Was the 50s a weak era for HW boxing?

When Marciano retired in April 1956 at 49-0 with 43 KO's...Liston was 14-1...not a ranked fighter...and was going to prison. He wouldn't step into the ring again until 1958...Marciano feared no one son! Do some research...

 

I wouldn’t say “ weak “ is the right word but there have been a few eras that were significantly stronger.

 

No. The opposite. The competition was actually very tough.

In the 50’s there was no cruiserweight division splitting the division in half, only one belt, and the good paydays were few and far between, so there were a lot of hungry heavyweight contenders.

 

Partial...

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

 

Yeah, but if you're looking at when they peaked you're basically down to Rocky and Floyd. And even Floyd's peak is arguably in the early 60's.

Louis, Liston, Ali, Holmes, Tyson, Holy, Lewis, Wlad, Vitaly, Foreman all straddled three decades (well, Foreman straddled four actually), so if you count it that way every decade is pretty much going to be stacked with ATGs.

So I think it's more useful to look at when they peaked.

 

But did he think Rocky Marciano Kos Ali in 13 ??

 

Dude, Rocky Marciano is a TV character played by Sylvester Stalloa.

 

Sorry mate I tried catching you out
No flies on you Boxy box set!

 

Well Marciano dabbled with a comeback against Patterson and decided against it. Had he came back against Liston he'd have been executed.

 

Yes.

The era had depth and it was the hardest era to get a title shot because of the IBC and Walcott and Charles getting rematches. But that doesn't make it not the worst HW era. Since 1905 anyway.

50s is in the convo for the most depth with the 40s and 80s but if that depth wouldn't do good in other eras what does it really mean?