 13, 2009
    Yeah, that Chambers and Byrd ****ogy was way off. Guy obviously assuming Norris was something he wasn't.
     
  6. The Mongoose

    The Mongoose I honor my bets banned

    24,478
    128
    Aug 13, 2009
    Here's 5'9" Norris ducking and weaving under Tucker's jabs.

    [url]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WYuUnG8UZ_E[/url]

    Here's Marciano ducking and weaving under Louis's jabs.

    [url]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9bmvHeqzXhA[/url]

    There are of course differences like Norris' high guard and Marciano's feinting moving hands and more pronounced lean. But in both cases, they are pressuring, crouching and using bobbing and weaving to get inside a longer opponent.


    Than Tyson and Lewis need to stop being credited for beating him.
     
  7. N_ N___

    N_ N___ Boxing Addict Full Member

    6,204
    93
    Oct 1, 2014

    He was good and very tough, but every notable win he has was close. He fought lazy and a lot of guys would be able to outwork him.

    There's more to fighting than fighting from a crouch. Norris wasn't the kind of guy to knock someone out after having his face bloodied while marching forward. It's not a great comparison.
     
  8. choklab

    choklab cocoon of horror Full Member

    27,674
    7,654
    Dec 31, 2009
    Norris was effective with the crouch but without the power. That's even harder for Norris to be successful. And he still was. It's very significant in this debate.
     
  9. mr. magoo

    mr. magoo VIP Member Full Member

    51,110
    25,266
    Jan 3, 2007
    Tucker did manage to beat a prime Norris the first time and that's despite being passed prime and on the comeback trail. Tony was slow by this stage and had no workrate. In the second meeting he was more like 37-38 and with nearly 60 fights of mileage behind him? That said I agree he was average and his record padded which I've commented on before. I don't subrcribe to either generalization that the 1980's was a "strong" or "weak" era in heavyweight boxing. You had some guys who were very good and others who weren't.. Same as any era.
     
  10. N_ N___

    N_ N___ Boxing Addict Full Member

    6,204
    93
    Oct 1, 2014

    I don't think Norris is a good measuring stick for heavyweight success. He wasn't successful. He was a good cruiser.
     
  11. choklab

    choklab cocoon of horror Full Member

    27,674
    7,654
    Dec 31, 2009
    Not successful at heavyweight? Norris beat three heavyweight champions.

    That's a better resume statistically than pinklon Thomas for example, among many other 1980s guys.

    Norris Made the Annual Ring heavyweight rankings two years running, that's the same as Dokes and Tubbs.
     
  12. N_ N___

    N_ N___ Boxing Addict Full Member

    6,204
    93
    Oct 1, 2014

    No, it's not. Not even close. Thomas was actually pfp. Don't make me dissect why Norris' wins don't hold much weight. Legit arguments only.
     
  13. choklab

    choklab cocoon of horror Full Member

    27,674
    7,654
    Dec 31, 2009
    Norris made the Annual Ring ratings two years running. He was therefore a relevant HW contender. Belt Holders Tubbs and Dokes only featured in as many years. Without getting into who was better he was relevant. That's the truth.
     
  14. N_ N___

    N_ N___ Boxing Addict Full Member

    6,204
    93
    Oct 1, 2014

    He rounded out the bottom of the top ten for a little bit. Not in the same ballpark as Thomas and lost to a past it Tubbs.
     
  15. choklab

    choklab cocoon of horror Full Member

    27,674
    7,654
    Dec 31, 2009
    It wasn't a little bit. Norris featured in the Annual HW ratings two years running. and was quite avoided.

    Oliver McCall was prime. He'd been avoided but Norris beat him hands down.

    Greg Page was offered a shot at Holyfeild if he could beat Norris. but even though Page came in at 220 (and looked good) when he lost Norris was not offered the fight with Hollyfeild that Page had been offered.

    When Orlin "lost" to Tubbs in 1989 one judge scored it even. It went down as an ND because Tubbs failed a drugs test. Tubbs was 27-2 and on a win streak at the time.

    Tony Tucker was active, unbeaten apart from the points loss to Tyson at 40-1 when he fought Norris. Most people think Norris won both fights with Tucker.

    Norris beat Snipes in a NABF title fight who beat Berbick.

    Norris beat jesse Ferguson after he beat Buster Douglas.

    Even when over the hill Norris gave prime Golota and Brian Neilsson all they could by handle, tough full distance fights when both relevant contenders.

    What ever way you look at it this is a good body of work over a long period against top heavyweights!