Who has the better 49-0, Rocky or Floyd?

Take an educated guess...

 

Charles? Way Past his prime?

 

Exactly!!!

 

Howitzer vs. a Pea Shooter...

 

The top wins argument is a stretch.

 

I think it's a solid argument.
Marciano's best wins are strangely dismissed these days. Strange, because the actual all-time ratings of the men he beat haven't diminished. E.Charles, for example, had risen in stature over the years, regarded as a top 10, often top 5 pound-for-pounder all-time. Moore is regarded as a top 20 or top 15 often.
They may have been ageing but they were still formidable. And Marciano battered them painfully. And, no, Marciano wasn't significantly bigger than them, if at all. So, for Rocky, such wins should mean A LOT in the all-time stakes.

 

Pacquiao and Marquez cancel them out. Create a heavyweight version of Corrales and you're left with a monster.

 

If Floyd gets his 50-0 fighting Coor McGregor I'd argue that it's actually minus points.

 

They were certainly good wins.. But I don't award as much credit for them as you and some others do. For one thing I don't rate Joe Walcott terribly high to begin with, and he was long past his better days with 70 hard fights, was now 37-38 years old and in the last couple bouts of his career. The Ezzard Charles who fought Rocky in 1954 wasn't the Cincinnati Cobra who people saw tearing up the division from 1947-1951. He was now 33 years old, had lost two of his last four fights, had about 90 bouts worth of mileage behind him and was on the cusp of a very steep downward fall. Mind you these men only took center stage after Louis got old and fell off the mountain, and both gave Mariano all he could handle. Archie Moore was 38-39 and fluctuating drastically in weight over short time periods. He went from weighing 196 in his May 1955 with Valdez to 175 a month later with Bobo Olson, then BACK up to 188 in september with Marciano. Not especially ideal or healthy, particularly for an aging fighter entering the ring with the heavyweight champion.

 

Charles. Way past his prime.

 

Floyd received gifts and won many of his fights in unconvincing fashion. He also ducked his way through the last half of his career and even then what was his KO percentage? I don't believe Rocky ducked anyone let alone half his career.

Two different careers but I prefer the warrior who fights and beats the best in exciting fights over a cherry picker who had so many advantages on his side in terms of weight and testing yet still struggled to do any damage to his foes in the most boring fights.

 

Well maybe that is part of the problem though i.e. you not rating Walcott very high. Even the lists in that thread about the greatest ever HW as of 75, you see JWW name on some of those lists. Granted, I don't agree with all the lists myself, but it certainly needs to be an indicator that it's plausible he was that good. He's beaten names like Charles x2, Bivins, Harold Johnson, Elmer Ray, Joey Maxim, Lee Murray. Then when you add in the likely victory over Joe Louis, it just gets all the more better. Having those names on one's resume, makes it odd you don't rate him terribly high, but hey, to each there own I guess.

 

No they don't, Pac was hurt for that fight and on the downside of his career as well. Marquez LOL, I'm assuming you believe the fight took place at Marquez' best weight and he looked good in there amirite? Corrales is like the Lee Murray really

 

I can agree with this sentiment.
The biggest example that sticks with me is the De La Hoya fight.
That was prime Mayweather, no excuses, favourite to win, in an absolute showcase fight against a huge name, past-prime ATG.
For me, that was a VERY "unconvincing" performance.
A huge rematch was there on the table for him too but he left it alone, announced his retirement.

 

FOH LOL