Wladimir Klitschko vs. Rocky Marciano

"Heavyweights are more widely recruited"

Here is a list from the 1952 Ring rankings of rated and Class A & B fighters--top 100--from outside the USA

Cesar Brion--Argentina
Hein Ten Hoff--Germany
Johnny Williams--UK
Jack Gardner--UK
Omelio Agramonte--Cuba
Karel Sys--Belgium
-----------------
class A (top 50)

Ansell Adams--Trinidad
Reg Andrews--UK
Johnny Arthur--South Africa
Frank Bell--UK
Abel Cestac--Argentina
Arturo Godoy--Chile
Don Scott--UK
Paddy Slavin--Ireland
Piet Wilde--Belgium
Jo Weidin--Austria

Class B (50-100)

Uber Bacilieri--Italy
Gino Buonvino--Italy
Paco Bueno--Spain
Jimmy Carroll--UK
Allan Cooke--UK
Robert Eugene--Belgium
Tommy Farr--UK
Jan Klein--Holland
Wilson Kohlbrecher--Germany
Jack Marr--Australia
Stephane Olek--France
Heinz Neuhaus--Germany
Kurt Schiegl--Austria
Eddie Vann--UK
Werner Wiegand--Luxemburg

Clearly it is a little more than the USA or UK (I will give you credit for meaning the British Empire thus including Canada and Australia)

Top heavyweights were coming from Western Europe and Latin America, and it is certainly possible that both areas were more active boxing centers then than they are now. Not only possible but likely.

One thing to consider is that the world population was much different then than now, with a far higher % of the population in Europe and North America than today.

The 1950's had champions from central Africa (Hogan Bassey) and Asia (Yoshio Sharai) but these areas did not impact heavyweight boxing back then.

**The Soviets and other eastern bloc countries did compete in the Olympics in the 1950's but did not do that well. There is no reason to suspect that there was some great fighter out there but unknown. This argument is the flip side of arguing that the Klitschkos would not be champions if the best American big men were not in the NFL or NBA.

 

"Marciano traveled ONCE to fight outside the eastern US seaboard"

Marciano also traveled to Chicago, and fought twice in Philadelphia, but ten times in NYC.

Of course, remember that the disposition of the population of the US (and also the world was different then). New York City was not only the largest city in the world then, but probably the undisputed boxing capital. Chicago was the second biggest US city. Philadelphia fourth. Actually, as NYC was the world's largest city then, Chicago 8th, and Philly 15th, Marciano fought more fights in the world's 15 or so largest urban centers than the two Klitschko's have together.

And Providence was located directly between NYC and Boston on the heavily populated east coast. I don't think there is any reason to expect Marciano to have a lot of fights somewhere else in the USA, actually. He was fighting where the population and interest in boxing were.

I guess not having a foreign fight is valid enough, but most didn't. I don't think Dempsey or Louis did either, and the few champs who did fought either before or after they were champions. Two reasons--the money was better in the US. And as you pointed out, DQ's were the order of the day in Britain and Europe. Marcel Thil winning fight after fight on questionable fouls probably gave any champion pause about risking a defense for a small potatos purse in Europe.

If Marcel Cerdan did not defend his title in Europe, I don't know if I would score Marciano for the same. Kid Gavilan also fought mainly in the US rather than Cuba, although he did defend once in Havana.

Reason--money, I presume.

and television (and closed circuit) money in Marciano's time was probably restricted mainly to the US.

 

"a bona fide lightheavy in Charles"

So what. This is just the old size thing through the back door. Charles was the heavyweight champion, was taller and had a longer reach than Marciano, and outweighed him in their second bout. Size is not my criteria when going back in history. Charles was as big as many champions, including Cribb, Dempsey, Tunney, etc.

"Walcott--a long, damaging career" "a shot Louis"

Interesting double standard. The 37 yr old Louis and 38 yr old Walcott (and I presume the 38 yr old Moore) supposedly prove Marciano fought in a weak era.

Currently the champions are the soon to be 37 yr old Wlad and the nearly 42 yr old Vitali, and they are not even facing severe challenges from younger men. And, the contenders themselves tend to be old more often than not. Plus when younger Vitali failed in a challenge against the 38 yr old Lewis.

"Wlad and Holy"

Holyfield was the top heavy in the late 1990's and one of the top heavies of the early 2000's. Wlad did not fight him. The excuse can't be that he was too green. He had a pro as long as Marciano when he faced Louis, and had a much better amateur background.

As I posted, for whatever reasons, Wlad did not the face the three best heavies active during his career--Holyfield, Lewis, and Vitali. The reasons for this might be valid, but it is still a fact.

Marciano did face the best of his era and ko'd them.

 

Holy has been shot for most of Wlad's career. It would be a nothing win. It is strange though, Lewis used to get all types of ****, he proceeds to beat shot Holy and Tyson and everyone develops some type of unrequited love for his reign. Lewis was not interested in Wlad at all. So we are left with Vitali, in a sport where you can inflict brain damage on your opponent, i can understand the reticence.

 

Are we talking head to head here? Because size (coupled with skill) is very important if we are. I'll concede your point if we are talking legacy. He fought the best around. I just think the best around at that point were better in name than substance, which brings us to...

We are talking road miles versus highway miles here. Walcott was at the end of a 70 fight career fought under trying circumstances and in which he had been KO'd 6 times by its end. He was barely .500 over his 12 fights previous to Marciano. Charles was 95 fights into a career whose ledger was adorned with Hall of Famers and elite talent. He was on the precipice of a very steep decline after a remarkable run. Louis had no business being in the ring by the time Marciano got to him. He had no right hand and no legs. Marciano faced each of these fresh from hitting practice home runs on the New England circuit against ham and eggers.

As far as Waldo, he is still relatively fresh but near the end. Outside of two of the KO's he has suffered, he stays fairly intact. Still, the end is nearer than most suspect. Vitali should have retired a while ago. He looks like ****.

I don't recall anyone, outside of an increasingly unintelligible Holyfield, calling for a Wlad-Holy fight. If I recall correctly, Lewis chose Vitali over Wlad for an opponent. And the Vitali thing, like I stated earlier, I am a bit on the fence about. I understand them not fighting but it is very convenient, also.

 

"Louis had no business being in the ring"

He was coming off 8 straight wins, and looking at the end of the year ratings for 1951 from the Feb 1952 issue of The Ring, all 8 wins were over top 50 fighters, five over fighters rated at the end of the year (Brion, Agramonte, Bivins) and one over a man who was not only hightly rated, but actually a title claiment (Savold). By modern standards, Louis would have been considered one of the alphabet champions.

Louis never lost to anyone who arguably wasn't at that time the best in the world.

Compared to Louis, how many Klitschko opponents should not have been in the ring with a champion?

Louis had gone back, certainly, and a lot, but he had been the dominant heavyweight for close to 15 years, and was still by ordinary standards a formidable fighter.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Walcott

6 ko defeats--over his career, counting the two by Marciano. Three of those ko's came prior to WWII. Only Louis in their second fight had stopped him since 1940. I would think if he had lost it because of being ko'd, or a tough life, he would never have had his post WWII career.

As for taking all this punishment--Walcott was the sort who took a lot of punishment in fights?

As for his record--since 1947 he had lost to Louis (2), Charles (2), and Layne, but the majority thought Walcott deserved the first fight with Louis, and he split four fights with Charles. So he basically pretty much fought on even terms with Louis and Charles.

The only hard to explain loss since 1946 was the upset to Layne, for what it is worth.

Walcott was coming off two victories over Charles, was the incumbent champion, and looked good against Marciano in 1952.

Going into the Marciano fight Walcott had been stopped once in the previous 12 years (by Louis). Going back 12 years from today, Wlad has been stopped twice (by Sanders and Brewster)
--------------------------------------------------------------------

Charles had gone back, and it is a legitimate question how much, but he was still coming off two impressive ko's and was ranked the #1 contender.

---------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Marciano just isn't proven against super heavyweight fighters. Had he fought and destroyed Valdes we might have a better idea as he was big with a solid jab.

Dempsey, Frazier, and Louis these guys did beat super heavyweights so I can understand those who favour them over Wlad but the same can't be said for Rocky. It's like comparing fighters from different weight classes and it's too much of a leap of faith.

I don't agree that Wlad is greater yet but I think history will remember him as the greater heavyweight. he'll probably stay champ until he's 40 racking up victories over ranked contenders.

 

Nobody is talking about other HWs. This thread is about Wlad. No blueprint exsits on how he beats an elite level boxer let alone AN ATG. Its a matter of styles and Marciano was a stylelistic nightmare for Wlad and his extremely low level of punch resistance.

 

wlad and rocky are essentially from differing weight classes. Wlad is from a weight class Rocky is unproven in. I just don't see him beating the much bigger and much heavier man and I saw nothing in his career suggesting he would do so.

 

Bryd, Haye, Chambers were all elite level boxers.

 

I disagree with you about Valdes.

He had four fights with Moore, Johnson, and Satterfield, all smaller than Marciano, and went 0-4.

I just don't think Valdes was all that good and so a victory by Marciano over him would hardly prove anything in comparision to Wlad or Vitali.

Valdes was big, but not bigger really than Louis and not as good a fighter, even the Louis of 1951.

----------------------------------------------------------------

As for Wlad's historical rating, I currently have him 9th, and he could move up a few notches if he continues, as you say, to win. I also think he might well be able to hold the title into his forties.

But I don't know if these sort of contenders he is fighting recently will really look all that good historically. Thompson? Two shots at the title?

I don't know how history will judge, and history is always contentious, but I think he will have a tough time pushing into the top five regardless of his eventual longevity because of not beating the other top guys out there, Lewis and Vitali, and the bad defeats when young.

But we shall see--not me, but the younger folks who will live enough to read an historical judgement.

 

Quite often I post from memory and not boxrec which means I make errors. I thought Valdes was big enough to consider a shw, if I'm wrong then fair enough. But my main point is Rocky has very little evidence of his effectiveness against the truly big men. Valdes was bigger and gives a bit more indication I feel.

I doubt Wlad will ever come near Louis, Ali nor Lewis. But Rocky, Johnson, Tyson, Foreman, Frazier, Holmes, these guys he can overtake in my opinion. I don't hold the Vitali situation against him and whilst he never fought Lewis when younger it was because he couldn't generate the money of Tyson, didn't become a mandatory with the WBC and perhaps most importantly got iced by Sanders. He'd have been iced by Lewis as well. However from 05 onwards he's begun to really clean house. Victories over Povetkin and Arreola would underline that status. As long as he continues to defend against the best available opposition his legacy will grow.

 

Thats just ridiculousness. I seen Rocky pummell bigger guys with a nonstop attack that only gained momentum as the rounds past. Wlad being bigger isn't going to shield him from the brutal assualt Rocky would be bringing him. You neglect the body attack. Have you ever taken shots to the body? I have, by a trainer who was almost a pro. Its sickening. Brewster ****ed Wlad up by going downstairs. I counted only 3 body shot s landed within the first 3 rounds and Wlad was visibly panting in his corner. Rocky chops him down inside where he has no power or inside game.

 

That's the problem, getting inside. Brewster took Wlad's legs with a left hook to the head if i remember rightly, Brewster was a big puncher. It's not impossible, but you are disregarding the danger of Wlad's offence and how much his range keeping and movement to that end has improved.

 

How old are you again, 16?