Wladimir Klitschko vs. Rocky Marciano

"His record at lightheavyweight is great"

He was the champion of an unlimited class and outweighed more often than not.

"Wlad is a superheavyweight"

Yeah.

**I don't know what nationality you are, but in American gridiron football the players have gotten so much bigger that almost any team could defeat the best of decades ago. But what is the point? Does a losing team in 2012 become great, good, or even satisfactory, because it could, or at least we judge that it could, defeat a championship team of decades ago.

I just don't find that an acceptable criteria.

**I know someone who is a relative of John Madden. I asked to him to ask Madden if Madden thought a top COLLEGE team today would defeat the Lombardi Packers or the seventies Steelers.

Madden's answer was most likely.

 

I don't really see the relevance of comparing Marciano to the likes of Lennox Lewis and Wladimir Klitschko. Yes, it does concern the weight division without limit, but these are different times we're comparing. Today's athletes are built on better nutrition and healthcare than those who grew up in the 30's. Not to mention all of today's athletes are on a truckload of steroids.

Can I prove that they all are on steroids? No. But let's look at the facts:

• The 80's were full of doping and it wasn't even a secret. Look at the 100m sprint. Ben Johnson was taking pretty much any PED (except HGH which wasn't around yet) and ran an almost impossible 9.83 s. After that, they started testing and the sport was "cleand up". Yet, within 4 years Johnson's superhuman steroid record is pretty much equaled by Carl Lewis, Bailey and Burrel. A few years later, Johnson's record is smashed to pieces and right now we're 30 milliseconds below that which is an insane improvement considering how much harder each next millisecond is. Yet I'm supposed to believe these guys are clean? If someone says he removed the supercharger from his engine, yet he takes 2 seconds off his 1/4 mile drag time, do you believe him?
• Armstrong was strictly and randomly tested and used HGH (Human Growth Hormone), Steroids, EPO, Cortisone, Testosterone and more. Using some many drugs, you won't possibly pass a modern, randomly timed drug test, right? Wrong, he fooled all of us for more than a decade. Testing clean doesn't mean ****. Especially when you're bringing in a shitton of money for the sport; anyone can be bought. The cost of buying drug test people is much less than the cost of losing your cash cow.
• Contrary to what most people think, you don't instantly look like Schwarzenegger when using them. James Toney was caught several times and he's a fat tub of lard. The largest benefit may well be the quick recovery it allows, which means you can train more.
• Athletes are the most competitive guys in the world. I don't believe that they'll give up a great advantage with low risks (in terms of getting caught) to their opponents. Next, it's very widespread. Just look at how many stories there are of high school football players using them.
• They weren't even illegal in the 70's.

 

Perhaps it did but they were not recruited either because of politics, geography or other sporting interests. Marciano was basically a regional fighter for most of his career. When he fought for the title, 31 of his 42 fights were in Rhode Island, the rest all in the US NE. I'll give you New York for being a world class fighting town, but the rest was strictly regional circuit stuff. It's not like he was getting exposed to a vast panoply of heavyweights, just your typical assortment of Carmine's and Vinny's. His true window of world class opposition was just 3 or 4 years.

Contrast this with Wlad who fought his first ex-champ 29 fights in and has been fighting almost exclusively against world class heavies (of modern size) for the intervening 14 years.

Point being is there probably was super-heavy talent out there. Just in this post-war window, it was not being recruited in the right places or it was just an anomaly fortuitous to a fighter of Marciano's physical abilities.

 

He was outweighed in about 60% of his fights and all credit to him regardless of opposition, most heavyweight champions are bigger in the majority of their fights. Although there isn't much in it for the larger part, 10 lb weight discrepancies.

It's not just his size, it's his style, potential for growth even applying modern methods and so on. Because if you start going down the lines of, people have grown due to dietary changes....Then it is impossible to speculate on any fight across era's. His genetics seemed to be indicative of a naturally squat guy, short, arms, legs, wide torso.

Modern sports equate to PED usage. But a bulked up Marciano is not going to be any more effective at closing distance on tall, athletic fighters. If anything it would **** his stamina up and make him slower.

 

It's extremely widespread. 15 year old kids in my gym are using and 90% of the gyms i have trained at, anybody that has been training for more than a few years has used.

It's not even a taboo, steroids were first properly synthesized in the 30's and were being used by athletes on a pretty widespread level in the 50's. This is not a new problem and although i have no interest in it, for recreational purposes i don't see a problem. Sport is another matter, but when you have millions of $ on the line, fame, career and your health, 99% of people will use every advantage imaginable.

No, the largest benefit is quickly building and then maintaining lean muscular weight past your natural platau. Visual is determined by genetics, bodyfat and so on unless on a bodybuilders protocal and then genetics largely don't matter.

But i agree it does make it very difficult to compare across era's due to such factors.

 

"point being is there probably was super-heavy talent out there"

There is absolutely no evidence of this. None at all. The Soviet bloc entered the Olympics in 1952. They were not able to dominate heavyweight boxing. Ed Sanders won the gold in 1952 and did little as a pro, getting killed in the ring. Pete Rademacher won in 1956. He was mediocre as a pro. So basically was the 1960 olympic heavyweight champion Franco DePiccoli.

As boxing was popular in the British Empire, Western Europe, and Latin America, where exactly were the great super-heavyweights hiding?
China?

in the 1950's, 230 lb'ers such as Ernie Stautner and Andy Robustelli were all pro NFL defensive linemen. Let us just say they wouldn't be at that size today. The 1955 Philiadelphia NBA team won with a 6' 7" center.

The argument that athletes haven't gotten bigger simply doesn't wash.

 

growing up in the NY area I have had the experience of being around many different kinds of ethnic groups and I can tell you American Italians and Italians are 2 different types of people. There are many types of Italian Americans ...not all Italians are tough but there are shortish Italians that have freakish strength, I know 2 brothers that are smaller than 5"8 that are legends in the boroughs of NY for there street fighting and are known for there one punch power. I know Italian,Irish,Poles,Germans,Jews of all nations that are tougher than there European cousins... Italian Americans for one have some shorter but wider and heavier boned or steel boned people and some are freakishly strong...they may be 5'8 5'9 and 230 lbs, not always suited for the boxing ring but strong dangerous people...I have also seen tough Jews and Puerto Ricans and Blacks that are small in height but freakish strength.....Northern Americans may not be as tough today as in the last 100 years but have been historically tougher than Europeans

I have to say these days it seems like Europe has a large edge on America today but America mostly dominated in the past 10 decades

 

growing up in the NY area I have had the experience of being around many different kinds of ethnic groups and I can tell you American Italians and Italians are 2 different types of people. There are many types of Italian Americans ...not all Italians are tough but there are shortish Italians that have freakish strength, I know 2 brothers that are smaller than 5"8 that are legends in the boroughs of NY for there street fighting and are known for there one punch power. I know Italian,Irish,Poles,Germans,Jews of all nations that are tougher than there European cousins... Italian Americans for one have some shorter but wider and heavier boned or steel boned people and some are freakishly strong...they may be 5'8 5'9 and 230 lbs, not always suited for the boxing ring but strong dangerous people...I have also seen tough Jews and Puerto Ricans and Blacks that are small in height but freakish strength.....Northern Americans may not be as tough today as in the last 100 years but have been historically tougher than Europeans

I have to say these days it seems like Europe has a large edge on America today but America mostly dominated in the past 10 decades

 

We has gotten soft, we has. Fast food, video games, sense of entitlement... the death of Ronald Reagan... it has led us down the path of perdition. And now we only breed blobs of soft, whining flesh.

 

all kidding aside you may be very right

 

"the death of Ronald Reagan"

Naw. It was the death of the Lone Ranger. When Clayton Moore went, we went.

The only argument you have made that I agree with is that America has gone to pot.

 

"Europe has a large edge on America today"

In boxing for certain.

But I have to say that boxing is not even on most people's radar out here in the west anymore.

 

I know a lot of people look at you like you are crazy if you admit to liking boxing today....I will always enjoy a good fight and I like all sports but nothing beats boxing when you have a great match.

 

Boxing's rarely been on any country's radar since Tyson's heyday. Outside of the odd superfight it's still a niche sport here in the UK. I believe the situation is more or less the same in the rest of Europe.

You're not special in this regard.

 

I live around a large Latino population. They still love the sport.