who should rate higher: marciano or foreman?

Discussion in 'World Boxing Forum' started by pelican, Jul 7, 2008.


Page 2 of 3
  1. pelican

    pelican Guest

    and old foreman became a lineal champ again 20 years after he first held the championship. the ali analogy is misleading. true ali wasnt getting any younger when he fought foreman, but he was far from being shot.

    moore, walcott, charles and louis were all shot when they faced rocky.
    and also, joe frazier may be a little short compared to foreman but he was a natural heavy with a very scary left hook (the same left hook that brought younger ali down on the canvass). charles and moore fought their prime at LHW
     
    pelican, Jul 7, 2008
    pelican, Jul 7, 2008
    #16
  2. pelican

    pelican Guest

    a lineal title at the age of 44 should really account for something
     
    pelican, Jul 7, 2008
    pelican, Jul 7, 2008
    #17
  3. PATSYS

    PATSYS Boxing Junkie Full Member

    10,481
    18
    Aug 12, 2004
    They were all old former LHWs with several losses already when they fought Marciano and none of them measure close to a prime undefeated Joe Frazier. Add to the fact that Marciano struggled with them whereas Foreman blased Frazier 2X with absolute ease.
     
    PATSYS, Jul 7, 2008
    PATSYS, Jul 7, 2008
    #18
  4. brown_bomber

    brown_bomber BROWN BOMBER Full Member

    2,973
    0
    Apr 26, 2006
    foreman faced the better opposition
     
    brown_bomber, Jul 7, 2008
    brown_bomber, Jul 7, 2008
    #19
  5. J.R.

    J.R. No Mames Guey Full Member

    15,033
    5
    May 26, 2008
    What's misleading is that you stating that older, yet formidable guys like Walcott, Charles, and Moore were shot. Like Ali these guys were still very formidable men when Marciano faced them. Charles busted up and nearly beat a prime Marciano so I doubt he was anywhere near "shot" as you say.... Walcott was the current reigning champion when Marciano faced him the 1st time, hardly a sign that he was some withered old man when he was the considered the best fighter in the division at the time... and Moore even went on to drop down in weight and succesfully defended his lightheavyweight title, again not the signs of an old shot fighter.

    Those guys, like Ali, were all-time great fighters who themselves were past their best, but defintely not shot at the time they faced Marciano.
     
    J.R., Jul 7, 2008
    J.R., Jul 7, 2008
    #20
  6. Zakman

    Zakman ESB's Chinchecker Full Member

    31,841
    3,074
    Apr 16, 2005
    Foreman
     
    Zakman, Jul 7, 2008
    Zakman, Jul 7, 2008
    #21
  7. sthomas

    sthomas Boxing Addict Full Member

    4,002
    6
    Jul 14, 2007
    Rock>George
     
    sthomas, Jul 7, 2008
    sthomas, Jul 7, 2008
    #22
  8. pelican

    pelican Guest

    those guys couldnt even sustain whatever heat theyd brought on rocky in the opener, thats not shot? they were past their primes when they fought rock. unless your definition of prime is a 38-42 y/o guy who has been into lots of wars.

    that moore could still fight and beat somebody at lighter weights only means hes great at that weight. doesnt mean anything at heavy.
     
    pelican, Jul 7, 2008
    pelican, Jul 7, 2008
    #23
  9. Dempsey1238

    Dempsey1238 Boxing Junkie Full Member

    12,689
    3,511
    Jul 10, 2005
    Moore beat the number 1 rank contender to get rank vs Valez. Moore clean his way to a shot vs Marciano. Hardly signs of a shot fighter. That and Moore was able to stay in the top ten heavyweight contenders when he retire, means in 55, He was a pretty good fighter. May have been Heavyweight champ if Marciano, Patterson or Liston were not around.
     
    Dempsey1238, Jul 7, 2008
    Dempsey1238, Jul 7, 2008
    #24
  10. Rumsfeld

    Rumsfeld Moderator Staff Member

    49,455
    15,724
    Jul 19, 2004
    1. Ali
    2. Louis
    3. Holmes
    4. MARCIANO
    5. FOREMAN
     
    Rumsfeld, Jul 7, 2008
    Rumsfeld, Jul 7, 2008
    #25
  11. pelican

    pelican Guest

    1. louis
    2. dempsey
    3. ali
    4. foreman
    5. johnson
    6. marciano
     
    pelican, Jul 7, 2008
    pelican, Jul 7, 2008
    #26
  12. Brian123

    Brian123 ESB WORLD CHAMPION Full Member

    2,765
    3
    Feb 16, 2008
    Marciano: The fact that he never lost and most "experts" say "well he wasn't really a HW so I don'r rate him" But he sure as hell beat a lot of great HW's!
     
    Brian123, Jul 8, 2008
    Brian123, Jul 8, 2008
    #27
  13. pelican

    pelican Guest

    who were those greats?
     
    pelican, Jul 8, 2008
    pelican, Jul 8, 2008
    #28
  14. McGrain

    McGrain Diamond Dog Staff Member

    112,628
    47,312
    Mar 21, 2007
    Marciano should rate higher, but they are both in the same clutch between 9 and 15 for me.

    But a higher rating for either is easy to justify dependant pon your criteria.
     
    McGrain, Jul 8, 2008
    McGrain, Jul 8, 2008
    #29
  15. fightfan

    fightfan New Member Full Member

    80
    1
    Oct 1, 2007
    A fighter can only be rated based on his fights during his time and Marciano fought anyone who was available to him. He never ducked anyone or lost to anyone and that in itself is a major accomplishment if we look back at all of the other great fighters in all of the other divisions. Somewhere along the line everyone else has lost on a given night, but not Marciano! What was so terrible about his opposition? Joe Louis may have been past his best, but he was on an 8-10 fight win streak going into his fight with Marciano and his wins were against decent to good opposition. And besides Walcott, Charles and Moore, there was LaStarza, Matthews, Layne, and many other tough fighters with very good records.
     
    fightfan, Jul 8, 2008
    fightfan, Jul 8, 2008
    #30
Page 2 of 3