Tony Canzoneri vs JM Marquez @ lightweight... who would win?

This looks like a Classic Boxing thread.

As a 20+ year boxing fan and huge fan of JMM I would love to opine on this mythical matchup but I have to admit I know very little of the legendary Canzoneri!

 

My opinion is that at featherweight or super featherweight, it'd be more competitive because JMM is simply faded at his 135+ days. But I'd favor Canzoneri. Even as a JMM fan. JMM ain't knocking Canzoneri out, Canzoneri probably isn't stopping JMM either in all likelihood. I'm thinking a UD from being a better of a mover. Marquez is a truly excellent tactician and a tough guy too, but Canzoneri I think is just athletically better.

 

This has got some terrific footage of Canzoneri. The contrast would be pretty stunning in the sense that JMM is such a minimalist in terms of movement.

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z-6rWIzAYow[/ame]

 

Ive seen a lot of footage of Canzoneri and to be honest id take Marquez over him, but those were different times. HTH id go with Marquez, but if you are going to go by resumes and how they were in there times id say Canzoneri should be rated higher on a ATG list.

 

Well, I don't think there's any question that Canzoneri should be rated higher. Way higher for me. I can see arguing JMM out of the top 100, although I personally have him in mine. Canzoneri on the other hand, I don't see him argued out of the top 25.

 

Canzoneri. JMM is good, very good but Canzoneri is great. More elusive, busier, punches harder, a bit faster, more experienced, more proven, trickier. Canzoneri's performance against Jackie "Kid" Berg is one if the greatest performances of one atg against another atg ever. Up there with Armstrong-Ross, Duran-Leonard I+II or Schmeling-Louis i+II. Nobody ever did to Berg what Canzoneri did in this lw/slw title fight.

 

Yey i would have Canzoneri in my top 40 and Marquez 70 to 80.
However when watching these two on film Marquez would whup him, but hey i know its a different era, and many old timers would be great today, however i feel Canzoneri was around that transition time when fighters got a better on a technichal level.

 

I'm a big, big fan of both these fighters but I don't honestly think that any of the brawlers from the early part of the century would stand a chance against a skillful counterpuncher with Marquez's timing, reflexes and power. Good matchup though...remember I love both of the guys.:think

 

I disagree. The trasnsition was over by the time Canzoneri came around. Canzoneri was unorhodox but in a way that would see him prevail in every era. Actually I think his style would befuddle a lot of todays fighters.

 

Canzoneri was not a brawler and with a career from 1925 to 1939 he hardly was a fighter of the early 20th century. And his timing, reflexes and power was better than Marquez'.

 

I disagree with you his power was not as good as Marquez and Marquez had some great reflexes in his prime on par with Canzoneri. Canzoneri would have to sharpen up his defense to beat elite modern fighters. Ive always believed that slightly after his time there was an improvement on fighters technique. Canzoneri was a sharp but closer to average puncher, Marquez is an above average puncher.

 

Remember that Stanley Ketchel is my favorite fighter of all time so I'm not biased against boxers from other eras or something. I'm simply saying that Canzoneri had a tendency to want to trade went prompted and that plays directly into a counterpuncher's hands...particularly a counterpuncher with some POP.:bbb

 

The only thing I think Marquez has to trouble Canzoneri is his jab; otherwise Tony is at least his equal, and often his superior in most other ways. Tony's power and superior quickness/sharpness at that weight carry him to a clear decision IMO.

 

There is really nothing primitive about Canzoneris skills and style...He was an unorthodox reflex fighter and his physical ability alone would have seen him be a top fighter in any era.
Guys like Chocolate and Ross had excellent all round skills and technical ability, in no way inferior to most of the top fighters around today.
His style was developed at a time when boxing was in a bit of a transition period but what brought about that were significant rule changes, especially post war but also at the time Tony fought.
He was a fighter of the highest pedigree and had he been brought up in JMM's era he simply would have developed his style to suit the modern game.
That is no way means he would have been out of his depth technically had he timewarped into todays era, he was proven at every aspect of boxing...Fighting a variety of fighters and styles..From athletically gifted boxer types like Chocolate, to teak tough and dirty maulers like Ambers and Mandell, to well rounded skillsters like Ross and Mclarnin, rangy stand up boxers like Berg.. forming one of the best resumes ever in the process.

Tony would carve up Marquez at lightweight in his own time...It would be a close call now under modern rules, 12 rounds, less fouling and bigger gloves.

Id probably side with a prime Marquez in 126-130 bouts...But Tony impressed me a hell of a lot more at lightweight where he spent a great deal of his prime and where I think Marquez quite clearly lost a step.