Was Marciano superior defensively to Tyson, and Frazier?

Discussion in 'Classic Boxing Forum' started by swagdelfadeel, Jan 12, 2021.

Was Marciano a better defensive fighter than Tyson and Frazier?

  1. No. It's not even close enough to warrant a discussion.

    83.0%
  2. Better than Tyson, worse than Frazier.

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  3. Better than Frazier, worse than Tyson.

    9.4%
  4. Better than both

    7.5%
  1. swagdelfadeel

    swagdelfadeel Boxing Junkie Full Member

    9,428
    3,815
    Jul 30, 2014
    Or if Frazier had the pleasure defending against the likes of ****ell. I don't know but something tells me he wouldn't struggle or get hit nearly as much as Marciano did.
    Agreed, Foreman would land a lot less on Marciano than he did Frazier.... because Marciano wouldn't last as long.
     
    BlackCloud likes this.
  2. Gazelle Punch

    Gazelle Punch Boxing Addict Full Member

    3,579
    3,828
    Aug 15, 2018
    Can you explain why individuals being held by the same standard video evidence wouldn’t be believable? I understand the in prime and out of prime arguments and strength of competition. Frazier’s and Tyson had slightly better competition. But it still doesn’t add up. Being hit 5-7 less punches per hundred is no small achievement especially when discussing great fighters. One or two fights won’t sway the average all that much and Frazier and Marciano retired at similar ages. So that is null. I don’t see the fights that Marciano was so easy to hit. As a matter of fact the opposite. You could hit him with one shot but rarely did u see him get hit w a combo.
     
  3. Gazelle Punch

    Gazelle Punch Boxing Addict Full Member

    3,579
    3,828
    Aug 15, 2018
    Can you imagine if Marciano defended against the likes of Ron Stander and Terry Daniels? He’d never survive...****ell beats both of those men.
     
    choklab likes this.
  4. young griffo

    young griffo Boxing Addict Full Member

    5,039
    3,484
    May 18, 2006
    I’m glad you saw it was tongue in cheek.
     
    swagdelfadeel likes this.
  5. George Crowcroft

    George Crowcroft 'Snarky Little Gobshite' - IntentionalButt Full Member

    20,300
    28,005
    Mar 3, 2019
    I don't believe in compubox stats. I'm saying that they're often wrong and misguided, and their margin for error is as big as my own would be if I watched a fight and clicked a button every time a punch was thrown, and then another a split second later if it landed.

    I don't accept that as factual evidence. If you do, then super. Don't force me into it.

    Regardless, it is absolutely ****ing bonkers to say that Tyson and Frazier had "slightly" better competition. Their competition was world's above Marciano's. Marciano never fought a Holyfield or a Lewis, or an Ali or a Foreman. Hell, he never even fought a Buster Douglas.

    Furthermore, I'd wager that a difference of six punches landed for every hundred thrown is very small. Especially when those 100 punches are coming from fighters the calibre of an old Joe Louis, or a prime Muhammad Ali.

    I don't know how long you've been following the sport but I'm sure it's more than a year or so. That means you have absolutely no excuse for using age as an example of someone's prime. They're not one and the same and the fact that Frazier had a much harder group of fighters to face as a pro, started as at a much younger age than Marciano and had a long and fruitful amateur career is why he was much further past his prime at age thirty-two than Marciano was. What's great about this little episode, is that if age = prime and thirty-two is the cut off point for prime, then Marciano has literally zero wins of note over prime opponents.

    Finally, you don't see any Marciano fights where he's easy to hit? Have you watched any of them? There's a reason why he was so entertaining. He was easy to hit! Watch him vs Walcott, where he was hit constantly. Or vs Moore, where he was hit constantly. Or vs Layne where he was hit constantly. Or in either fight with Charles, where he was - you guessed it - hit constantly.

    The idea that Marciano was some defensive wizard, is people taking one idea and running way too far with it. Marciano's defence was a little better than it used to be given credit for, but now, it's way overrated. A constantly moving, high energy guy who's short, makes himself shorter and likes to get up close is going to provide a challenge for the 35 ham and eggers he fought. When he fought real competition, he was hit clean and often.

    It's there on film.
     
    Last edited: Jan 14, 2021
    Glass City Cobra and BlackCloud like this.
  6. choklab

    choklab cocoon of horror Full Member

    24,865
    4,313
    Dec 31, 2009
    Frazier fought an excellent level of opponent. Ali, Quarry, Ellis, Bonavena were his generation. And he beat them all. So Frazier’s comp was cast iron. Tyson? I’m not so sure. He did everything he could have given the situation... which is all anyone can do, but it’s not like Holmes, Bruno, Thomas, Tubbs or Biggs were actually beating contenders to earn their shot. I mean if you look at the circumstances of Tucker becoming champion. They basically promoted an NABF title fight into a IBF vacant title. All these names look good but the facts of the back story to those fights really cannot stand up under the same kind of scrutiny as Marciano title challengers. LaStarza had to beat Layne. Charles had to beat Satterfeild. Cokkell had to beat Lastarza. Moore had to beat Valdes then defend his own title before being stripped. Nobody was dug up from retirement or sitting on the back burner of Alphabet limbo.

    agreed. Who ever hit Rocky wound up getting more back than they dished out.
     
    Gazelle Punch likes this.
  7. Gazelle Punch

    Gazelle Punch Boxing Addict Full Member

    3,579
    3,828
    Aug 15, 2018
    Some of what you said I agree with some I don’t. Yes only slightly better competition. Archie Moore would be Tysons and Frazier’s second best win. Walcott or Charles would be there third best win. Rocky did lack that top dog killer that the other two do have on their resumes.
    I won’t try to convince you to accept the same standards of compubox that all of them were subject too. It’s your loss. And maybe rewatch some of those fights. He wasn’t easy to hit at all. Had trouble with the ATG Louis jab (which was the only thing working well for him). But that was before prime as was the Layne fight. Even then it’s not like he took a beating. Against Walcott he had that terrible round 1 but regained his composure after that. Against Moore he looked great. Even Archie the man he fought said he was hard to hit. Idk why you’d argue with him.
    As far as Marciano being a “defensive wizard” don’t put words in my mouth. I just said he was a solid defender and better then the names mentioned...which he was. Tysons defense was always good but plenty of people have over rated it.
    Lastly I didn’t bring up age swag did. Was just informing him of the facts. And if we are being honest all those “old” fighters Marciano knocked out were at the top of the field. All coming off solid wins. Let’s not act as if they were retired for two years and made a comeback for a title fight at a late age.
     
    choklab likes this.
  8. choklab

    choklab cocoon of horror Full Member

    24,865
    4,313
    Dec 31, 2009
    people forget that when Tyson fought holyfeild, Evander was coming off a loss to Bowe and a win over an unranked Bobby Cyz. No matter how much further appreciated Evander became, at that point his credentials were not taken seriously. People feared for Evander. Myself included. So the face value of this challenge was low. So sure Tyson fought a Holyfield. He was supposed to win it. Bowe and Moorer had already beat him and he had not looked good in his last fight against cyz. Marciano never fought long enough to be in the desperate position Tyson was challenging Lennox Lewis beyond his prime. What a sad state of affairs that was.

    no Marciano did not fight an Ali or a Foreman. But the equivalent to Ali, a recent former champion, was probably Charles. I think when Foreman lost to Ali, Muhammad was of a similar age and stage of career as Charles was facing Marciano. A legitimate challenger who earned this title fight beating Joe Frazier. Well Charles was legit too. He had beat two legitimate contenders to earn that title shot. And Marciano won that fight. Frazier and Foreman didn’t beat their Ezzard Charles. Rocky did. You can only beat the guy there. And the guy there earned it as much as Ali had.

    Yeah, I don’t think Marciano was ever 33-1 or whatever wide odds Tysin was supposed to be to beat Buster Douglas. I imagine if Marciano was given those kinds of odds to succeed in a title fight he would probably win. I am scratching my head to think who was low enough considered to beat Marciano at those kinds of odds that Tyson had over Douglas. Heinz Neuhaus?



    With Fighters like Tyson Marciano and Frazier the defence is built into the style..a consequence of the offence itself. The question of their ability as defensive fighters is unfair. When they win fights it was because they got hit less than the guy they beat. The question of whom was the greater defensive wizard was posted by a buffoon who is sore that his other poll went the wrong way.

    And so is the number of punches Marciano took in return for landing blows. It’s less than the number of blows Rocky landed on the men he beat and also less than the number of times Frazier and Tyson were hit in title fights.
     
    Last edited: Jan 13, 2021
  9. McGrain

    McGrain Diamond Dog Staff Member

    90,792
    9,516
    Mar 21, 2007
  10. George Crowcroft

    George Crowcroft 'Snarky Little Gobshite' - IntentionalButt Full Member

    20,300
    28,005
    Mar 3, 2019
    GP, I've said my piece on everything you've just wrote. I can only say I completely disagree with almost everything you've said in that post. It's midnight and tbh I couldn't give enough of a **** to actually go into why I disagree. Look after yourself, mate.

    And Choklab, I'm afraid I have a few requirements for dealing with people. The main two being coherency and intellectual honesty. I'm afraid saying Holyfield wasn't a challenge for Tyson even in hindsight definitely violates the second rule. Nor does comparing an old Charles to a prime Ali, or acting as if Buster Douglas wasn't an awesome fighter that night in Tokyo. That said, I hope all is well and carries on to be. Good night.
     
    swagdelfadeel and Gazelle Punch like this.
  11. DanDaly

    DanDaly Member Full Member

    398
    350
    Apr 28, 2020
    Marciano had his moments where he looked better defensively than Tyson and Frazier but overall I don't think he was better defensively than either.
     
    swagdelfadeel likes this.
  12. Soxial experimennt 2.0

    Soxial experimennt 2.0 Trans and proud banned Full Member

    142
    55
    Jan 11, 2021
    well I disagree
     
  13. swagdelfadeel

    swagdelfadeel Boxing Junkie Full Member

    9,428
    3,815
    Jul 30, 2014
    Choklab, not intellectually honest? You're joking right?
     
  14. swagdelfadeel

    swagdelfadeel Boxing Junkie Full Member

    9,428
    3,815
    Jul 30, 2014
    The biggest Crock O ****, I've ever seen on this forum. Frazier's defense got BETTER as the fight went on, not worse, seeing as he needed a couple rounds to hit his stride. For example in the FOTC, Joe slipped about 23 punches in the 14th round, by far the highest slip and duck rate not only in the fight, but the highest I've ever seen (take notes @Gazelle Punch) in heavyweight champions and top fighters.
     
    George Crowcroft likes this.
  15. swagdelfadeel

    swagdelfadeel Boxing Junkie Full Member

    9,428
    3,815
    Jul 30, 2014
    You can't disagree. It's literally on film.
     
    George Crowcroft likes this.