Why does Rocky Marciano rank so high to many of you?

I rate him about eleventh on my all time heavy list. I think that his unbeaten record gives him a mystique.

 

Because he beat all his top contenders/champions, he cleaned out the division and alongside Joe Louis was the first man to really do this - Johnson/Dempsey/Jeffries/Tunney/Willard etc all avoided top contenders, Rocky didn't.

He beat 2 top20 of all time HWs in Walcott and Charles twice, they were both near their best. Beat Archie Moore who was number 1 contender dominating him past his own prime. Beat Louis who while not as good as he was, was still top5 in the world. Beat Lastarza/Layne/Matthews/Cockell who were all top contenders

Yes the raw back is he wasn't at the top for long - only 4years. But he did a fair bit in those 4years.

He was ofcourse very dominant - even if he did lose to LaStarza in a close 1 he avenged it brutally. The likes of Foreman, Liston and Frazier can't claim this type of dominance

Not top5 legacy wise but top10 for sure

 

Because these people did their homework. :thumbsup

 

He cleaned out a division, fair enough it inst the greatest division, whilst remaining undefeated.

 

Because he was an ass beater who fought real fighters, experienced guys with boxing skill, experience, and talent, all of the best of the era, and beat them. Guys like Charles, Walcott, and Moore were beautiful boxers with speed, footwork, pop in their blows, timing, ring generalship, and vast experience in an era where they weren't protected and fought everyone, often multiple times. Those guys came to fight Marciano in top shape and age did not matter. Walcott was one of those guys who actually got better with age and experience, not worse. Moore too. Calling these guys old is like calling Bernard Hopkins and Vitaly Klitschko old and past it. Say that after Bernard whipped Trinidad and Pavlik. All those guys were craftsman who stayed in shape, beat top contenders, and had phenomenal bodies. Overcoming those guys was no easy task. Just watch the video of Marciano-Walcott I and tell me Walcott is old and past it. Hell no! He's sharper and in better shape than 100% of today's light heavyweights, cruiserweights, and heavyweights. I don't see one guy out there who is as fast, as busy, with the footwork, timing, and pacing that Walcott had in that fight.

Just look at the experience of the guys he fought, and in an era when they had to take real fights, and fight all the time. At the time Marciano fought them, Ted Lowry had over 100 pro fights, Phil Muscato had 76 pro fights, Roland LaStarza was 37-0, Bill Wilson had over 50 fights, Rex Layne was 34-1-2, Louis was still beating top 10 contenders and had a 66-2 record, Lee Savold had 136 fights, Bernie Reynolds was 51-9-1, Harry Matthews was 81-3-5, Walcott had 69 pro fights, LaStara was 53-3 when he fought for the title, Ezzard Charles had 94 fights, even Don Cockell was 66-11-1, and Moore had 148 wins. Today a majority of contenders are lucky if they have 20-30 fights of experience and probably five or less were against actual live bodies that could fight back. That was an era of really tough fighters.

 

Do your homework then rethink your opinion.

 

Johnson's, Dempsey's respective heavyweight divisions were wretched but it doesn't stop people from ranking them so highly.

 

To be fair to you mate, i too used to wonder that but the more ive read up on him,watched him fighting and heard from his peers, ive formed a different opinion, not much mind. He is not top 3 IMO but is top 10 for sure. Rocky was a very tough nut to crack, he used his supposed disadvantages to his advantage. He was determined,resilient and never let up for a minute. His opponents were constantly put under huge pressure from the get go, and for the full 3 minutes of a round,every round. In fact, there are fewer less desirable wishes than to have Marciano standing across the ring from you chomping at the bit. Not only could he punch but he hit you everywhere, arms,body,head,chest anywhere at all until he ground an opponent down. He dominated an era that, whilst certainly not the best, was certainly not the weakest either. If i were you id go back and watch a few more of his fights and just study his game cos, believe me, hes better than you think:good

 

Marciano was phenomenal.
Let's ask Ali if he agrees.

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GDaw2QFC1Qg[/ame]

 

Foreman,Liston and Frazier could have attained the dominance that Rocky attained though. If it had n't have been for Muhammad Ali.

 

The educated boxing minds that I know always rated Marciano high, I have to admit after years of hearing and reading and watching my boxing senses grew and I was able to recognize the subtle skills and obvious strengths of the man not to mention his God-given freakish gifts ....I do not think we will ever see another...Marciano was a true Super- freak-ATG

Ali was being honest, I spoke to him one time many years ago about Marciano and he said it was one thing watching from outside the ring and another inside and it sure was not pretty being inside the ring with Marciano.....In the video above he said you can not teach these kids to fight like Marciano and that is the KEY....God Given-and Charlie Goldman taught

 

I have him at #3 in my heavyweight all time great list. Behind Ali and Louis.
While he may not have been the most skilled heavyweight, he had skills don't get me wrong. While his skills get underrated there are heavys with better skills. The thing is results matter a lot to me when I rank boxers. Marciano's results place him high in my rankings. He went undefeated 49-0 and beat a crop of very good oppoents. Some of them may have been past thei best years, but they were far from washed up.

 

You know, I do believe after the first two on most of our list, the rest of the top ten in many orders with several different faces are very rationally arguable.

 

There would have been a Leotis Martin,A Jimmy Young or an Ezzard Charles