Marciano vs. Norton

[laxpdx]

Would Rocky be successful in an all out attack vs. the man who broke Ali's jaw?

[Muchmoore]

Marciano would grind him down and take him out around 7. Norton would have more success than he did against Foreman, Shavers but the end result would be the same.

[RockyJim]

The Rock by KO.....too many guns for Norton...

[SuzieQ49]

Pre 1953 Slugger Version of Marciano knocks Norton out in 1-2 rounds. The 1954-55 Swarmer version of marciano has a little bit more trouble, but gets the job down by the 10-12th round.

[Hydraulix]

^^Do you know why Rocky became a volume puncher later in his career? I've always wondered this.

[MrMarvel]

If Walcott could extend Marciano for 12 rounds, indeed dropping him and winning the most rounds, a shot Charles could take Rocky 15 rounds, and Moore could drop Marciano and give him some scary moments, it's pushing it to think Marciano beats a big powerful and accomplished heavyweight like Norton. Norton defeated Ali, destroyed Quarry and Bobick, outboxed Young, and gave Holmes a real struggle. Norton was destroyed by megapunchers like Foreman, Shavers, and Cooney, but Marciano was not on that level of power. Marciano generally needed an accumulation of punches. Norton could take a shot. I would pick Norton for an inside the distance win, probably inside of six.

[SuzieQ49]

O dear god, here we go again

[djanders]

I liked watching Ken fight, but, in a series of 10 fights, Rocky Marciano would knock out Ken Norton 10 times...in my opinion. Not a good match-up for Ken.

[MrMarvel]

Folks are way too happy on Marciano here. It's a different class between Norton and Marciano.

[mcvey]

If Walcott could extend Marciano for 12 rounds, indeed dropping him and winning the most rounds, a shot Charles could take Rocky 15 rounds, and Moore could drop Marciano and give him some scary moments, it's pushing it to think Marciano beats a big powerful and accomplished heavyweight like Norton. Norton defeated Ali, destroyed Quarry and Bobick, outboxed Young, and gave Holmes a real struggle. Norton was destroyed by megapunchers like Foreman, Shavers, and Cooney, but Marciano was not on that level of power. Marciano generally needed an accumulation of punches. Norton could take a shot. I would pick Norton for an inside the distance win, probably inside of six.

Norton could take a shot? Not without going down he couldnt.Marciano stops the body beautiful as ALL big punchers did.

[BITCH ASS]

Folks are way too happy on Marciano here. It's a different class between Norton and Marciano.

You do realize that Rocky punched so hard that he busted up the blood vessels and broke bones in LaStarza's arms as well as had several one punch knock outs, yet his power is overrated?

[he grant]

Actually a very interesting match up as Norton did freeze against huge punchers like Foreman, Shavers and Cooney. He was also once stopped by Jose Luis Garcia, another explosive puncher ...

Norton also had the size and skills to bust up Marciano as well if he got his jab working and did not freeze out of the gate. Marciano was much smaller than Ken and not a fast starter and all this adds to an interesting match up ...

I really feel that this is a fighter that could play out many ways ... on a one shot I'd pick Rocky but he'd definately have to be the guy that fought Charles the second time and not the one that fought Cockell ...

[PowerPuncher]

You do realize that Rocky punched so hard that he busted up the blood vessels and broke bones in LaStarza's arms as well as had several one punch knock outs, yet his power is overrated?

You mean BRUISED, thats what broke blood vessels are :lol: And I don't think there were any evidense he broke LaStarzas arm, although I could break a mans arm with 1shot if I have it placed in the right place, doesn't make me Ernie Shavers does it?

[SuzieQ49]

You mean BRUISED, thats what broke blood vessels are And I don't think there were any evidense he broke LaStarzas arm, although I could break a mans arm with 1shot if I have it placed in the right place, doesn't make me Ernie Shavers does it?


Marciano officially chipped bones in his elbows and broken blood vessels in Lastarza's forearms. His broken blood vessels in his forearms turned into hardened clots. It basically ruined lastarza as a fighter. I did in depth research on this a while back, and this is the scientific evidence that was found after the fight. so even though lastarza did not suffer broken bones, he still suffered DEVASTATING injuries.

[MrMarvel]

Norton could take a shot? Not without going down he couldnt.Marciano stops the body beautiful as ALL big punchers did.

Right. He was hit on the money by Ali, Holmes, and Quarry and didn't go down. Not once. Stop exaggerating. It ruins your credibility.

[MrMarvel]

You do realize that Rocky punched so hard that he busted up the blood vessels and broke bones in LaStarza's arms as well as had several one punch knock outs, yet his power is overrated?

Knocking out Harry Matthews with one punch is not an accomplishment.

Hammering Don Cockell for 11 rounds and relying on the ref to save the man is not an impressive display of one-punch power. That fight if any any reveals the myth of Rocky's vaunted punching power. It wasn't like Cockell was a Jake LaMotta. Nowhere close.

Lee Savold had to be saved. Marciano couldn't put him away. I could keep going. We all could - if we are honest with ourselves.

Marciano did not have one-punch power. He never did. He was a swarmer. He needed to beat people up. He wouldn't have a chance to do this against Norton.

Don't confuse Marciano with a Foreman or a Shavers. Different type of punching power. Indeed, different size fighter. Marciano, 5'10" 185 lbs looks great against similarly small heavyweights. He isn't having success against big powerful heavyweights like Norton.

Different era. Different abilities. Different levels.

[la-califa]

barring a victory by cut. Norton likes to mix it up a little too much. Rocky would definatly catch Ken early & put him away. But Marciano would KNOW he was in a fight! All action while it lasts.

[la-califa]

Knocking out Harry Matthews with one punch is not an accomplishment.

Hammering Don Cockell for 11 rounds and relying on the ref to save the man is not an impressive display of one-punch power. That fight if any any reveals the myth of Rocky's vaunted punching power. It wasn't like Cockell was a Jake LaMotta. Nowhere close.

Lee Savold had to be saved. Marciano couldn't put him away. I could keep going. We all could - if we are honest with ourselves.

Marciano did not have one-punch power. He never did. He was a swarmer. He needed to beat people up. He wouldn't have a chance to do this against Norton.

Don't confuse Marciano with a Foreman or a Shavers. Different type of punching power. Indeed, different size fighter. Marciano, 5'10" 185 lbs looks great against similarly small heavyweights. He isn't having success against big powerful heavyweights like Norton.

Different era. Different abilities. Different levels.:lol: Tell that to Joe Walcott, Rocky almost tore the poor guys head off!

[SuzieQ49]

Quarry was a fat way out of shape shot fighter when he fought norton, i believe he also took the fight on one weeks notice....207lb he looked soft as hell. that beating he took from frazier in 74 really took alot out of him.

[SuzieQ49]

Marciano did not have one-punch power. He never did.

Tell that to Rex Layne and Jersey Joe Walcott.

Rex Layne? 34-1 22 year old top contender who took bob satterfields best punches. One Right hand from rocky knocked Layne out cold, and sheered his front teeth off at the nubs.

Jersey Joe Walcott, heavyweight champion, fought a long list of heavyweight punchers 1944-1953 and only ATG louis had knocked him out prior....marciano did the job with one right hand.

[SuzieQ49]

For those that question Laynes chin

[Only registered and activated users can see links]

[SuzieQ49]

Knocking out Harry Matthews with one punch is not an accomplishment.

No? Harry Kid was 81-3 and had never been down for the 10 count before in his whole career. just two short left hooks did the trick. I think that is an accomplishment.


Joe Louis was 6'2 214lb, he had not been down once since his comeback, and not been knocked out in 12 years and had 35lb advantage on Rock, and Rock knocked him out cold.

[MrMarvel]

:lol: Tell that to Joe Walcott, Rocky almost tore the poor guys head off!

That was the fifth time Walcott had been knocked out. It wasn't a feat. Walcott was tricky and that allowed him to survive. But caught cleanly, he could be taken out. Six times he couldn't beat the count. Bad metric for pumping up Rocky.

[MrMarvel]

And he was a goner. People felt sorry for Louis at that point. So what if Rocky knocked him out? How many times was Louis down anyway? Hell, Max Schmeling knocked out Louis in his prime. Bad example.

Harry Matthews wasn't a real heavyweight. Good Lord, he only weighed 179 for the Marciano fight! Marciano weighed in at one of his all-time highs, over 187 lbs. In his loss to Don Cockell, Matthews was dropped three times. Yeah, he was pretty solid at light heavyweight. Not at heavyweight. We can say the same about Foster (and he was a hell of a lot better than Matthews). Does it blow your mind that Frazier and Ali blew away Foster? It don't faze me.

Please keep bringing up these examples! You're winning my argument for me!

[ChrisPontius]

Pre 1953 Slugger Version of Marciano knocks Norton out in 1-2 rounds. The 1954-55 Swarmer version of marciano has a little bit more trouble, but gets the job down by the 10-12th round.

I would honestly be surprised if he makes it to the 10th round, whether it's the swarming Marciano or not. Norton didn't like pressure and that's what he was all about.

[BITCH ASS]

Mr. Marvel, you do realize that size doesn't necessarily determine punching power, don't you?

In fact, often times it doesn't.

[BITCH ASS]

And he was a goner. People felt sorry for Louis at that point. So what if Rocky knocked him out? How many times was Louis down anyway? Hell, Max Schmeling knocked out Louis in his prime. Bad example.

Harry Matthews wasn't a real heavyweight. Good Lord, he only weighed 179 for the Marciano fight! Marciano weighed in at one of his all-time highs, over 187 lbs. In his loss to Don Cockell, Matthews was dropped three times. Yeah, he was pretty solid at light heavyweight. Not at heavyweight. We can say the same about Foster (and he was a hell of a lot better than Matthews). Does it blow your mind that Frazier and Ali blew away Foster? It don't faze me.

Please keep bringing up these examples! You're winning my argument for me!

Walk into a gym and you'll see a lot of big guys that can't hit worth shit, and then a guy maybe 160 lbs that sounds like he's shootin off fire *******s.

[BITCH ASS]

You mean BRUISED, thats what broke blood vessels are :lol: And I don't think there were any evidense he broke LaStarzas arm, although I could break a mans arm with 1shot if I have it placed in the right place, doesn't make me Ernie Shavers does it?

Prove it.........

I want it on film.

[diamondDave]

Norton froze against really big punchers. I think the Rock takes him out in three. Rocky's right hand was legendary and combined with his iron chin and will would be enough to win this fight.

Marciano ko3 Norton

[PowerPuncher]

Prove it.........

I want it on film.

Bring your arm and a video camera :D

[BITCH ASS]

Bring your arm and a video camera :D

:lol:

[MrMarvel]

Mr. Marvel, you do realize that size doesn't necessarily determine punching power, don't you?

In fact, often times it doesn't.

Oh boy, now, "doesn't necessarily" is a way out of the point. It's a way out of just about every point. Very few things are ever absolute. Some small men can punch harder than some big men. On average, a bigger man can generate more force. On average a bigger man who knows how to balance himself is harder to knock down. These are not controversial points. The impact of size and mass is why we have weight classes. If size and mass were irrelevant, then we wouldn't need weight classes. Very few people today would regard Marciano a heavyweight, and unless he packed on a shitload of pounds, he wouldn't be competing for the heavyweight title. Are you seriously going to deny any of this?

Marciano proved he was not a one-punch knockout artist. He generally needed an accumulation of punches. Everybody who knows anything about Marciano's style and record knows this is a true statement. I don't know why people are trying to deny it. Well, I do know why, but spin is never legitimate.

Norton was a bigger, stronger, and better heavyweight than Marciano. Marciano would not have been competitive in the 1970s. Norton was. Norton batters Marciano.

[Seamus]

It's a different class between Norton and Marciano.

Even a broken clock is right twice a day.

[PowerPuncher]

1 thing I hate in every Norton match up is 'Norton loses by KO in 1-3rounds he has no chin'. Do people seriously believe Holmes and Ali can't punch? I wouldn't be suprised if both hit as hard as Marciano when they sit on their shots with their greater speed and weight behind their punches. Norton went 54 rounds with them. Lets not forget Norton with a bit of luck could be 4-0 against Ali and Holmes

Lets also not forget Norton was 36 against Shavers and 38 against Cooney, visably not the same fighter and possibly doen before he got in the ring with either

[PowerPuncher]

Just to add I'm not saying Norton beats Marciano but he might do his size/strength/skill/athleticism would all be tough for Rocky.

1 thing that ticked me off was the SHWs versus Norton thread with people picking some real bums over him

[natonic]

Marciano would KO Norton in the middles rounds for all the reasons previously stated.

[SuzieQ49]

Marciano proved he was not a one-punch knockout artist.


I am sure Rex Layne would disagree with you.

[mcvey]

Right. He was hit on the money by Ali, Holmes, and Quarry and didn't go down. Not once. Stop exaggerating. It ruins your credibility.

I said all big punchers floored Norton ,find me one who didnt .Ali and Holmes do not qualify.
Dont say Quarry he was fat and finished.
By the way Joe Walcott said on TV that Marciano had better one shot power than Joe Louis ,and he said it when he was sitting next to Louis ,you can find it on You Tube.
Dont worry about my credibility ,you have yours to earn yet .

[SuzieQ49]

Do people seriously believe Holmes and Ali can't punch? I wouldn't be suprised if both hit as hard as Marciano when they sit on their shots

I stopped reading your post after this one. This is not only laughable, but preposterous as well. The only fighters Norton fought that were on the same level of punching power and finishing ability as marciano were Foreman, Shavers, Cooney..They all knocked norton out in 1-2 rounds. The next biggest puncher Norton faced, 188lb Jose Luis Garcia knocked norton out flat on his back in 8 rounds. Let me say in terms of brute power, Marciano was alot closer to foreman,cooney, and shavers than Ali and Holmes were to Marciano.

[Sardu]

This is disaster for Norton. See the Foreman, Shavers and Cooney fights although Rocky did not usually start as fast as those guys did.

Marciano KO 3

[SuzieQ49]

The pre 1953 Marciano who was fighting all the time and less rusty, was actually a pretty fast starter and had alot of early round knockouts...partly due to lack of competition, but more so because he was alot fresher younger and had more snap on his punches. Layne Vingo Matthews Reynolds all didnt make it past round 6 vs Rock, and Louis was nearly knocked out at the end of round 1 by a marciano right hand.


When Marciano changed his style in 1953, he lost his one punch knockout power. Still a deadly accumalitve puncher, but not the one punch knockout artist who knocked layne and walcott out cold with 1 punch.

[MrMarvel]

The problem with Marciano threads is the lack of historical perspective. When you have some, the idea that the man who gave all-time greats Ali and Holmes fits would suffer a knockout defeat at the hands of a fighter like Marciano sounds strange.

If Marciano had been around in the 1970s, he likely would have been instructed to lose weight and compete at light heavyweight. That wouldn't have been hard given his frame. He ate like an animal during training to keep his weight up, which was still only around the mid-180 lbs range. He couldn't have packed much more weight on given that frame. He would have been swimming in a world with fighters who were 6'1"-6"4" weighing 200-225 lbs, with better skills. It would be irresponsible to throw him into that environment, the same environment in which Ken Norton thrived.

Rocky would still have trouble, though, at least in the first half of the 1970s, given than Bob Foster was the reigning light heavyweight champ. But I think Marciano would have been competitive in the division. Many of his opponents back in the day were light heavyweights. Cockell. Matthews. Charles. Moore. It was a different time. Rocky would still have been a great draw. They make great story lines, which is, if we admit it, the reason why we still talk about Marciano.

Norton is underrated as a heavyweight. He was blown out by George Foreman, but then so was Frazier. Foreman was just a tremendous fighter. He would have completely dominated Marciano's time period. In the other common case, we see that Norton gave Ali more trouble than Frazier did. Once Ali had figured out Frazier and stopped playing, he won convincingly. Norton came very close to defeating Ali the two times he lost, and Ali wasn't playing around with Norton. How can anybody seriously make an argument that Marciano blows away a guy Ali and Holmes struggle with? Sorry to sound like Mr. Spock, but it's just not logical.

Norton was almost 38 years old for the Cooney fight, and Cooney was a monster puncher. He was almost 36 for Shavers, another monster puncher. Shavers didn't get his reputation for nothing. These were end of career losses.

Before that, excluding the Foreman fight, Norton was only stopped once, and that was a strange affair. It was his 17th pro fight, and he had his opponent, Garcia busted up (eye swollen, face bloody), but was hurt in the eighth round with a punch after the bell. Without allowing his corner time to manage the situation, the referee waived off the fight. We were stunned when it happened. Norton avenged the loss, but Garcia was no longer a top flight fighter by that point so I can't give Norton much credit for that. Compare Norton's early career with, for example, Walcott's, and its stellar.

When Norton entered the ring against Ali for the world title, he had won 37 fights, including wins over Ali and Quarry, against three losses, one early in his career, the other two against Ali and Foreman. He was the outstanding challenger for the world title. He was tested. And he almost won the fight against Ali. Some think he did. After that he defeated Young and gave Holmes fits. It was an impressive career.

Part of the reason why people think Marciano has a chance is because they devalue Norton's career. This fault combines with falsely inflating Marciano's abilities. The result is a bad conclusion.

[SuzieQ49]

If Marciano had been around in the 1970s, he likely would have been instructed to lose weight and compete at light heavyweight. That wouldn't have been hard given his frame. He ate like an animal during training to keep his weight up, which was still only around the mid-180 lbs range. He couldn't have packed much more weight on given that frame.

Wrong. Marciano naturally weighed well over 200lb, and was training like a maniac to keep his weight under 190lb, he was cutting alot of weight to get down there his brother told me. Rocky himself said in his biography "I was never a big eater". Rocky could never have made 175lb without killing himself. In rockys amatuer fights, in his eearly 20s he was weighing over 200lb.

[groove]

Norton is a lot better than most of the opponents Marciano fought so it won't be that easy for him as many of these posts suggest. I think he had the right style to defeat Norton but he was a lot bigger than 179 pound guys like Harry kid and fought much bigger heavies - Ali, Foreman, Holmes etc. Is that correct? only 179 pounds in the heavy division. Look at what happened to the great light heavy champ Bob Foster when he moved up against real good heavies. Frazier destroyed him and Ali played games with him.

[dezbeast]

When he was past his peak, Norton took some heavy shot's from hard hitting Cobb and still went on to win. Although I can't ignore Norton's loss to Garcia, after factoring a number of things, I still believe that a prime Marciano would get destroyed by a prime Norton.

[rodney]

If Walcott could extend Marciano for 12 rounds, indeed dropping him and winning the most rounds, a shot Charles could take Rocky 15 rounds, and Moore could drop Marciano and give him some scary moments, it's pushing it to think Marciano beats a big powerful and accomplished heavyweight like Norton. Norton defeated Ali, destroyed Quarry and Bobick, outboxed Young, and gave Holmes a real struggle. Norton was destroyed by megapunchers like Foreman, Shavers, and Cooney, but Marciano was not on that level of power. Marciano generally needed an accumulation of punches. Norton could take a shot. I would pick Norton for an inside the distance win, probably inside of six.

Walcott and Moore both much better fighters than Norton.
Norton did not have much of a defence or chin.
He wouldnt be competative against the Rock.
Norton KO by Marciano in 2 rounds (at the most).

[PowerPuncher]

I stopped reading your post after this one. This is not only laughable, but preposterous as well. The only fighters Norton fought that were on the same level of punching power and finishing ability as marciano were Foreman, Shavers, Cooney..They all knocked norton out in 1-2 rounds. The next biggest puncher Norton faced, 188lb Jose Luis Garcia knocked norton out flat on his back in 8 rounds. Let me say in terms of brute power, Marciano was alot closer to foreman,cooney, and shavers than Ali and Holmes were to Marciano.

Marciano isnt in the same dimension as Shavers/Foreman, hes an accumulation puncher, he could bang to a degree but at 185lbs his biggest strength was accumulation and stamina, which isn't necessarily a knock as hard hitting accumulation can do some serious damage. He wasn't an explosive puncher but he was a strong puncher.

As for Ali and Holmes, Ali is the only man to KO Foreman out of Frazier, Holyfield, Moorer, Lyle. And when Holmes sits on his right hand it can smash an opponent nicely

The Cooney and Garcia losses are irrelevant to a prime Norton who ofcourse beat Garcia and ALi.

Not to mention its not unfeesable both Foreman and Shavers may KO Marciano himself early

[PowerPuncher]

Wrong. Marciano naturally weighed well over 200lb, and was training like a maniac to keep his weight under 190lb, he was cutting alot of weight to get down there his brother told me. Rocky himself said in his biography "I was never a big eater". Rocky could never have made 175lb without killing himself. In rockys amatuer fights, in his eearly 20s he was weighing over 200lb.

Your full of shit because Marciano's bodyfat in the ring looked to be around 12-15%. If he was leaner you'd see much more definition, he doesn't even have solid upper abbs definition let alone lower abbs, so probably 15%. Thats all fine because boxing isn't bodybuilding but Marciano wasn't a 200lb fighter as he wasn't particularly lean at 180lbs at 200lbs he'd be well overweight. He was a very fit and stong 180lb fighter though.

The 185lb Rocky could easily have made 175lbs by losing bodyfat and dehydrating to make weight, he could easily lose 10lbs in water alone. There are plenty of fighters bigger than Marciano who make 175 today, Marciano could bulk up to HW but otherwise hes fighting at 175 or perhaps Cruser but allot of trainers would have him down at 175 at least to start his career

[dezbeast]

Your full of shit because Marciano's bodyfat in the ring looked to be around 12-15%. If he was leaner you'd see much more definition, he doesn't even have solid upper abbs definition let alone lower abbs, so probably 15%.

I'm no expert on bodyfat but I'm pretty sure Rocky's was closer to 5%. My friend's was around 8% years ago. And from looking at photos Rocky looked more cut.

[BITCH ASS]

Oh boy, now, "doesn't necessarily" is a way out of the point. It's a way out of just about every point. Very few things are ever absolute. Some small men can punch harder than some big men. On average, a bigger man can generate more force. On average a bigger man who knows how to balance himself is harder to knock down. These are not controversial points. The impact of size and mass is why we have weight classes. If size and mass were irrelevant, then we wouldn't need weight classes. Very few people today would regard Marciano a heavyweight, and unless he packed on a shitload of pounds, he wouldn't be competing for the heavyweight title. Are you seriously going to deny any of this?

Marciano proved he was not a one-punch knockout artist. He generally needed an accumulation of punches. Everybody who knows anything about Marciano's style and record knows this is a true statement. I don't know why people are trying to deny it. Well, I do know why, but spin is never legitimate.

Norton was a bigger, stronger, and better heavyweight than Marciano. Marciano would not have been competitive in the 1970s. Norton was. Norton batters Marciano.

Man, you're just being disrespectful to the minority of people who are huge punchers but not big men, so they also have speed, mobility, and better defense on average, as well being more able to diversify their style and angles they take in the fight.

Just because maybe you can't punch doesn't mean that you need to channel your insecurity to the rest of the world with biased bullshit assumptions when there is obvious proof on film that Marciano punched very hard, and that it is difficult to KO a fighter clean if you don't land directly on their chin, which is also testament to the skill level of opposition Marciano faced.

Shit, of course you can KO a guy when he sticks his chin right out there. Marciano's opponents had the advantage of actually knowing how to box.

[MrMarvel]

I saw the Garcia fight. It was weird. Norton was young, inexperienced, cocky, and unprepared. Garcia was hot for spell. Norton had some trouble with the tall and gangly Garcia. But the decision to stop the fight was highly unusual.

But that's not my point with this post. I want to respond to a few things.

First, Rocky was not that cut. He could have lost down to 175 lbs easy. I already proved that he struggled to gain weight in training by citing actual articles that documented it. I will keep repreating the facts, though, since people keep making it seem like Rocky could have easily made 200 lbs in training. Of course he walked around heavier than his fighting weight. Most fighters do. Duh. The question is his fighting weight, and Marciano ate like a demon to keep weight on, not take it off.

Second, Rodney and his rdicidulous claim that Marciano knocks out Norton. He wants to base this on a claim that Walcott and Moore were better than Norton. I don't think anybody would argue that Norton was technically better than Moore. Moore was an all-time great. He was a master. But Walcott? No way. Walcott was cute, but no master. Tragically overrated Walcott is.

But their abilities aside, the problem either Moore or Walcott run into is a 6'3" 210-220 lbs heavyweight with knockout power, great stamina, and a tough constitution, a guy who hung touch with Ali and Holmes, heavyweights far superior to anything the late 1940s-early 1950s had to offer.

Norton's defense was more than decent. And Rodney is way off base on the chin comment. This is a myth. I already explained why. But if you want to see if for yourself, look at how Ali, Quarry, and Holmes drill Norton and he keeps coming. Ali and Holmes were no Foremans, but they weren't featherfisted either. Ali and Holmes had knockout power, as they proved on many occasions. Ali was big and strong and Norton went 39 rounds without getting knocked out. If people think Cockell could have stayed upright against Ali, well, I don't know how to help you. You're clueless. Quarry nailed Norton and the look on Norton's face was simply where do I hit this guy to close the show.

Norton is better than Marciano in every category that matters.

[Seamus]

Your full of shit because Marciano's bodyfat in the ring looked to be around 12-15%. If he was leaner you'd see much more definition, he doesn't even have solid upper abbs definition let alone lower abbs, so probably 15%. Thats all fine because boxing isn't bodybuilding but Marciano wasn't a 200lb fighter as he wasn't particularly lean at 180lbs at 200lbs he'd be well overweight. He was a very fit and stong 180lb fighter though.

The 185lb Rocky could easily have made 175lbs by losing bodyfat and dehydrating to make weight, he could easily lose 10lbs in water alone. There are plenty of fighters bigger than Marciano who make 175 today, Marciano could bulk up to HW but otherwise hes fighting at 175 or perhaps Cruser but allot of trainers would have him down at 175 at least to start his career

I respect your takes usually but by appearances, Rock's bodyfat looked to be around 6 -7 percent. He was lean and ripped with little subcutaneous fat and apparently no visceral fat. Now realize that muscle shapes and construction are different from person to person, giving differing depth to definition, and pigment also effects the "look" of defined muscles (i.e. why body builders tan so deeply before competition). Quite simply, there is no way Marciano makes 175.

Back to some other points, I don't think Norton's chin makes him vulnerable here but his durability would be an issue. I do not think that the versions of Ali that Norton fought or even Holmes match the grinding attack that Marciano pursued. With a couple exceptions, the 70's Ali did not like to fight full rounds, and not even each round, stalling with antics, holding on the neck, the ropes, clinching, shuffling... et. al. Norton did not fall for this (nor did Frazier) and those became his toughest fights. I think when Norton meets someone with the intense pursuit of Marciano, the results are very different. Just thoughts here.

[SuzieQ49]

Your full of shit because

Honeslty man, you are not an expert on the 1950s heavyweight division, and I highly doubt you have personally discussed with Rocky's brother what Rocky's natural weight was during his career while not in the ring


Marciano's bodyfat in the ring looked to be around 12-15%.

Probably the dumbest most uninformative statement you have ever said. No one on this forum will agree with you.

If he was leaner you'd see much more definition

Marciano was built like a brickhouse...If you have Ali vs Marciano DVD, take a look at behind the scenes footage of Marciano throwing heavy rocks over his head...Unbelievable muscle defintition

he doesn't even have solid upper abbs definition let alone lower abbs


Again one of the dumbest statements I have ever heard....Rocky's midsection was rock solid...you could Iron a shirt on his stomach it was so flat

so probably 15%.

Dumb


Thats all fine because boxing isn't bodybuilding but Marciano wasn't a 200lb fighter


He was a natural well above 200lb and he cut down to 185lb


at 200lbs he'd be well overweight.

Rocky weighed in for a couple of his fights at 192-193lb in 1950, didnt look overweight to me


He was a very fit and stong 180lb fighter though.


When in Rockys prime did he ever weigh 180lb? More like 185-190lb



The 185lb Rocky could easily have made 175lbs by losing bodyfat and dehydrating to make weight


He already did non stop road work and non stop training sucking down to 185lb, he did not have an once of fat left on him to lose.....Rocky would have a much easier time bulking up to 205lb with modern supplements/training/nutrition.


There are plenty of fighters bigger than Marciano who make 175 today

Marciano had the bone structure of a heavyweight, so I would have to disagree with you here.


but otherwise hes fighting at 175 or perhaps Cruser but allot of trainers would have him down at 175 at least to start his career

Rocky could not make 175lb if his life depended on it, he would lose all his muscle mass

[MRBILL]

Hmmmmm.... Norton looked pumped and sharp in hammering a 207 pound Jerry Quarry into submission up in New York in 1975...... Christ, Ol' Norton was a ripped solid 218 1/2 pounds......... I think Norton handles the smaller Marciano....... You know, Marciano would've thought Jerry Quarry was a monster.... I think the Norton of 1975 / '76 beats the ever lovin' piss outta the 1954 version of Marciano....... Cheers.....

MR.BILL

[Boilermaker]

Hmmmmm.... Norton looked pumped and sharp in hammering a 207 pound Jerry Quarry into submission up in New York in 1975...... Christ, Ol' Norton was a ripped solid 218 1/2 pounds......... I think Norton handles the smaller Marciano....... You know, Marciano would've thought Jerry Quarry was a monster.... I think the Norton of 1975 / '76 beats the ever lovin' piss outta the 1954 version of Marciano....... Cheers.....

MR.BILL

I am not saying that your prediction is necessarilly off, but there is no wayh that marciano has any sort of trouble with Quarry. He isnt in the same class.

[SuzieQ49]

Norton could not fight off the back foot. that is why he was so horrible against punchers. Norton never ever could beat a big puncher, let alone an ATG puncher like marciano. Ill be shocked if norton sees the 3rd round.

[MRBILL]

I am not saying that your prediction is necessarilly off, but there is no wayh that marciano has any sort of trouble with Quarry. He isnt in the same class.

I can't cut Quarry short against Marciano...... Why? Because Quarry only had trouble for the most part against tall guys who could box & punch and weighed over 200 pounds....... Quarry was a brawler who had a good two-fisted attack... Against a slightly smaller dude like Marciano, I see Jerry Quarry landing a lot of shots that he missed "Ellis, Frazier, Ali & Norton" with...... Although Quarry did hit Frazier with the kitchen sink in '69, but Frazier was just too peaked to get beat then..........

MR.BILL:bbb

[MRBILL]

I am NOT saying Quarry would beat Marciano in a time machine.... I'm just saying that Quarry would be very tuff for Marciano...... Quarry was better and bigger than "LaStarza & Cockell." I'm guessing Rocky Marciano would have some fits with Quarry........

Ken Norton only backed up against BIG MOTHERS like "Foreman, Shavers & Cooney." Norton attacked Quarry & Bobick....... I don't see Marciano at 187 to 192 pounds pushing Norton at 215 to 220 pounds backwards... Oh, Marciano would surely try, but then he'd eat lotsa leather in the process........ Norton would not be forced to fight off his back foot that dragged...... I think Norton could and would force Marciano to retreat... Marciano on the retreat, would be dead meat........ Peace...

MR.BILL

[Seamus]

For the record, Quarry had a severe back injury and a good drug habit going into the Norton fight. His doctor suggested he did not fight but Jerry was going through a lot of tough mental as well as physical stress, issues with his father and whatnot, so he stepped into the ring in bad shape.

And when referring to Shavers as a "big mother" is far from reality. At his peak, he was 6 feet, 205 lbs. and not exactly rock hard.

[Farmboxer]

Quarry was great when he fought Lyle, looked great. He had the ability, not the size, but ability, when he was right, he was fantastic, but he would fight one way for one fight, then another for another, you never knew which. Quarry would show up.

[ChrisPontius]

I am NOT saying Quarry would beat Marciano in a time machine.... I'm just saying that Quarry would be very tuff for Marciano......


I think Norton handles the smaller Marciano....... You know, Marciano would've thought Jerry Quarry was a monster.... I think the Norton of 1975 / '76 beats the ever lovin' piss outta the 1954 version of Marciano....... Cheers.....

MR.BILL

So which one is it?




I think Norton could and would force Marciano to retreat... Marciano on the retreat, would be dead meat........ Peace...

MR.BILL

How is he going to do that?

[MRBILL]

For the record, Quarry had a severe back injury and a good drug habit going into the Norton fight. His doctor suggested he did not fight but Jerry was going through a lot of tough mental as well as physical stress, issues with his father and whatnot, so he stepped into the ring in bad shape.

And when referring to Shavers as a "big mother" is far from reality. At his peak, he was 6 feet, 205 lbs. and not exactly rock hard.

Shavers is listed at 6' 1" in the states, and by 1979, Shavers was at about 213 pounds for Norton............ For the 1970s, that was considered a good sized heavyweight.....

Hell, Larry Holmes was 6' 3 1/2" tall and 211 pounds for Ali in 1980....

A man 6' to 6' 3" tall and 210 to 215 pounds was BIG in the late 70s & early 1980s..... Cheers.....

MR.BILL:hey:deal

[ChrisPontius]

Anyone picking Norton here has a serious case of seventies-ism.

[MRBILL]

So which one is it?






How is he going to do that?

Simple..... Norton had a ram-rod for a left jab.... And Norton's overhand right was generally thrown with conviction, as well...... I don't think Norton would shit his pants by seeing a dude 5' 10 1/2" tall and barely 190 pounds in the opposite corner..... Norton's psych was "Iffy" at best, but he really only fell apart when faced against big punchers who were well over 200 pounds.....:yep

MR.BILL

[MRBILL]

Anyone picking Norton here has a serious case of seventies-ism.

I sure as hell do.... A great decade, too.........:hey:happy:D

MR.BILL:good

[ChrisPontius]

Simple..... Norton had a ram-rod for a left jab.... And Norton's overhand right was generally thrown with conviction, as well...... I don't think Norton would shit his pants by seeing a dude 5' 10 1/2" tall and barely 190 pounds in the opposite corner..... Norton's psych was "Iffy" at best, but he really only fell apart when faced against big punchers who were well over 200 pounds.....:yep

MR.BILL

He fell apart against a low profile 190lbs puncher in Garcia, too.

[MRBILL]

He fell apart against a low profile 190lbs puncher in Garcia, too.

Yes... But Norton was pretty goddamn green in 1970...... By 1973, Norton was much more seasoned and mature as a fighter......:yep

MR.BILL

[mcvey]

Simple..... Norton had a ram-rod for a left jab.... And Norton's overhand right was generally thrown with conviction, as well...... I don't think Norton would shit his pants by seeing a dude 5' 10 1/2" tall and barely 190 pounds in the opposite corner..... Norton's psych was "Iffy" at best, but he really only fell apart when faced against big punchers who were well over 200 pounds.....:yep

MR.BILL

Which big punchers didnt he fall apart against?

[Bokaj]

1 thing I hate in every Norton match up is 'Norton loses by KO in 1-3rounds he has no chin'. Do people seriously believe Holmes and Ali can't punch? I wouldn't be suprised if both hit as hard as Marciano when they sit on their shots with their greater speed and weight behind their punches. Norton went 54 rounds with them. Lets not forget Norton with a bit of luck could be 4-0 against Ali and Holmes

There's some wisdom to this. But with Norton it wasn't just down to power, it was down to psychology and style as well. He just didn't like meeting big punchers who were willing to trade. Futch said he froze up against big punchers, and when you watch him against Foreman, Cooney and Shavers it's hard not to agree. He also didn't do to well when being crowded.

Marciano would certainly crowd him, but would he be able intimidate Norton like guys like Foreman and Shavers seeemingly did? Hard to tell for sure. My money would be on Marciano, but if Norton can relax a bit and get into his groove it could certainly be interesting.

[Mendoza]

Actually a very interesting match up as Norton did freeze against huge punchers like Foreman, Shavers and Cooney. He was also once stopped by Jose Luis Garcia, another explosive puncher ...

Norton also had the size and skills to bust up Marciano as well if he got his jab working and did not freeze out of the gate. Marciano was much smaller than Ken and not a fast starter and all this adds to an interesting match up ...

I really feel that this is a fighter that could play out many ways ... on a one shot I'd pick Rocky but he'd definitely have to be the guy that fought Charles the second time and not the one that fought Cockell ...

Agreed. In many ways Norton would be Rocky's toughest opponent. I think Norton hit harder than Walcott, or Moore, and had a fine attack to the head and the body. Norton would also own a clear edge on height, reach, and weight. If the two best punchers Rocky fought floored him, and others like Vingo or Lowry had him hurt Norton could do the same.

Marciano could not afford to look as he did vs Savold ( sub par ), Cockell ( sub par ), Lastarza II ( behind on points and fouling to help turn the tide ) or Moore ( just ok ).

He would need to perform as he did vs Louis, Wlacott, or Layne II.

Norton had a weird chin. Ali could not hurt him in three fights, yet Ali hurt Frazier. Quarry landed some solid stuff, and Norton took it, and fought back well. Holmes, who was a pretty good hitter could not put Norton away.

The Garcia loss was stamina related. Norton was somewhat green, and he avenged it. The Foreman and Shaver loss was chin related, and psyche related as Norton feared them, and was caught early. I do not think Marciano would intimidate Norton as much Foreman or Shavers did, and Rocky wasn't quite as dynamic with his hands or feet in as Foreman and Shavers could be. The Cooney fight means nothing here as Norton was already past his prime. Chins can go down hill quickly with past their prime fighters.

On average it took Rocky 9+ rounds to win his title shots vs slightly past their prime venisons of Walcott and Charles, who did not take the best heavyweight punch. I think those who call early Ko's for Rocky are off. Marciano and Charles stood toe to toe for a 15 round fight in a war.

So who wins? I'll go with Rocky via a grueling come from behind late round TKO. Norton sometimes froze on the ropes, and though his defense could be rather good, this flaw would give Rocky his chance to end it late...if Rocky could stand up to Norton's attack in the early to mid rounds.

60/40 in my book in favor of Marciano.

[janitor]

Anyone picking Norton here has a serious case of seventies-ism.

I tend to agree.

It is at best a bit of a leap of faith to pick Norton over any ATG heavyweight puncher.

You might be proved right but it is always going to be a leap into the unknown.

[MRBILL]

Bokaj is on the right track..... Ken Norton hated big punchers who were big dudes.... YES! We ALL know Norton was iced like a sickle by "Foreman, Shavers & Cooney." And, them dudes were all over 6' tall and 200 pounds as well...... However, Norton did look good in hammering "Quarry and Bobick" in 1975 / '76... Plus, punchers or not, Norton did perform like a world class fighter against both Ali and Larry Holmes several times over in winning and losing some decisions.... Ken Norton had the size and physique to be a true heavyweight champion, but, his mental make-up drifted here and there....

SO! Look.... I am NOT the biggest Ken Norton fan or poster of all-time.... I'm not even close to that.... I have questioned his worthyness into the IBHOF as well.... I just don't see a big guy like a 215 to 220 pound Ken Norton being afraid or overly concerned about a slightly less than 6' tall and 187 to 192 pound Rocco Marciano in a time machine....

I will say this about Ken Norton.... He fought a tougher crop of fighters than Rocco Marciano did...... Norton's opponents like "Ali, Foreman, Quarry, Bobick, Holmes, Shavers & Cooney" were either truly great or very imposing when they met Norton in the ring.... Hell, even lesser guys like "Pedro Lovell & Texas Cobb" are worth mentioning, too......

I don't think that Rocco Marciano beat anyone in the 1950s that Ken Norton couldn't have beaten...... Joe Louis was aged and slow in '51, but still formidable..... Same for Joe Walcott.... Walcott was age 38 in 1952, but rock hard and still a fine boxer..... Both "Louis & Walcott" were Marciano's BEST opponents in the ring..... Ezzard Charles and Archie Moore were great too, however, I drop them guys down a notch below the dudes mentioned before..... Rolando LaStarza and Don "The Cock" Cockell were average contenders of the 1950s.....

In a time machine, I see Ken Norton ripping Rocco Marciano apart... Marciano is not stronger than Norton and he would not be able to pin Norton up against the ropes to go to work on him, either... I see Marciano going for broke, but also eating leather left and right from Norton, as well.... At any rate, a great dream match for the ages..... Peace...

MR.BILL

[Flea Man]

Certain posters on the Classic don't see the difference between old, small HW's who could punch and the more recent guys.

Norton didn't have a china chin. He just thought some big hitters.

Marciano hit extremely hard, but it wasn't like he only landed one punch on Walcott or Charles. They extended him, and sometimes hurt him.

I don't see Norton being particularly effective, but to predict a one or two round blowout is stupid IMO (although not completely inplausible I guess)

Like those who think Barbadoes Joe Walcott would K.O Mike McCallum :rofl

[Flea Man]

Bokaj is on the right track..... Ken Norton hated big punchers who were big dudes.... YES! We ALL know Norton was iced like a sickle by "Foreman, Shavers & Cooney." And, them dudes were all over 6' tall and 200 pounds as well...... However, Norton did look good in hammering "Quarry and Bobick" in 1975 / '76... Plus, punchers or not, Norton did perform like a world class fighter against both Ali and Larry Holmes several times over in winning and losing some decisions.... Ken Norton had the size and physique to be a true heavyweight champion, but, his mental make-up drifted here and there....

SO! Look.... I am NOT the biggest Ken Norton fan or poster of all-time.... I'm not even close to that.... I have questioned his worthyness into the IBHOF as well.... I just don't see a big guy like a 215 to 220 pound Ken Norton being afraid or overly concerned about a slightly less than 6' tall and 187 to 192 pound Rocco Marciano in a time machine....

I will say this about Ken Norton.... He fought a tougher crop of fighters than Rocco Marciano did...... Norton's opponents like "Ali, Foreman, Quarry, Bobick, Holmes, Shavers & Cooney" were either truly great or very imposing when they met Norton in the ring.... Hell, even lesser guys like "Pedro Lovell & Texas Cobb" are worth mentioning, too......

I don't think that Rocco Marciano beat anyone in the 1950s that Ken Norton couldn't have beaten...... Joe Louis was aged and slow in '51, but still formidable..... Same for Joe Walcott.... Walcott was age 38 in 1952, but rock hard and still a fine boxer..... Both "Louis & Walcott" were Marciano's BEST opponents in the ring..... Ezzard Charles and Archie Moore were great too, however, I drop them guys down a notch below the dudes mentioned before..... Rolando LaStarza and Don "The Cock" Cockell were average contenders of the 1950s.....

In a time machine, I see Ken Norton ripping Rocco Marciano apart... Marciano is not stronger than Norton and he would not be able to pin Norton up against the ropes to go to work on him, either... I see Marciano going for broke, but also eating leather left and right from Norton, as well.... At any rate, a great dream match for the ages..... Peace...

MR.BILL

I agree with a lot of this.

I think Norton would be comfortably ahead but worn down by about the 10th, when Rock would catch him, hurt him, and then finish him.

[MRBILL]

AND! I know goddamn well Rocco Marciano of 1952 / '53 is not and cannot beat a Joe Frazier from 1968 to 1971 in a time machine, either.... Marciano never fought a dude over 200 pounds with the aggression of Smokin' Joe........ Marciano was not known for backing up very much, but Frazier would push Marciano back and chase his ass right outta the ring...... The Frazier who was clobbering and kayoing dudes like "Mathis, Quarry, Ellis, Foster & Ali" would NOT be denied by Marciano... NO!!

MR.BILL

[Maxmomer]

Agreed. In many ways Norton would be Rocky's toughest opponent. I think Norton hit harder than Walcott, or Moore, and had a fine attack to the head and the body. Norton would also own a clear edge on height, reach, and weight. If the two best punchers Rocky fought floored him, and others like Vingo or Lowry had him hurt Norton could do the same.

Marciano could not afford to look as he did vs Savold ( sub par ), Cockell ( sub par ), Lastarza II ( behind on points and fouling to help turn the tide ) or Moore ( just ok ).

He would need to perform as he did vs Louis, Wlacott, or Layne II.

Norton had a weird chin. Ali could not hurt him in three fights, yet Ali hurt Frazier. Quarry landed some solid stuff, and Norton took it, and fought back well. Holmes, who was a pretty good hitter could not put Norton away.

The Garcia loss was stamina related. Norton was somewhat green, and he avenged it. The Foreman and Shaver loss was chin related, and psyche related as Norton feared them, and was caught early. I do not think Marciano would intimidate Norton as much Foreman or Shavers did, and Rocky wasn't quite as dynamic with his hands or feet in as Foreman and Shavers could be. The Cooney fight means nothing here as Norton was already past his prime. Chins can go down hill quickly with past their prime fighters.

On average it took Rocky 9+ rounds to win his title shots vs slightly past their prime venisons of Walcott and Charles, who did not take the best heavyweight punch. I think those who call early Ko's for Rocky are off. Marciano and Charles stood toe to toe for a 15 round fight in a war.

So who wins? I'll go with Rocky via a grueling come from behind late round TKO. Norton sometimes froze on the ropes, and though his defense could be rather good, this flaw would give Rocky his chance to end it late...if Rocky could stand up to Norton's attack in the early to mid rounds.

60/40 in my book in favor of Marciano.

I agree with this.

[janitor]

[quote=MRBILL;3922925]Bokaj is on the right track..... Ken Norton hated big punchers who were big dudes.... YES! We ALL know Norton was iced like a sickle by "Foreman, Shavers & Cooney." And, them dudes were all over 6' tall and 200 pounds as well......

Do you think that they were necisarily on a diferent level to Marciano in terms of power?

Also do you think that he would have done much better against Joe Frazier who was himself only 5' 11'' and 200 lbs?

However, Norton did look good in hammering "Quarry and Bobick" in 1975 / '76...

I think it is fair to say that Quarry was prety much and empty shell and Bobbick might never have been much good to start with.


I will say this about Ken Norton.... He fought a tougher crop of fighters than Rocco Marciano did......

I don't think that Rocco Marciano beat anyone in the 1950s that Ken Norton couldn't have beaten...... Joe Louis was aged and slow in '51, but still formidable..... Same for Joe Walcott.... Walcott was age 38 in 1952, but rock hard and still a fine boxer..... Both "Louis & Walcott" were Marciano's BEST opponents in the ring..... Ezzard Charles and Archie Moore were great too, however,


Norton probably would have done verry well against Walcott Charles and Moore but how would he have done against sombody like Rex Layne who could really crack, or Satterfield?

Even an old Joe Louis might still have had the power to put him away.

These are guys who he might have had to go through just to get in the ring with Marciano.

In a time machine, I see Ken Norton ripping Rocco Marciano apart... Marciano is not stronger than Norton and he would not be able to pin Norton up against the ropes to go to work on him, either...

What makes you think that Marciano could not have been stronger than Norton?

He is smaller for sure but that means next to nothing.

Archie Moore said that Marciano was stronger than Nino Valdez so it is at least plausible that he could manhandle norton.

[Flea Man]

AND! I know goddamn well Rocco Marciano of 1952 / '53 is not and cannot beat a Joe Frazier from 1968 to 1971 in a time machine, either.... Marciano never fought a dude over 200 pounds with the aggression of Smokin' Joe........ Marciano was not known for backing up very much, but Frazier would push Marciano back and chase his ass right outta the ring...... The Frazier who was clobbering and kayoing dudes like "Mathis, Quarry, Ellis, Foster & Ali" would NOT be denied by Marciano... NO!!

MR.BILL

It makes me laugh when people predict a Rocky K.O of Kid Dynamite as well. HOW??????

[MRBILL]

I like ex-champs like Jack Dempsey and Rocky Marciano, but them two have been greatly overrated and fabled to the point of folklore....... Many old-timers claim that Dempsey and Marciano could've and would've KO'd "King Kong & Godzilla." C'mon, let's not lose touch with reality here...... Cheers......

MR.BILL

[MRBILL]

I'll say "YES" that Foreman and Shavers had harder right hands than Marciano did, and Cooney's left-hook was harder than Marciano's hook shot, too........ Marciano KO'd lotsa' guys 185 to 195 pounds during his day...... Marciano also fought a lot of guys 6' and BELOW..... "Vingo & Louis" were the exception..... Again, Foreman, Shavers and Cooney were HARDER punchers kayoing bigger dudes than what Marciano was used to hammering on.......... Okay... Let the arrows fly..........

MR.BILL

[Flea Man]

I'll say "YES" that Foreman and Shavers had harder right hands than Marciano did, and Cooney's left-hook was harder than Marciano's hook shot, too........ Marciano KO'd lotsa' guys 185 to 195 pounds during his day...... Marciano also fought a lot of guys 6' and BELOW..... "Vingo & Louis" were the exception..... Again, Foreman, Shavers and Cooney were HARDER punchers kayoing bigger dudes than what Marciano was used to hammering on.......... Okay... Let the arrows fly..........

MR.BILL

The arrows are not warranted....I agree with this:good

[MRBILL]

The arrows are not warranted....I agree with this:good

Fellas, I am not biased or anything here.... I could really care LESS about the decade or time...... But I own a shitload or two of shit on tape, etc..... I have been reviewing this stuff for 25 years...... I do have a clue as to what all these fighters used to be able to do.......
:deal:bbb:hat:good:hey

MR.BILL

[PowerPuncher]

I respect your takes usually but by appearances, Rock's bodyfat looked to be around 6 -7 percent. He was lean and ripped with little subcutaneous fat and apparently no visceral fat. Now realize that muscle shapes and construction are different from person to person, giving differing depth to definition, and pigment also effects the "look" of defined muscles (i.e. why body builders tan so deeply before competition). Quite simply, there is no way Marciano makes 175.
.

I'm actually a nutritionist and I assist boxers making weight, from dieting to dehydrating. I can also usually guess a bodyfat percentage very accurately and Rocky by the looks of him looks around 12%. He simply isn't that lean, if he was 6% he would literally looked ripped to shreds regardless of skin pigment. Just for the record you'd die if your bodyfat level got down to 3%

Not that an ultra low bodyfat is always good for boxers as some degree of bodyfat protects the body from blows, ie the liver.

Simply put I've helped bigger men than Rocky make 175lbs, so yes Rocky could with a superior diet, meal planning, cutting supplements and possibly some dehydrating.

[PowerPuncher]

1. Honeslty man, you are not an expert on the 1950s heavyweight division, and I highly doubt you have personally discussed with Rocky's brother what Rocky's natural weight was during his career while not in the ring

2. Probably the dumbest most uninformative statement you have ever said. No one on this forum will agree with you.

3. Marciano was built like a brickhouse...If you have Ali vs Marciano DVD, take a look at behind the scenes footage of Marciano throwing heavy rocks over his head...Unbelievable muscle defintition

4. Again one of the dumbest statements I have ever heard....Rocky's midsection was rock solid...you could Iron a shirt on his stomach it was so flat Dumb

5. He was a natural well above 200lb and he cut down to 185lb

6. Rocky weighed in for a couple of his fights at 192-193lb in 1950, didnt look overweight to me When in Rockys prime did he ever weigh 180lb? More like 185-190lb

7. He already did non stop road work and non stop training sucking down to 185lb, he did not have an once of fat left on him to lose.....Rocky would have a much easier time bulking up to 205lb with modern supplements/training/nutrition.

8. Marciano had the bone structure of a heavyweight, so I would have to disagree with you here.

9. Rocky could not make 175lb if his life depended on it, he would lose all his muscle mass

1. No but I am an expert on nutrition and helping fighters make weight

2. I'll reiterate Marciano has 12% bodyfat at best I know what I'm talking about with this. At 8% he'd have washboard abbs, which he doesn't, if he had a 5-6% level his muscles would be stirated.

3. You can have good muscle definition at 15% it doesn't mean you

4. Men of 15% BF have flat stomachs, Rocky had a small layer of fat over his stomach, hence he didn't have ripped abbs. If you can find a picture showing ripped abbs I'll take that back but you won't because he didnt

5. He may have come down from 200lbs but he would have been very overweight at 200lbs if that was the case. Now he may have had more endurance at 180lbs than someone ripped at 200lbs but it doesnt make him big at 180lbs

6. No he could handle 190lbs well enough

7/9. Actually he looks like he could drop 5-10lbs of bodyfat with the right nutritional advice, however he could also just drop water weight and put the water back in after the weigh in. Doing lots of endurance work doesn't equate to low bodyfat. YEs Rocky could carry 205-210lbs with modern training, he could also make 175lbs with a modern nutritionist/supplements/saunas/sweatsuits/ dehydrating, day before weigh ins etc.

I know many LHWs that enter the ring well over 190lbs with low bodyfat which is the same as Rocky's weight

8. Bone structure is irrelevant a 190lb man can make 175lbs

[janitor]

I'll say "YES" that Foreman and Shavers had harder right hands than Marciano did, and Cooney's left-hook was harder than Marciano's hook shot, too........ Marciano KO'd lotsa' guys 185 to 195 pounds during his day...... Marciano also fought a lot of guys 6' and BELOW..... "Vingo & Louis" were the exception..... Again, Foreman, Shavers and Cooney were HARDER punchers kayoing bigger dudes than what Marciano was used to hammering on.......... Okay... Let the arrows fly..........
MR.BILL

To be honest with you I dont think that Marcianos oponents were really smaller or less durable than the guys Liston beat or contenders of the 70s like Quarry and Ellis who made up the backbone of Joe Fraziers resume.

I also know that Marciano was knocking them dead on film, in a way that compares favourably to the champions of subsequent eras.

I dont think it is out of the question that Marciano's power was close or even comparable to Foremans.

I also think that it was significantly better than Fraziers.

I think that any fighter who has issues with punchers is going to have issues with Marciano.

[Bummy Davis]

Shavers never KO'd class and lost to such as Bob Stalling who was 5"9 and not a big puncher, STallings had a decent chin...Shavers could also not stop Vincente Rondon who was lightheavy who was started in 2 rds by Bob Foster....I think it is Shavers who has hit the fable level and not the outstanding old timers like Marciano and Louis. Some of these guys who had one good quality in the 70's are made legends out of were nothing speacial....Norton would be brutally Ko'd by Marciano as soon as he went in to mix...he could not trade with Marciano and he could not run for long...Rocky by KO in 5

[SuzieQ49]

I think Norton hit harder than Walcott


Ridiculous. Ken Norton NEVER FLOORED a Ring Magazine top 10 rated contender in his life outside of overhyped Duane Bobick. Thats how overrated his power was. On film, Walcott demonstrates much better power with one punch than norton does. Walcott could knock you out with one punch, Ken norton could not. Walcotts left hook was more powerful, and when his right hand landed on opponents they typically went down and down fast...ken norton needed many punches to get journeyman down. Norton did not come close to flooring Ali or Holmes in multiple rounds, while Walcott floored both Louis and Rocky.

[SuzieQ49]

I would also like to say I dont see how one could make a case norton hit harder than archie Moore. Moore knocked out far more Ring Magazine top 10, is the all time knockout king, is rated # 4 on Ring Magazine all time punchers list which Norton does not make, and Archie displays lethal one punch power on film with his straight right hand that norton has never shown. Before anyone questions size of opponents.... Archies record against men over 200lb stood at 22-1 with 19 kayos

[groove]

i've just posted the stats to your opinion of walcott's best ko wins - those heavies weighed 180 pounds. my god the best in norton's era were over 2 stone heavier. norton could ko 180 pounders a lot easier than 215 pound fighters (35 pound in difference!). BTW Bob Stallings weighed 210 pounds v shavers and won on points (6-4). No doubt shavers lost the last rounds of the fight when he was all burnt out :)

[MrMarvel]

1. No but I am an expert on nutrition and helping fighters make weight

2. I'll reiterate Marciano has 12% bodyfat at best I know what I'm talking about with this. At 8% he'd have washboard abbs, which he doesn't, if he had a 5-6% level his muscles would be stirated.

3. You can have good muscle definition at 15% it doesn't mean you

4. Men of 15% BF have flat stomachs, Rocky had a small layer of fat over his stomach, hence he didn't have ripped abbs. If you can find a picture showing ripped abbs I'll take that back but you won't because he didnt

5. He may have come down from 200lbs but he would have been very overweight at 200lbs if that was the case. Now he may have had more endurance at 180lbs than someone ripped at 200lbs but it doesnt make him big at 180lbs

6. No he could handle 190lbs well enough

7/9. Actually he looks like he could drop 5-10lbs of bodyfat with the right nutritional advice, however he could also just drop water weight and put the water back in after the weigh in. Doing lots of endurance work doesn't equate to low bodyfat. YEs Rocky could carry 205-210lbs with modern training, he could also make 175lbs with a modern nutritionist/supplements/saunas/sweatsuits/ dehydrating, day before weigh ins etc.

I know many LHWs that enter the ring well over 190lbs with low bodyfat which is the same as Rocky's weight

8. Bone structure is irrelevant a 190lb man can make 175lbs

Great post. Unless this is a guy with a huge head, there's not much more going on this body.
[Only registered and activated users can see links]

The guy was a natural light heavyweight.

[SuzieQ49]

i've just posted the stats to your opinion of walcott's best ko wins - those heavies weighed 180 pounds. my god the best in norton's era were over 2 stone heavier. norton could ko 180 pounders a lot easier than 215 pound fighters (35 pound in difference!). BTW Bob Stallings weighed 210 pounds v shavers and won on points (6-4). No doubt shavers lost the last rounds of the fight when he was all burnt out


Considering Norton got knocked out by an 188lb fighter, your arguement for "size is better" does not hold much claim. And if I had said Johnny Skhor and Ollie Tandberg were Walcotts best knockout wins, than your size arguement would go completley out the window. Fact is that the 4 men I listed 2 of which were hall of famers would have destroyed the 4 men on nortons list he knocked out including washed up quarry.



Now let me throw this at you....

Archie Moores best knockout wins

TKO 9 Bob Baker- Top 10 Ring Magazine
TKO 10 Alejandro Lavorante- Top 10 Ring Magazine
TKO 9 James J Parker- Top 10 Ring Magazine
KO 1 Embrell Davidson



Now what is your arguement norton hit harder than archie moore?

[MrMarvel]

Walcott had a 45 percent knockout record. Norton has a 66 percent knockout record. This means that while Walcott fell well shot of knocking out half of his opponents, Norton knocked out two-thirds of his, and his record was accumulated in an era of much bigger men. True, Norton couldn't knock out Ali and Holmes, but then Walcott couldn't knock out Louis, who didn't have the chin of either Ali or Holmes, and this was despite the fact that Walcott nailed Louis often and cleanly.

Walcott gets his reputation as a puncher from his brutal knockout of Charles. It was impressive. But Charles was a light heavyweight and, as we saw going forward, the studiness of his chin has undergone a chance in character over years of competing out of his weight class. Besides, even fighters with low knockout percentages can capture lightning in a bottle from time to time. We don't think of Benitez as a terrific puncher (although his ko percentage was considerably higher than Walcott's), but he was capable putting an opponent to sleep. Obviously there are plenty more examples.

[SuzieQ49]

Walcott gets his reputation as a puncher because he either knocked out or floored pretty much every hall of famer he faced Charles, Louis, Marciano, Bivins, Johnson, Maxim all kissed the canvas courtesy of a Walcott punch.


Ken Norton on the other hand DID NOT FLOOR ANY ring magazine top 10 contenders not named Bobick.

[MrMarvel]

Just to make the record clear, Archie didn't knock out Baker. He overwhelmed his man with superior skill and the referee stopped it because it was so uneven. Baker was on a serious downward slide, having been knocked out by Henry late 1951 and then knocked out in one by Satterfield less than a year before the Moore loss. This is not to take anything from Archie, who was a terrific fighter, but to make sure we don't read too much into the fight. Interesting, though, that the Moore loss woke up Baker for a little while and he put together a nice little winning streak over the next year or so.

The Parker fight was a joke. It was no contest. Moore overwhelmed Parker from the beginning. The only surprise was that Moore couldn't actually knock him out. The ref stopped the contest. Everybody expected the win. Moore was a 4-1 favorite entering the fight. Parker had been twice knocked out before, and two fights later he was knocked out in the first round by George Chuvalo. Why he was ranked in the top 10 by Ring Magazine says something about why we shouldn't always trust rankings.

We should also note that Embrell Davidson was coming off an eighth round stoppage loss to Clarence Henry less than four months earlier. I don't know the circumstances of the stoppage.

[MrMarvel]

The point being that if anybody thinks Parker lasts much longer with Norton than he did with Chuvalo, ah....

Moore could really punch. Nobody denies that. It is equally silly to argue that Norton couldn't.

[BITCH ASS]

The problem with this thread is that most of ya'll who are arguing that so and so was too small don't know shit about the sport of boxing itself.

Boxing is a skill sport. It's not predicated by size. It is today, but that's because there is much less skill.

[Bokaj]

[quote] What makes you think that Marciano could not have been stronger than Norton?

He is smaller for sure but that means next to nothing.

Archie Moore said that Marciano was stronger than Nino Valdez so it is at least plausible that he could manhandle norton.

Let's not forget that Norton was strong for his size (205-210 lbs) as well. He was a ripped, physical phenomen who was 20-25 lbs bigger than Marciano.

And of course that size difference means something. Would you say the same if we compared the strength of Marciano and LaMotta?

Would be surprised if Norton wasn't stronger than Norton and see few things suggesting he wasn't. Some do sell Rocky short, but this mythologizing of him doeesn't do him any favours either.

[MRBILL]

Marciano's right hand was BETTER than Frazier's right----NO DOUBT! But, I think Frazier's left-hook was equally as wicked as Marciano right cross in terms of a power punch looking to cause severe damage...... No man in his right mind wants to get nailed by Frazier's hook or Marciano's cross........

As for Norton's physical strength, that was ONE of his MAIN attributes that was worthy of note.... I know Marciano was strong, but I'm damn sure Norton could lift more weight in a gym than Marciano could.... Norton had the biggest biceps of muscle back in the 70s that I ever saw on a boxer / fighter.... Only the George Foreman of the 1990s developed bigger pythons.....

Again, for the umpteenth time as well, Norton owned a damn good jab that was hard.... NO! He was not really a wicked puncher with numbing power, but he had above average power that hurt / stung.....

I can see the 215 to 220 pound Norton pushing back the 190 pound Marciano in the ring and battering him about as well....

NOW!! I am BOLD as all HELL! Muhammad Ali was not a known power-puncher, however, Ali had some power..... Ali got his victims drunk before he mugged them....... Same goes for Larry Holmes, as well....... BUT! I think Larry Holmes was a damn good right hand puncher...... Holmes really let his hands go against Norton in the epic '78 classic title fight in Vegas... Norton took it all and lasted all 15 rds in losing his title to Holmes..... So, point being: Norton's chin was not entirely made of glass...... However, I admit, his vase had a few cracks in it.......

MR.BILL

[MRBILL]

I must agree that Shavers' power is partly legit and somewhat fabled.....:shock:

I have said so myself that Shavers rarely ever KO'd a solid "A" fighter..... His KO's over "Ellis" and "Norton" are his two "A" grade KO's that I know of off the top of my head...... Jimmy Young, Howard Smith, Henry Clark & Joe Bugner are NOT my idea of "A" opponents..... That is the "B" team......:hey

SR.BILLARDO:rasta

[Dempsey1238]

Did see footage of Marciano tossing giant rocks around if that means anything.

[Beatle]

Marciano was a slow starter who wore out his opponents. Norton had power, but Marciano had a steel jaw (he was floored twice for only 2 seconds). Norton would not be able to hold out for a long time. Marciano had the best stamina in boxing history. Watch him in round 15 against Ezzard Charles: it looks like he's in round 1.

[MRBILL]

I gotta say: "Norton in my view would've and could've beaten all the guys that Rocco Marciano fought in the 1950s." I think Ken Norton could beat and hammer an aged Joe Louis and a 38 year old Joe Walcott pretty much the way Marciano did back in 1951 & '52....

I can't see a smallish 183 pound Ezzard Charles beating Norton, nor can I see "LaStarza or Cockell" beating Norton, either........ I see a 1975 / '76 version of Kenny Norton handling that crop pretty well......... Peace....

MR.BILL

[JIm Broughton]

I think MR.BILL may be right on this one. Marciano feasted on fighters who were generally smaller than the likes of Norton and his contemporaries. The biggest man Rocky fought as champion was Walcott and he was 6' 196lbs. The rest would've been puny if dropped in the 1970's contrasted against the likes of Foreman, Lyle, Ali, Bugner and Norton as well as Holmes. Much has been made of Marciano's power but Rocky was for the most part a grinder. He would wear down and discourage his opponents more than take them out with one spectacular punch. After beating Walcott for the title who did Rocky blow away early with an awesome display of power? Nobody actually. Walcott was decked in the first round but it always looked to me like he decided to call it quits anyway rather than go through another long struggle with Rocky. After that all of his subsequent defenses were grinders (Charles, Moore, Cockell). Now if Rocky couldn't blow these guys away (Cockell especially) why do so many in this forum think he'll blow Kenny away. Rocky had to live like a monk and train like a Spartan to beat men who were for for the most part light heavyweights. Can we be sure that he could take out a big modern athlete like Norton with ease? Norton 's chin was good. It was his style that let him down against bombers. He couldn,t fight backing up. Could Rocky back him up? Norton had a considerable size and reach advantage along with a very good (and underrated) jab. Could Rocky get past that jab? Norton gave Ali fits with it. Couldn't he do the same to Rocky? I'm not suggesting that Rocky can't win but I think we have to give Kenny a little more credit here. If Cockell could last 9 or 10 with Rocky I think Norton could a little better....don't you agree?

[Dempsey1238]

I gotta say: "Norton in my view would've and could've beaten all the guys that Rocco Marciano fought in the 1950s." I think Ken Norton could beat and hammer an aged Joe Louis and a 38 year old Joe Walcott pretty much the way Marciano did back in 1951 & '52....

I can't see a smallish 183 pound Ezzard Charles beating Norton, nor can I see "LaStarza or Cockell" beating Norton, either........ I see a 1975 / '76 version of Kenny Norton handling that crop pretty well......... Peace....

MR.BILL


Think 37 year old Walcott would shock Norton, the punchings he nail Marciano with in the first fight would have hurt Norton imo.

[MRBILL]

I think MR.BILL may be right on this one. Marciano feasted on fighters who were generally smaller than the likes of Norton and his contemporaries. The biggest man Rocky fought as champion was Walcott and he was 6' 196lbs. The rest would've been puny if dropped in the 1970's contrasted against the likes of Foreman, Lyle, Ali, Bugner and Norton as well as Holmes. Much has been made of Marciano's power but Rocky was for the most part a grinder. He would wear down and discourage his opponents more than take them out with one spectacular punch. After beating Walcott for the title who did Rocky blow away early with an awesome display of power? Nobody actually. Walcott was decked in the first round but it always looked to me like he decided to call it quits anyway rather than go through another long struggle with Rocky. After that all of his subsequent defenses were grinders (Charles, Moore, Cockell). Now if Rocky couldn't blow these guys away (Cockell especially) why do so many in this forum think he'll blow Kenny away. Rocky had to live like a monk and train like a Spartan to beat men who were for for the most part light heavyweights. Can we be sure that he could take out a big modern athlete like Norton with ease? Norton 's chin was good. It was his style that let him down against bombers. He couldn,t fight backing up. Could Rocky back him up? Norton had a considerable size and reach advantage along with a very good (and underrated) jab. Could Rocky get past that jab? Norton gave Ali fits with it. Couldn't he do the same to Rocky? I'm not suggesting that Rocky can't win but I think we have to give Kenny a little more credit here. If Cockell could last 9 or 10 with Rocky I think Norton could a little better....don't you agree?

YES! Walcott was decked early by a Marciano uppercut in '53, but Walcott was still clear-headed...... BUT! Walcott took his sweet ass time rising.... The ref waived the fight off too soon..... Walcott was on his feet at the count of 10, but slightly hunched over; he was not fully erect.... Still, that call was hogwash....... Walcott got his check and retired......... Had I been ringside in 1953, I'd have chased the referee home on foot...... I also would've been ticked at Walcott for showing no heart or soul at age 39 in 1953...... Walcott took the money and ran............:scaredas::fire

MR.BILL:deal

[Dempsey1238]

Dont know why people keep bring up the Cockell fight, Rocky is allow a poor showing here or there he is human.


I pretty sure Marciano would beat the Ali that show up vs Wepner or Young. Or even Spinks I.

[JIm Broughton]

Spinks and Young possibly but not the Ali who fought Wepner. Rocky would need a ladder to reach Ali consistently enough to hurt him and even an older Ali moved more than any of Rocky's opponents did. Rocky was too short and too slow for Ali....period.

[MRBILL]

Dont know why people keep bring up the Cockell fight, Rocky is allow a poor showing here or there he is human.


I pretty sure Marciano would beat the Ali that show up vs Wepner or Young. Or even Spinks I.

Hmmmm.... Marciano MIGHT beat the Ali who was 224 1/2 flabby pounds who fought Leon Spinks in Las vegas........ POSSIBLE!! But Ali still hung tuff, despite being in piss poor shape..........

ALSO! I know goddamn well Leon Spinks was not a great fighter, but in Feb. of '78, at 196 pounds, Leon Spinks was in great shape at age 24 and full of piss and vinegar........ Leon Spinks in 1978 was the BEST 7 to 8 pro fights fighter that I have ever seen at heavyweight.........

Leon Spinks weighed 202 for the rematch with Ali in the Fall of '78, and Spinks lost a lopsided decision... STILL! Leon Spinks looked solid and strong at 202.............. He was simply out-classed by a well tuned Ali.....

MR.BILL:deal:thumbsup:bbb

[he grant]

Guys, isn't everyone bored over Marciano already ... some think he defies all logic, statistics, recorded events or common sense... others think he was a fluke that lucked out timewise ... no one budges and around and around we go endlessly ... agree to disagree on this guy and get to other equally endless arguments ...

[MRBILL]

Chuck Wepner was NOT a pussy in 1975 out in Cleveland....................... I'm sure Ol' Wepner would've welcomed a fight with a '53 Marciano in Cleveland, instead of a '75 version of Ali who was over 220 pounds, and not yet washed up......... Ali had a tuff time with Ol' Chucky baby, but Ali was always in control, too............... Wepner was tuff............. Cheers.........

MR.BILL

[SuzieQ49]

Mr. Bill, the better question is if Norton could beat Rex Layne, not Rocky Marciano. Marciano kills Norton. Layne in his prime vs norton is a toss up. Layne was a horrible stylistic matchup for norton.

[SuzieQ49]

even an older Ali moved more than any of Rocky's opponents did

Please be realistic. That version of Ali was slow as molasses... Walcott, Charles, Lastarza all moved MUCH BETTER than a mid 1970s FAT Ali

Rocky Marciano knocks out Muhammad Ali of the 70s. Ali would try to rope a dope and take horrible punishment from marciano, Ali simply was not fast enough any more in the 70s to avoid marciano punishment for 15 rounds. I like marciano by late TKO. I think a 1970s Ali is the most overated fighter head to head of all time, there are MANY great heavyweights I would pick to beat a mid 1970s Ali.

1966 Muhammad Ali beats Rocky by unanimous decision. A 1960s Ali was the real thing, he doesnt lose.

[SuzieQ49]

gd

[MRBILL]

Ali of '64 thru '77 EASILY bitch slaps Marciano in a fight in the ring............. CHRIST! Marciano was an aggressive bobber & weaver who owned a good punch of the right hand and a solid left-hook......... The Ali of '76 who struggled against Norton at Yankee Stadium still could handle a 190 lb. Marciano.................... Norton at 217 pounds was on fire in New York............... Ali was hurt, and the fight was close; Ali still won the decision.................. Cheers........

MR.BILL

[Bummy Davis]

i've just posted the stats to your opinion of walcott's best ko wins - those heavies weighed 180 pounds. my god the best in norton's era were over 2 stone heavier. norton could ko 180 pounders a lot easier than 215 pound fighters (35 pound in difference!). BTW Bob Stallings weighed 210 pounds v shavers and won on points (6-4). No doubt shavers lost the last rounds of the fight when he was all burnt out :)

Shavers got dropped for a ( NINE count ...9 in the last rd...Stalling had a 21-24 record and was stopped 6 times before he fought Earnie Shavers., he weighed 209 but could have been lighter, he was 5"9...in one of Shavers early fights he lost to 180lb Stan Johnson, was ko's in 1 by 200 lb Jerry Quarry and could not Ko light heavyweight Vincente Rondon who was Ko'd in 2 rds in a previous fight by Bob Foster.Young also weighed 200 in his draw with Shavers(most felt Young won) LEtS not make Shavers an all time great based on losses to Ali and Holmes. His best Ko came over the KOable Ken Norton who could not slug or run from a puncher.Shavers lost all the big ones

[Bummy Davis]

Chuck Wepner was NOT a pussy in 1975 out in Cleveland....................... I'm sure Ol' Wepner would've welcomed a fight with a '53 Marciano in Cleveland, instead of a '75 version of Ali who was over 220 pounds, and not yet washed up......... Ali had a tuff time with Ol' Chucky baby, but Ali was always in control, too............... Wepner was tuff............. Cheers.........

MR.BILL

I like Chuck Wepner and have seen him fight many times...Rocky would kill Wepner...Chuck was tough because he could bleed better than any heavy other than Henry Cooper but he could not punch his way out of a paper bag or box a lick. Chuck was easy to hit, so easy in fact he did not block, he was a poor mans Tex Cobb and that is not saying much.Chuck had a lot of heart but Chuck was a big target but had zero offence and zero power. In fact I would bet that Don Cockell beats him.

[MRBILL]

:dealI like Chuck Wepner and have seen him fight many times...Rocky would kill Wepner...Chuck was tough because he could bleed better than any heavy other than Henry Cooper but he could not punch his way out of a paper bag or box a lick. Chuck was easy to hit, so easy in fact he did not block, he was a poor mans Tex Cobb and that is not saying much.Chuck had a lot of heart but Chuck was a big target but had zero offence and zero power. In fact I would bet that Don Cockell beats him.
Bum,

Okay... Styles make fights............ Fair...... But even if Marciano would KO Wepner, that doesn't mean he'd whup ALI!! In my world, Ali bitch slaps Marciano into a 13th round defeat................ Marciano cut above and below BOTH eyes.................... I bought the "Computerized DVD" off ESB a year or so ago........ The disc has a DUEL ending............... Marciano's KO ending is BULLSHIT!! I prefer Ali's TKO win on cuts much better:bbb
:deal:thumbsup:hat:rasta:admin:D

SR.BILLARDO

[Dempsey1238]

The thing about Marciano's cuts is Rocky was never relly a bleeder.

In around his 5th pro fight a headbutt open up Rocky's eye, and it never heal right. Thus later foes, like Reenes and Charles reopen the cut. Now the cut was never bad to have a stoppage, but still I dont think Ali would stop the Rock on cuts.

Charles thing was a freak thing.

[MRBILL]

Marciano's ass would be grass against the likes of many POST 1960 heavies............... Liston, Ali, Frazier, Foreman, Holmes, Tyson, Holy, Bowe, Lewis & The K bros. would more than likely kill or KO Marciano in a time machine.............. Cheerio........

MR.BILL

[Dempsey1238]

If you belive that, might as well add Joe Louis, Jack Dempsey and Jack Johnson to that list.

[Bokaj]

Rocky Marciano knocks out Muhammad Ali of the 70s. Ali would try to rope a dope and take horrible punishment from marciano, Ali simply was not fast enough any more in the 70s to avoid marciano punishment for 15 rounds. I like marciano by late TKO. I think a 1970s Ali is the most overated fighter head to head of all time, there are MANY great heavyweights I would pick to beat a mid 1970s Ali.

I would give Ali of 1970-1975 a very good chance against Marciano, and I actually think that this Ali have a better chance of stopping him than vice versa.

A good poster like you shouldn't harp on about Ali only doing the rope-a-dope, because that wasn't what Ali of the early 70's was about. He did it ONCE, but he sticked and moved on far more occassions. Yes, he had lost a step, but against Frazier (especially rematch), Norton (rematch), Ellis, Quarry, Bugner and Chuvalo he still showed really good movement and sharp punching. When he got into proper shape in the early 70's he still looked very, very sharp.


The fight against Foreman was the ONLY one up to that point where he consistently lay on the ropes. Therefore I get a bit annoyed when Ali of the early 70's gets reduced to just a rope-a-doper.

[GPater11093]

The thing about Marciano's cuts is Rocky was never relly a bleeder.

In around his 5th pro fight a headbutt open up Rocky's eye, and it never heal right. Thus later foes, like Reenes and Charles reopen the cut. Now the cut was never bad to have a stoppage, but still I dont think Ali would stop the Rock on cuts.

Charles thing was a freak thing.

wasnt the Charles cut his nose being opened up completly

[Maxmomer]

Please be realistic. That version of Ali was slow as molasses... Walcott, Charles, Lastarza all moved MUCH BETTER than a mid 1970s FAT Ali

Rocky Marciano knocks out Muhammad Ali of the 70s. Ali would try to rope a dope and take horrible punishment from marciano, Ali simply was not fast enough any more in the 70s to avoid marciano punishment for 15 rounds. I like marciano by late TKO. I think a 1970s Ali is the most overated fighter head to head of all time, there are MANY great heavyweights I would pick to beat a mid 1970s Ali.

1966 Muhammad Ali beats Rocky by unanimous decision. A 1960s Ali was the real thing, he doesnt lose.

Are we discussing late 1970's out of shape un-prepared Ali vs Marciano?

[Maxmomer]

Guys, isn't everyone bored over Marciano already ... some think he defies all logic, statistics, recorded events or common sense... others think he was a fluke that lucked out timewise ... no one budges and around and around we go endlessly ... agree to disagree on this guy and get to other equally endless arguments ...

Mix them together.

[DRMULLEN]

The Rock, Knocks, The Block-Off Kenny Head.

[SuzieQ49]

I would give Ali of 1970-1975 a very good chance against Marciano, and I actually think that this Ali have a better chance of stopping him than vice versa.

A good poster like you shouldn't harp on about Ali only doing the rope-a-dope, because that wasn't what Ali of the early 70's was about. He did it ONCE, but he sticked and moved on far more occassions. Yes, he had lost a step, but against Frazier (especially rematch), Norton (rematch), Ellis, Quarry, Bugner and Chuvalo he still showed really good movement and sharp punching. When he got into proper shape in the early 70's he still looked very, very sharp.


Look I am a huge Ali fan, and outside of Joe Louis, I dont think any heavyweight in history beats a 1960s Muhammad Ali. But this is a 1970s Ali were talking about....he got clearly outpointed by Joe Frazier, then struggled greatly with a past his prime overweight joe frazier in rematches. I think a peak Marciano is alot better than the frazier of the 2nd and 3rd fights. Though Frazier put on more pressure and faster hands, Marciano took more angles he was harder to hit with a clean jab, he was the much more effective two fisted puncher, the way he would roll his torso around and come up with a leaping left hook would give a 70s ali huge fits. I just dont think Ali in the 70s could keep up with marciano for 15 rounds, i think Ali would get seriosely worn down.

1960s ali is a different story

[SuzieQ49]

Mix them together.

For someone who rates Dempsey so high head to head, I'll never understand the the lack of high rating for Marciano. Old Fogster once pointed out just how many flaws dempsey has head to head.

[Bokaj]

Look I am a huge Ali fan, and outside of Joe Louis, I dont think any heavyweight in history beats a 1960s Muhammad Ali. But this is a 1970s Ali were talking about....he got clearly outpointed by Joe Frazier, then struggled greatly with a past his prime overweight joe frazier in rematches. I think a peak Marciano is alot better than the frazier of the 2nd and 3rd fights. Though Frazier put on more pressure and faster hands, Marciano took more angles he was harder to hit with a clean jab, he was the much more effective two fisted puncher, the way he would roll his torso around and come up with a leaping left hook would give a 70s ali huge fits. I just dont think Ali in the 70s could keep up with marciano for 15 rounds, i think Ali would get seriosely worn down.

1960s ali is a different story

I have no problem with anyone picking Marciano over early 70's Ali. While I'm not sure I agree, I definitely see an argument for it. What I objected against was that he would try a rope-a-dope. I think his choosen tactic would be to stick and move. Marciano could of course trap him on the ropes and wear him down, but I don't think Ali would put himself in that situation willingly.

I think a bit much is made of Frazier's supposed decline in the second and third fight. Sure, FOTC saw the best version of him, but he was in great shape in the other two as well. I also think that Ali just being six months out of exile probably was a factor in the first fight. It should also be noted that Ali was the one furthest from his prime weight over the three fights all in all, so if one calls Frazier overweight the same also goes for Ali.

Maciano hands down beats any version of Ali post Manilla, btw. Possibly by KO.

[spittle8]

Marciano officially chipped bones in his elbows and broken blood vessels in Lastarza's forearms. His broken blood vessels in his forearms turned into hardened clots. It basically ruined lastarza as a fighter. I did in depth research on this a while back, and this is the scientific evidence that was found after the fight. so even though lastarza did not suffer broken bones, he still suffered DEVASTATING injuries.
Haven't you heard? Marciano was a blown-up light-heavyweight, no way he could have that kind of power...:lol:

[OLD FOGEY]

Simple..... Norton had a ram-rod for a left jab.... And Norton's overhand right was generally thrown with conviction, as well...... I don't think Norton would shit his pants by seeing a dude 5' 10 1/2" tall and barely 190 pounds in the opposite corner..... Norton's psych was "Iffy" at best, but he really only fell apart when faced against big punchers who were well over 200 pounds.....:yep

MR.BILL

Norton also got knocked out by the 188 lb Jose Luis Garcia.

[he grant]

Norton also came back to destroy Garcia.

The only Ali that loses to the best Marciano is post Norton 3 ...

[SuzieQ49]

Good post Bokaj....but if you read the posts here not everyone is agreeing with us. In fact I have heard more than one poster pick a 1977-1978 Ali to easily beat Marciano

[SuzieQ49]

The only Ali that loses to the best Marciano is post Norton 3 ...

You must mean post manilla right? Ali really lost alot after Manilla and by 1976 his speed snap and reflexes were gone and he was relying all on experience. Marciano would crush a 1976-1978 ali, no way ali is able to take that kind of punishment for 15 rounds. Don't forget, Marciano was a better two fisted puncher than frazier.

[Bokaj]

Good post Bokaj....but if you read the posts here not everyone is agreeing with us. In fact I have heard more than one poster pick a 1977-1978 Ali to easily beat Marciano

Yeah, I saw. Quite strange... Even a prime Ali would be pissing blood and whatnot after a fight with Marciano. It would always be a very, very tough fight for him.

[janitor]

Norton also came back to destroy Garcia.

The only Ali that loses to the best Marciano is post Norton 3 ...

So how far gone would he have to be to loose to Doug Jones?

[MRBILL]

If you belive that, might as well add Joe Louis, Jack Dempsey and Jack Johnson to that list.

In a time machine, I would certainly add "Johnson & Louis." But I would exclude Jack Dempsey................. "Dempsey vs. Marciano" in a time machine would be a war.... Too close to call there........... Pretty evenly matched as well............ I'd pick Marciano over Dempsey.....
:hey:good:bbb

MR.BILL

NOTE:

Had Joe Louis been the man of 1940 instead of 1951 when he fought Marciano in New York, he would've had the youth and reserve to fend Marciano off and KO his ass...... Or at least carve Marciano up like a bird on a silver platter..... Christ, Louis was doin' good in '51 for about 6 rds..........

[MRBILL]

Norton also got knocked out by the 188 lb Jose Luis Garcia.

In 1970, Norton himself was only around 200 pounds..... Plus, back in '70, Norton was green as the grass is in the Spring..... Norton weighed an even 200 pounds for Ali in March of 1973 down in San Diego..... Norton was 205 for the rematch in Los Angeles and 217 pounds of muscle for the '76 rubber match.....
:hey

MR.BILL

[MRBILL]

Good post Bokaj....but if you read the posts here not everyone is agreeing with us. In fact I have heard more than one poster pick a 1977-1978 Ali to easily beat Marciano


That could be me.?.? BUT! I'm realistic about this..... The '77 Ali who slipped by Earnie Shavers in New York was still great.... Yes, his reflexes had faded and his legs had slown, but Ali still had his hand speed and chin intact...... In my book, The fight with Shavers was Ali's last true epic effort in the ring to be praised as great....... That was 1977............ Come '78, I thought Ali and Leon Spinks put on a couple of stink fights..... Ali's regaining of the title in Sept. of 1978 was historical, but the fight was a borefest......
:bbb:deal:rasta

MR.BILL

[MRBILL]

So how far gone would he have to be to loose to Doug Jones?

The fight with Jonesy in '63 is too knit-picky for me.... I just taped that fight off ESPN...... Ali got rocked early in round one, but Ali was pretty much in control.... The fact that Ali predicted he'd stop Jones also made him look bad........ But Ali won a UD decision by a wide margin......
:admin:good:yep:-((

MR.BILL

[SuzieQ49]

Norton also came back to destroy Garcia.


When Norton beat Garcia, he was no longer in the top 10, I checked in my Boxing Registar 4th edition

[SuzieQ49]

The fact that Ali predicted he'd stop Jones also made him look bad

Ali would have predicted he would stop marciano in 4, you don't think that would have fueled the rockys fire?

[janitor]

The fight with Jonesy in '63 is too knit-picky for me.... I just taped that fight off ESPN...... Ali got rocked early in round one, but Ali was pretty much in control.... The fact that Ali predicted he'd stop Jones also made him look bad........ But Ali won a UD decision by a wide margin......
:admin:good:yep:-((

MR.BILL

Bottom line.

Ali strugled with a few good but not great fighters who had a style and size similar to Marciano.

He lost to a great fighter (Frazier) who had a similar style and was better in some aspects and worse in others.

Why would any sensible person asume that Ali was going to have an easy time with Marciano.

If he won he would have to walk through his own personal hell. Chuvalo made him piss blood and Marciano would have made him piss a bit of his life escence like Frazier did.

[Bokaj]

Bottom line.

Ali strugled with a few good but not great fighters who had a style and size similar to Marciano.

A few? For me, only Chuvalo fits this description and I wouldn't say Ali struggled with him really.

Norton and Jones was also stalker types and Norton was awkward, but otherwise they didn't have that much in common with Marciano.

If he won he would have to walk through his own personal hell. Chuvalo made him piss blood and Marciano would have made him piss a bit of his life escence like Frazier did.

Yeah, it would be tough.

[MRBILL]

I'm not saying that Ali would have an easy time with Marciano at all........ Marciano's conditioning would certainly help him through a fight with Ali... But I do think the Ali prior to 1977 still had enough skill and savy and spryness left over to school Marciano, and be well ahead on points going down the stretch of a 10, 12 or 15 rounder..... If the fight were a 15 rounder, I see Ali very possibly scoring a late rd. TKO over Marciano by way of cuts...... If Marciano wasn't a typical bleeder like some suggest, that would change with Ali.....

Note:

Nobody had ever seen Sonny Liston sliced and diced above and below the eyes and drooling blood from the mouth until he fought Clay / Ali in Miami in '64........ Cheers...

[kolcade4]

Norton was a definant unsung champ, but rocky's record is undeniable, rocky in 6.

[MRBILL]

A few? For me, only Chuvalo fits this description and I wouldn't say Ali struggled with him really.

Norton and Jones was also stalker types and Norton was awkward, but otherwise they didn't have that much in common with Marciano.



Yeah, it would be tough.

Fuckin' A. Skippy!:good:D

SR.BILLARDO:hat

[MRBILL]

OKAY! I give up........... Marciano KO's Norton inside of 7 rds................ I'll buy into it..... I will...... I swear.......... But I will need a bottle of Pepto Bismol to settle the stomach a tad.......

As for Rocco Marciano beating an in-shape Clay / Ali from 1964 to 1976----NEVER! And I'm not talkin' bout the Ali who fought "Buster Mathis" or "Jimmy Young" from the 70s, either..... I'm talkin' bout the Ali who fought / boxed Frazier in '74 / '75 and the Ali who stopped Foreman in the jungle.......... Also, the Ali who toyed with Jerry Quarry 2X...... Marciano has very little chance against that version of the 70s Ali.......... Cheerio......

Note:

YES! I am a self admitted Ali jock-sniffer...... I'm guilty of it......... I'm not ashamed....

[MRBILL]

For the record, my THREE all-time favorite fighters are: Roberto Duran, Muhammad Ali & a prime Raymond Leonard..... The post '87 Leonard was a major egotistical asshole...... I liked / loved SRL right up until he beat Hagler in 1987...... By the time SRL was fighting Donnie Lalonde, you could see SRL was over-dosing in the spotlight as a promoter / fighter and was only in the BIDNESS for the money....... ALSO! The 5 world title thing is utter bullshit on the part of the boxing world proclaiming SRL to be one officially....

MR.BILL

[janitor]

OKAY! I give up........... Marciano KO's Norton inside of 7 rds................ I'll buy into it..... I will...... I swear.......... But I will need a bottle of Pepto Bismol to settle the stomach a tad.......

As for Rocco Marciano beating an in-shape Clay / Ali from 1964 to 1976----NEVER! And I'm not talkin' bout the Ali who fought "Buster Mathis" or "Jimmy Young" from the 70s, either..... I'm talkin' bout the Ali who fought / boxed Frazier in '74 / '75 and the Ali who stopped Foreman in the jungle.......... Also, the Ali who toyed with Jerry Quarry 2X...... Marciano has very little chance against that version of the 70s Ali.......... Cheerio......

Note:

YES! I am a self admitted Ali jock-sniffer...... I'm guilty of it......... I'm not ashamed....

We value your contributions even on the (few) ocasions when they are off base.

[MRBILL]

We value your contributions even on the (few) ocasions when they are off base.

GOOD!:good

Now, The Ali from '65 thru 1967 was the best and most athletic heavyweight over 200 pounds to this very day.....:D

MR.BILL

[MRBILL]

You know, if Jerry Quarry really accepted a fight with Norton in 1975 on a ONE WEEK notice, I gotta say that Quarry didn't look like a slob who was totally outta shape..... Jerry Quarry weighed 207 pounds to Norton's 218.... YES! Quarry had some loose flesh off his sides of his girth, but that was because he was somewhat blown-up in weight..... A peak Quarry when young usually was between 194 to 199 pounds..... by 1975, 207 pounds was not all that bad.... Jerry Quarry was right there at 207 for Joe Frazier in June of '74...... Later on, Quarry wanted to be up between 205 to 210 so he wouldn't get pushed around by naturally bigger dudes........ So he ended up getting punched around instead......... Hehehe....

MR.BILL

[OLD FOGEY]

In 1970, Norton himself was only around 200 pounds..... Plus, back in '70, Norton was green as the grass is in the Spring..... Norton weighed an even 200 pounds for Ali in March of 1973 down in San Diego..... Norton was 205 for the rematch in Los Angeles and 217 pounds of muscle for the '76 rubber match.....
:hey

MR.BILL

Boxrec says Norton was at 207 for Garcia and he had had more pro fights than Garcia. If Norton was green, so was Garcia.

He weighed 210 for the first Ali fight and 205 for the second. Basically, Norton was about the same size against Garcia as he was against Ali. He was a mature 27 when he fought Garcia.

[MRBILL]

Boxrec says Norton was at 207 for Garcia and he had had more pro fights than Garcia. If Norton was green, so was Garcia.

He weighed 210 for the first Ali fight and 205 for the second. Basically, Norton was about the same size against Garcia as he was against Ali. He was a mature 27 when he fought Garcia.

Both were green.... Fine with me......... Garcia won in 1970.... It happens.....:yep

According to my tape / tapes, Norton was an even 200 pounds for Ali in fight # 1..... 205 for # 2 and 217 1/2 for fight # 3....
:deal

Ali's weights were 221, 212 & 221 for them fights with Norton.......:thumbsup

MR.BILL

[Bummy Davis]

:deal
Bum,

Okay... Styles make fights............ Fair...... But even if Marciano would KO Wepner, that doesn't mean he'd whup ALI!! In my world, Ali bitch slaps Marciano into a 13th round defeat................ Marciano cut above and below BOTH eyes.................... I bought the "Computerized DVD" off ESB a year or so ago........ The disc has a DUEL ending............... Marciano's KO ending is BULLSHIT!! I prefer Ali's TKO win on cuts much better:bbb
:deal:thumbsup:hat:rasta:admin:D

SR.BILLARDO

Hey Bill, everyone is entitiled to there opinion. It is hard to say when you are judging era's but harder in the Heavyweight division because of the size thing. Heavyweights used to train to make weight. I guess because of the 15 rds. Even Ali and Joe Frazier trained for 15 rds and it changed in the 80's....However the guys Ali had trouble with were the smaller more energetic type and Marciano had an unorthodox style. Marciano was a faster,stronger Bonevena that hit like Shavers with his right and Frazier with the hook and he had late stamina and heart...Lets not confuse Marciano with Henry Cooper...IMO Marciano in a war take Ali to the limit and does what Frazier did to Ali in the first fight and would take the next 2 also...It would be tough but Marciano had the will to win. I only see Louis and Marciano as the 2 heavys that would be able to beat any version of Ali...and it could be closer, indeed...but that is my opinion...styles make fights

[MRBILL]

Boxrec says Norton was at 207 for Garcia and he had had more pro fights than Garcia. If Norton was green, so was Garcia.

He weighed 210 for the first Ali fight and 205 for the second. Basically, Norton was about the same size against Garcia as he was against Ali. He was a mature 27 when he fought Garcia.

Boxrec means well, but they screw up a lot of little details..... I've shook my head several times upon reading their dribble....:yep:twisted:

MR.BILL:bbb:good

[Bummy Davis]

You know, if Jerry Quarry really accepted a fight with Norton in 1975 on a ONE WEEK notice, I gotta say that Quarry didn't look like a slob who was totally outta shape..... Jerry Quarry weighed 207 pounds to Norton's 218.... YES! Quarry had some loose flesh off his sides of his girth, but that was because he was somewhat blown-up in weight..... A peak Quarry when young usually was between 194 to 199 pounds..... by 1975, 207 pounds was not all that bad.... Jerry Quarry was right there at 207 for Joe Frazier in June of '74...... Later on, Quarry wanted to be up between 205 to 210 so he wouldn't get pushed around by naturally bigger dudes........ So he ended up getting punched around instead......... Hehehe....

MR.BILL


weight is not the issue here, Quarry admitted to heavy alchohal and cocaine use before this fight,he did not train at all for Norton, he prosituted himself. he and his brother Mike were deep into drugs, Jerry starting late in life doing Coke and drinking with his new wife....Jerry and those close to him said he should have never entered the ring that night...the drug use was the worst thing Jerry did, I think he died around 50 yrs old and his drug and drinking took its toll

[MRBILL]

I'm sorry, but in terms of skill and savy and natural ability, Rocky Marciano doesn't crack my top-8 of all-time heavyweight champions..... Marciano fits in on my list between 9 thru 12......

1. Ali
2. Holmes
3. Johnson
4. Louis
5. Foreman / Lewis (Tie)
6. Vitali Klit
7. Holy
8. Tyson
9. Wlad Klit
10. Liston / Bowe (Tie)
11. Frazier / Marciano (Tie)
12. Dempsey
13. Jeffries
14. Baer
15. Patterson / Tunney / Charles

MR.BILL

[MRBILL]

weight is not the issue here, Quarry admitted to heavy alchohal and cocaine use before this fight,he did not train at all for Norton, he prosituted himself. he and his brother Mike were deep into drugs, Jerry starting late in life doing Coke and drinking with his new wife....Jerry and those close to him said he should have never entered the ring that night...the drug use was the worst thing Jerry did, I think he died around 50 yrs old and his drug and drinking took its toll

I'm aware of that.....:yep

MR.BILL:rasta

[Bummy Davis]

Yeah, I saw. Quite strange... Even a prime Ali would be pissing blood and whatnot after a fight with Marciano. It would always be a very, very tough fight for him.



Brave post on ESB but you are correct

[Bummy Davis]

Marciano's ass would be grass against the likes of many POST 1960 heavies............... Liston, Ali, Frazier, Foreman, Holmes, Tyson, Holy, Bowe, Lewis & The K bros. would more than likely kill or KO Marciano in a time machine.............. Cheerio........

MR.BILL

Liston and tyson had the bully mentality and did not like it when there opponent was fearless....Lyle( no super puncher) had Foreman down a few times and Ali stopped him...Foreman had 6-7 rds to do his thing or he would be winded against Marciano...(terriblethought).....Frazier,Holyfield,Holmes ,Klitscko's,Lewis competitive and tough fights but I think you would have to crazy to think a time machine could take the hardness and conditioning of Marciano or the heart....Todays training would make Marciano a bigger man and would the time machine prepare those guys for a 15 round fight

[OLD FOGEY]

Both were green.... Fine with me......... Garcia won in 1970.... It happens.....:yep

According to my tape / tapes, Norton was an even 200 pounds for Ali in fight # 1..... 205 for # 2 and 217 1/2 for fight # 3....
:deal

Ali's weights were 221, 212 & 221 for them fights with Norton.......:thumbsup

MR.BILL

The tape I have seen says 210. So does the Boxing Register. So does the New York Times coverage of the fight on April 1, 1973. According to the Boxing Register, which gives his weights for all his fights, Norton was never less than 201. It doesn't much matter, though, as he was at 207 for Garcia who was at 188. If an ordinary fighter like Garcia could stop Norton, it is certainly a tough sell that he could survive top level punchers of that weight simply because of the weight advantage.

By the way, I remember watching this fight live on TV and I remember the weights as being 221 for Ali and 210 for Norton.

[MRBILL]

Weight gain or not, Marciano would not be well off at 200 to 210 pounds of muscle.... He's still a hair under 6' tall with short arms.... At 200 solid pounds, Marciano's speed would be reduced, and perhaps even his stamina would suffer...... Marciano doesn't do well with the POST '60 crop of champions.........

Prior to 1960 I'd place Marciano in the top-5....

1. Johnson
2. Louis
3. Marciano
4. Jeffries
5. Dempsey / Baer / Charles

After 1960, Marciano takes a big dip.....

MR.BILL

[MRBILL]

The tape I have seen says 210. So does the Boxing Register. So does the New York Times coverage of the fight on April 1, 1973. According to the Boxing Register, which gives his weights for all his fights, Norton was never less than 201. It doesn't much matter, though, as he was at 207 for Garcia who was at 188. If an ordinary fighter like Garcia could stop Norton, it is certainly a tough sell that he could survive top level punchers of that weight simply because of the weight advantage.

By the way, I remember watching this fight live on TV and I remember the weights as being 221 for Ali and 210 for Norton.

Goddammit.... Now I'm gonna have to pull my tapes out........ :twisted:

MR.BILL:bbb

[groove]

Marciano would get demolished by Liston like Patterson did. Styles is what it's about. A boxer will beat a big puncher. A swarmer will not. What Foreman did to Frazier and Norton he would do to Marciano. That is a fact. You bringing up Bonanvena to Ali shows how biased you are. Eliis nowhere near a peak 60s ali outboxed Bonavena. Ali would killed Oscar in 1967. Oscar was lucky he fought him after 3 years exile. Simple as that!

[MRBILL]

:heyMarciano would get demolished by Liston like Patterson did. Styles is what it's about. A boxer will beat a big puncher. A swarmer will not. What Foreman did to Frazier and Norton he would do to Marciano. That is a fact. You bringing up Bonanvena to Ali shows how biased you are. Eliis nowhere near a peak 60s ali outboxed Bonavena. Ali would killed Oscar in 1967. Oscar was lucky he fought him after 3 years exile. Simple as that!

As likeable as Floyd Patterson was, he was NOT a great heavyweight..... Most know that, as well......... However, he was a great 180 to 195 pound fighter...... I've gone on record saying that Patterson MIGHT'VE schooled Marciano had they fought in late '56 or 1957....... Many disagree, and I'm not positive myself..... Its just a notion I have...... Timing is everything here...... I believe by 1956, Marciano's time had come and gone.....:bbb

MR.BILL

[OLD FOGEY]

My take on the original question is that Marciano is all wrong for Norton. Norton did better against boxers. He might defeat the Tunneys and Walcotts and Jack Johnsons, but I don't see him doing well against the Marcianos and Dempseys.

As someone put it, styles make fights, but style in this case favors Marciano in my judgement.

[groove]

i think Marciano had the right style to beat Norton. Ali never worked that guy out but he had to be more agressive and fight coming forward like Marciano was great at. What you had here was simply two counter punchers cancelling each other out. Ali was outta shape for the 1st fight, he was in great conditon for the 2nd and he was going down rapidly for the 3rd and last fight. He was the dope-on-the-rope by that stage. Monrey was the only reason that kept him fighting by that stage. Sad!

[prime]

In this matchup, I don't see almighty weight being decisive.

Rocky would not stop coming and Norton can never, ever, handle power effectively. If we begin to believe that Ali or Holmes could hit as hard or harder than Marciano, we are taking revisionism to the point of distortion of foregone conclusions safely accepted as true for decades. Marciano's right hand, thrown with great body torque and leverage, was more powerful than any single Ali or Holmes punch. As Frazier said in response to why his blows were more effective than Ali's at FOTC: he was throwing his whole body into the punches, something hardly true of any boxer.

And the Suzie-Q would not come alone. Marciano would crowd Norton all night and grind him and his muscles down before the final bell. It wouldn't be very close.

[SuzieQ49]

Marciano would get demolished by Liston like Patterson did. Styles is what it's about


This is actually very wrong. Not only was marciano 10x more durable, stronger, and powerful than patterson..he also fought MUCH different style wise than floyd.

I have gone through a liston vs marciano prime for prime fight a billion times and I am 100% confident that this fight GOES THE DISTANCE with liston winning a close unanimous decision in a WAR! both these fighters were ALOT more patient and cool in the ring than frazier and foreman...so dont expect in rounds 1 and 2 for each fighter to come flying into eachother fists flailing right away...there will be alot of precision calculating jabbing and crouching in this fight. both will have alot of respect for eachothers power... Liston will be content to bust up marciano at long range, while marciano will work his way in slowly getting him some big licks here and there on the inside. GREAT fight

[SuzieQ49]

I'm sorry, but in terms of skill and savy and natural ability, Rocky Marciano doesn't crack my top-8 of all-time heavyweight champions..... Marciano fits in on my list between 9 thru 12......

1. Ali
2. Holmes
3. Johnson
4. Louis
5. Foreman / Lewis (Tie)
6. Vitali Klit
7. Holy
8. Tyson
9. Wlad Klit
10. Liston / Bowe (Tie)
11. Frazier / Marciano (Tie)
12. Dempsey
13. Jeffries
14. Baer
15. Patterson / Tunney / Charles

MR.BILL


I dont agree with this list at all, and it seems to me your way to caught up on size. vitali klit 6? is that a joke? vitali never beat any in shape good fighter in his life

[MRBILL]

I dont agree with this list at all, and it seems to me your way to caught up on size. vitali klit 6? is that a joke? vitali never beat any in shape good fighter in his life

Well, size is important to me to a certain extent, but I do look at skills all the way......... I'm confident that my top-10 list could and would beat Marciano in a time machine.......:yep

MR.BILL:bbb

[kolcade4]

I'm sorry, but in terms of skill and savy and natural ability, Rocky Marciano doesn't crack my top-8 of all-time heavyweight champions..... Marciano fits in on my list between 9 thru 12......

1. Ali
2. Holmes
3. Johnson
4. Louis
5. Foreman / Lewis (Tie)
6. Vitali Klit
7. Holy
8. Tyson
9. Wlad Klit
10. Liston / Bowe (Tie)
11. Frazier / Marciano (Tie)
12. Dempsey
13. Jeffries
14. Baer
15. Patterson / Tunney / Charles

MR.BILL
im sorry bill but there is possibility you might need to get the old noggin checked with your list. you say these things with confidence but you my friend are full of smoke.

[MRBILL]

Okay..... I fucked up on the initial weight of Ken Norton against Ali in San Diego..... Norton was 210.......... 205 for fight # 2 and 217 1/2 for # 3 at Yankee Stadium.....

Again, Ali's weights were 221, 212 & 221 for fights 1 thru 3..... Cheers......

MR.BILL

[SuzieQ49]

im sorry bill but there is possibility you might need to get the old noggin checked with your list. you say these things with confidence but you my friend are full of smoke.

Agreed with all due respect to Bill

[MRBILL]

Agreed with all due respect to Bill

Such is life..... Though I'd bet that my top-10 could and would beat Marciano........... :D:bbb

MR.BILL:rasta

[MRBILL]

Just finished reviewing "Ali-Norton 1." Jesus Christ that is a boring ass fight..... Actually, NONE of the three fights were all that great in terms of sustained action and thrills.... Peace...

MR.BILL

[MRBILL]

I tell you all who's full of shit.... Burt R. Sugar..... That's who......... I forgot all of Sugar's top-5 list, but I recall he had Marciano at # 3 and Ezzard Charles at # 4...... If he's only thinking prior to 1960, I can see his vision.... But he was talking from 1887 to 2008 I believe........ That's real hard to digest for me....... Cheerio.....

MR.BILL

[BITCH ASS]

What would be the purpose of pumping Marciano up with muscle when he had no problem knocking people out when he was weighing 185?

What would size do? Would it give him a chin?

Does Klitschko have a good chin? He weighs 250 lbs, but is considered a chinny fighter.

Does Lewis have a good chin? He was knocked out cold before by an a heavyweight who has decent punching power, but it's nothing to write about in the history books.

So what good would it do Marciano to make him bigger? It would make him slower, less conditioned, and less agile, which would make him a worse overall fighter.

He would be like today's straight up and down lugs that can't really fight for shit.

Some of ya'll put too much emphasis into size as if this was a wrestling match, when history has proven time and time again that size is not a determinate factor of power.

A guy like Louis for instance at 200 lbs was arguably one of the hardest hitters in the sport, but if he was 230 using some bullshit weightlifting program that may add an incremental percentage of punching power if any, MRBILL and severall other posters would be all over his nuts.

Size is good for strength, and strenght is good if you're object is to wrestle the guy, but it the way to get size without putting on fat usually takes weightlifting, and weightlifting can make you stiffer, slower, and more apt to run out of gas because of the oxygen required to utlize your muscles.

I think it might be psychological though. Perhaps people obsessed with size are scared of big men and automatically think that they would be beaten to a pulp if they were to get in a fight with them.

Well, I feel sorry for you because it's not true. Sometimes big guys can really hit, but more often than not it's very difficult to gauge whether or not someone has power, and often times you'll see these big guys on the back that push it rather than hit it, and that kind of power doesn't translate very well to a boxing ring.

In a wrestling match sure, but boxing.......

And furthermore, more importantly is BOXING itself.

Ya'll get so focused on size that you don't see or understand the styles and the skill of boxing itself. Marciano for instance would be a difficult target for many of the big men of today just like Archie Moore was and it's because of his style and his ability to get so low that it takes away the 1-2 punches that big men are opt to throw. It also makes it difficult for them to throw uppercuts because they are required to get low which is exhuasting and difficult because generally they are not as limber as smaller men who also have them beat in the speed department.

You show me a film of Klitschko bending at the waist, and I'll give you 5 bucks.

This is boxing, not obsessing over some guy's body. Ya'll have got to get off the gay shit and think about the skill actually involved in the sport. Use your eyes.

[BITCH ASS]

Mr Bill, if Rocky doesn't crack your top 10 heavyweights it's obvious that you don't really know much about the sport.

Rocky fought in arguably one of the hardest eras of all time, certainly one of the deepest, with the largest pool of tallent.

Explain to me how you go 49 and 0 with no skill?

Do you really think Rocky got that far with his heart and punch alone? I'm sorry, but guys like that end up as journey men.

Rocky had incredible skill and was an excellent counterpuncher that often forced his opponent to throw first because if they didn't, it would be too late as Rocky's crouching style would allow him to get inside and deliver his bombs.

And because that particular style is very difficult to hit against, his opponents would get flustered and tenative because most of the times they threw Rocky would duck and counterpunch.

It seems simple, but it takes a great degree of dilligence and fortitude to develop that kind of style and make it work in the ring with the ability to be agile enough to not just slip, but counter punch your opponents.

You not having Rocky in the top 10 leads me to believe that you need to learn more about boxing...

If you think today's fighters with their straight up and down Tysonesque style without the headmovement or the fight tall can't bend at the waist, keep your hands far away from your face and lean back technique of today is superior to the techniques from the past.........

I can't help you.

[MRBILL]

I do like size, but it does not determine my overall pick each and every time out...... Take Nick Valubum for instance.... The guy is a hulk, but his punching power sucks long pool stick.... Same thing for the late Primo Carnera, too...... Another hulk who punched like a wus.....

Then you have big ass dudes like Buddy Baer who had a power-punch from hell, but no defense or athletic ability....

George Foreman of the early 70s was strong and powerful, but the only proper punch he knew how to throw was a left jab....

Gerry Cooney was a tall dude with a left-hook from hell, but his right hand sucked and I hated his "Pawing" jab....

The list goes on and on........ Size is good, but it is NOT everything.......

MR.BILL

EXTRA:

I agree that Marciano was fine and at his best between 187 to 192 pounds...... Marciano up at 210 would NOT be a better fighter with more power or stamina..... He'd be slow as all hell.........

[MRBILL]

Axe,

Give me a break........ Marciano was carefully managed and his title days were NOT all that tough of an era...... PUH-LEASE! Spare me the song and dance.......... Middle aged white guys need to stop riding Marciano's nut-sack...... Rocky Marciano was a fine fighter and a good champion, but I can name 10 guys past or present that I think could've taken him apart or to school..... Nuff said........... Jesus......

MR.BILL

[SuzieQ49]

I agree that Marciano was fine and at his best between 187 to 192 pounds...... Marciano up at 210 would NOT be a better fighter with more power or stamina..... He'd be slow as all hell.........

thats not true. With Modern nutrition supplements weight training marciano could easily come in at 205lb without sacrificing speed . REMEMBER marciano naturally weighed well above 200lb in his prime and cut down to 185lb...this is what his brother told me personally. If marciano hits weight lifting, doing lifts like cleans and deadlifts...he will build up his fast twitch muscles meaning he will be MORE explosive kinda like a tyson.

[hhascup]

I tell you all who's full of shit.... Burt R. Sugar..... That's who......... I forgot all of Sugar's top-5 list, but I recall he had Marciano at # 3 and Ezzard Charles at # 4...... If he's only thinking prior to 1960, I can see his vision.... But he was talking from 1887 to 2008 I believe........ That's real hard to digest for me....... Cheerio.....

MR.BILL

Here's what my good friend Bert had:

Sugar's top 10 heavyweights: 2006

1. Joe Louis
2. Muhammad Ali
3. Jack Dempsey
4. Jack Johnson
5. Gene Tunney
6. Rocky Marciano
7. Ezzard Charles
8. George Foreman
9. Joe Frazier
10. Larry Holmes

Source: "Ringside: The Ten Greatest Heavyweights," ESPN Classic


Bert Sugar, 1991

1.Jack Dempsey
2.Joe Louis
3.Muhammad Ali
4.Jack Johnson
5.Gene Tunney
6.Rocky Marciano
7.Joe Frazier
8.Larry Holmes
9.Sonny Liston
10.Mike Tyson

I asked him why did he change several rtaings such as Dempsey from #1 to #3. He said that he learned to listen to what others had to say. I also asked him about Rocky, and why he was rated at #6 and he said because of his record, and if he lost to either Lowry or LaStarza, which could have gone either way, he would be rated out of his top 10.

[SuzieQ49]

Marciano was carefully managed in his title days

carefully managed you mean the way his management sent him in the ring in 5 out of his 6 title defenses vs Ring Magazine # 1 contenders, and that they ducked nobody during his title reigning years?

[MRBILL]

Here's what my good friend Bert had:

Sugar's top 10 heavyweights: 2006

1. Joe Louis
2. Muhammad Ali
3. Jack Dempsey
4. Jack Johnson
5. Gene Tunney
6. Rocky Marciano
7. Ezzard Charles
8. George Foreman
9. Joe Frazier
10. Larry Holmes

Source: "Ringside: The Ten Greatest Heavyweights," ESPN Classic


Bert Sugar, 1991

1.Jack Dempsey
2.Joe Louis
3.Muhammad Ali
4.Jack Johnson
5.Gene Tunney
6.Rocky Marciano
7.Joe Frazier
8.Larry Holmes
9.Sonny Liston
10.Mike Tyson

I asked him why did he change several rtaings such as Dempsey from #1 to #3. He said that he learned to listen to what others had to say. I also asked him about Rocky, and why he was rated at #6 and he said because of his record, and if he lost to either Lowry or LaStarza, which could have gone either way, he would be rated out of his top 10.


Fair enough.... See.... That's the shit I'm talkin' bout.......... Dempsey at # 1 and Larry Holmes down at the lower bottom...... Yeah, I'll have another drink..... Christ......
:patsch

MR.BILL

[BITCH ASS]

Axe,

Give me a break........ Marciano was carefully managed and his title days were NOT all that tough of an era...... PUH-LEASE! Spare me the song and dance.......... Middle aged white guys need to stop riding Marciano's nut-sack...... Rocky Marciano was a fine fighter and a good champion, but I can name 10 guys past or present that I think could've taken him apart or to school..... Nuff said........... Jesus......

MR.BILL


Shit.......name 10.

And what's with the race and age assumption? And today's tallent pool?

Have you seen today's fighters? Guys today are Juan Ma Lopez, straight up and down, hands up, little headmovement, mostly brute force and sharp punches.

Is that tallent to you?

Rocky was in an era where people could actually fight, and people wanted to fight as boxing was mainstream when today the tallent pool is shit.

Anyway, name those 10.

[OLD FOGEY]

Axe,

Give me a break........ Marciano was carefully managed and his title days were NOT all that tough of an era...... PUH-LEASE! Spare me the song and dance.......... Middle aged white guys need to stop riding Marciano's nut-sack...... Rocky Marciano was a fine fighter and a good champion, but I can name 10 guys past or present that I think could've taken him apart or to school..... Nuff said........... Jesus......

MR.BILL

You might name 10,000 guys you personally think would beat Marciano. But the historical facts are that he is the only heavyweight champion of the 20th century to win all his fights, he knocked out a higher percentage of opponents than any other 20th century heavyweight champion, he has the highest winning percentage and knockout percentage against Hall-of-Famers, champions, or rated or ever rated opponents, of any fighter in the Hall of Fame.

[SuzieQ49]

I talked with Sugar Personally before. The guy is a good story teller, but I think his knowledge is very limited for a "famous" historian.

I also asked him about Rocky, and why he was rated at #6 and he said because of his record, and if he lost to either Lowry or LaStarza, which could have gone either way, he would be rated out of his top 10.

he puts way too much emphasis into the 49-0 rather than the fact Marciano went 6-0 with 5 knockouts against hall of famers, knocked out every Ring Magazine top 10 heavyweight contender he faced, and had a style on film that would cause pure hell for any heavyweight in any era.


I remember in Rocky Marciano ringside, Teddy Atlas a very knowledable boxing man completley owned sugar when discussing marciano's defense...sugar was saying he had the best right hand in history but no defense, and atlas was breaking down the Walcott I film showing little things marciano did on defense that were very effective. Clearly a much better boxing mind.

[SuzieQ49]

You might name 10,000 guys you personally think would beat Marciano. But the historical facts are that he is the only heavyweight champion of the 20th century to win all his fights, he knocked out a higher percentage of opponents than any other 20th century heavyweight champion, he has the highest winning percentage and knockout percentage against Hall-of-Famers, champions, or rated or ever rated opponents, of any fighter in the Hall of Fame. These facts are what shapes history.

good stuff

[MRBILL]

thats not true. With Modern nutrition supplements weight training marciano could easily come in at 205lb without sacrificing speed . REMEMBER marciano naturally weighed well above 200lb in his prime and cut down to 185lb...this is what his brother told me personally. If marciano hits weight lifting, doing lifts like cleans and deadlifts...he will build up his fast twitch muscles meaning he will be MORE explosive kinda like a tyson.

200 plus pounds was not good for Marciano at all.... He was a natural heavy kid when he was young... He has been at 210 to 215 pounds before.... Yes, lotsa' fat, etc.... I know that.... But Marciano trained his aging ass off in '69 for the comp. fight with Ali.... Marciano weighed-in at 200 pounds even, and appeared slightly thick around the middle, as well.. Granted Rocco was around 45 yrs old in 1969, but he was chunky at 200 pounds.....
:bbb

MR.BILL

[BITCH ASS]

I talked with Sugar Personally before. The guy is a good story teller, but I think his knowledge is very limited for a "famous" historian.



he puts way too much emphasis into the 49-0 rather than the fact Marciano went 6-0 with 5 knockouts against hall of famers, knocked out every Ring Magazine top 10 heavyweight contender he faced, and had a style on film that would cause pure hell for any heavyweight in any era.


I remember in Rocky Marciano ringside, Teddy Atlas a very knowledable boxing man completley owned sugar when discussing marciano's defense...sugar was saying he had the best right hand in history but no defense, and atlas was breaking down the Walcott I film showing little things marciano did on defense that were very effective. Clearly a much better boxing mind.

Marciano had excellent defense. His technique of getting lower than your opponent with a sideways lean makes it nearly impossible to hit him with any punch.

Taller opponents will have to reach in against him which will often leave their chins exposed.

Only the greatest fighters in the sport like Walcott who was a master at keeping his chin protected, a figther who Bernard Hopkins mimics, and Ezzard Charles could really avoid being hit clean.

You'll see the same thing happen against Klitschko when he fights Haye who will employ a similiar tactic of using his opponents height against him.

The only thing that Haye may lack is nerves, and he needs a little refinenment and we might be watching a relic from the past.

[SuzieQ49]

Marciano weighed-in at 200 pounds even, and appeared slightly thick around the middle, as well..

Marciano was 46 years old. at that age ur body naturally SAGS and u get natural flab in lower midsection due to old age, and btw I believe Marciano weighed 220lb for the computer fight, cutting down from 270lb. Rocky still looked imposing for an old man though....Ali came out of that sparring session with a whole new respect for Marciano and he told Angelo Dundee in private. Said Marciano was alot harder to hit with a jab than he looks, and he said he couldnt believe how strong and how hard hitting marciano must have been in his prime, because 46 year old marciano body blows left Ali with welts and red swells all over his midsection. Ali critisized practically every heavyweight champion before him, EXCEPT marciano.

[MRBILL]

Marciano was 46 years old. at that age ur body naturally SAGS, and btw I believe Marciano weighed 220lb for the computer fight, cutting down from 270lb.

NO! I scored the DVD.... Ali was a bloated 220, while Rocco was a semi-bloated 200........... Marciano claimed he dropped roughly 50 pounds in training.......
:deal

SR.BILL:deal

[BITCH ASS]

Again, what difference does his weight make?

Did size give Klitschko a chin?

And as far as his defense, if Marciano had piss poor defense, how is it that in 39 fights he was never knocked down?

But the size thing.........it doesn't matter. Rocky would be just fine at 185-190.

The man can punch.

[SuzieQ49]

I have the DVD too, and i choose to use better sources than some "narrator" who doesnt know the information hes getting. According to Peter Marciano, Rocky was 220lb for the computer fight cutting down from 50-60lb.

Btw did you checkout the rare footage of Rocky throwing Rocks? he was as chizzled as they come. Imagine with modern ehancements if he lifted weights and got modern nutrtion...hed come into today at a ripped 205lb and be unbeatable.

[OLD FOGEY]

Here's what my good friend Bert had:

Sugar's top 10 heavyweights: 2006

1. Joe Louis
2. Muhammad Ali
3. Jack Dempsey
4. Jack Johnson
5. Gene Tunney
6. Rocky Marciano
7. Ezzard Charles
8. George Foreman
9. Joe Frazier
10. Larry Holmes

Source: "Ringside: The Ten Greatest Heavyweights," ESPN Classic


Bert Sugar, 1991

1.Jack Dempsey
2.Joe Louis
3.Muhammad Ali
4.Jack Johnson
5.Gene Tunney
6.Rocky Marciano
7.Joe Frazier
8.Larry Holmes
9.Sonny Liston
10.Mike Tyson

I asked him why did he change several rtaings such as Dempsey from #1 to #3. He said that he learned to listen to what others had to say. I also asked him about Rocky, and why he was rated at #6 and he said because of his record, and if he lost to either Lowry or LaStarza, which could have gone either way, he would be rated out of his top 10.


If any average poster posted this list and I was FORCED to comment on it, I would say it was unimpressive and I would not be convinced of the boxing knowledge of the man who made it. Tunney in the top five, but Lennox Lewis not even in the top ten? Holmes at number ten behind Charles as a heavyweight?

How much money would anyone here put on Tunney against Lewis? Or Charles against Holmes?

This list makes little sense either historically or as p4p ratings.

[MRBILL]

If any average poster posted this list and I was FORCED to comment on it, I would say it was unimpressive and I would not be convinced of the boxing knowledge of the man who made it. Tunney in the top five, but Lennox Lewis not even in the top ten? Holmes at number ten behind Charles as a heavyweight?

How much money would anyone here put on Tunney against Lewis? Or Charles against Holmes?

This list makes little sense either historically or as p4p ratings.

Goddamn right, man.......:yep:good

MR.BILL:thumbsup

[leverage]

Right. He was hit on the money by Ali, Holmes, and Quarry and didn't go down. Not once. Stop exaggerating. It ruins your credibility.
Marciano would knock norton out soon after the first time he landed. Ali and holmes though solid punchers were not knockout punchers, and quarry, though a hard puncher, was a level below marciano in that department.

Norton was a hard luck fighter when it came to facing big punchers. His fights against foreman, shavers (whom he should have beaten) and cooney proved this. He just seemed to freeze up for some reason and a fight with marciano would've been no different. Marciano by ko within 3.

[hhascup]

We went over this about Rocky many times before and I don't think we should do it again BUT.

Yes he did beat several Hall of Famers
Yes he was 49-0
Yes he had the Greatest winning percentage against Top 10 contenders and HOF.

BUT he fought only 8 different boxers that were rated in the Top 10, when he fought them, for a total of 11 times in his 49 bouts. Only LaStarza (2), Charles (2), Walcott (2), Louis, Cockell, Moore, Harry Matthews & Rex Layne were rated at the time Rocky fought them. Just to compare, 38 of Ali's bouts were against Top 10 contenders when he fought them.

I can add a lot more BUT I am in Florida on vacation right now and my wife is telling me to PLEASE get off the computer and come to bad, so I will leave it at that.

[MRBILL]

You know, it really piss' me the fuck off when a poster attacks another poster's integrity, just because they beg to differ on a certain topic.... I have never ever bad mouthed Rocco Marciano.... BUT! I have been critical of him and his 49-0-0 (43) Ko's record... Still, I am a fan and follower of Marciano's career and story.... However, I cannot place R.M. up at the top in the all-time great list of heavyweight champions.... I can squeeze Marciano in the top-10 if I want to..... However, top-5? No way...... Cheers.....

MR.BILL

[SuzieQ49]

I just can't believe you put Vitali Klitschko # 6 on your all time heavyweight list. totally unworthy. also Wladimir klitschko in the top 10? he hasnt even beat potvekin, haye, arreola, or chagaev/valuev yet....let the man beat some good names before you include him.

[MRBILL]

I just can't believe you put Vitali Klitschko # 6 on your all time heavyweight list. totally unworthy. also Wladimir klitschko in the top 10? he hasnt even beat potvekin, haye, arreola, or chagaev/valuev yet....let the man beat some good names before you include him.

That's just a matter of opinion...... I think the "K" brothers are the goods.... Especially older bro. Vitali.... Vitali Klit is downright scary, powerful, solid, rugged & good..... He's pretty much kicked-ass or made his mark against everybody he's ever fought.......... I think V.K. could hold his own in any era from 1887 to 2009...... He may not beat every goddamn champion over the last 122 yrs, but he'd be game throughout..... I give V.K. that much credit.........:hey

Wlad Klit is now safety first and cautious....... STILL! His technique and speed / mobility is above average for a dude his size........ Manny Steward has done wonders for Wlad Klit since 2005....... Wlad Klit is the goods right now.....:yep

MR.BILL:bbb

[MRBILL]

Off topic.... I have NO DOUBT that Wlad Klit will beat the ever lovin' shit outta David Haye come June in Germany......

MR.BILL

[Dempsey1238]

But the K brothers did not clean out the divsion, yet any way.

You may say Rocky did not fight as many rated guys, and that is true, Ali was more active, BUT Marciano DID clean out his era, and thats all one can relly ask for. I dont belive Bert's saying if Rocky lost, he drop him out of the top ten. Rocky was still the man, and still clean out the divsion. Either way he earn to be in the top ten. I have him in the top 5 personal.

Yeah Ali and Louis are 1 and 2, but than the numbers relly drop.

Does say Tyson should be over Marciano? Or Bowe? Or even Lewis?? I cant see it imo. Perhaps Lewis, but Tyson did not lived to his name loseing to Douglas, Bowe was a one champ wonder, Holyfiled was inconsisted, Holmes didnt fight the best, and had TOOO many 11-0 type guys on his record. I take the 5 title defenses over Walcott, Moore and Charles, over the Beys of the divison any time, Holmes also never clean out the divsion.

Even with a loss, Rocky should be there for cleaning out his era, and being the man.

[MRBILL]

Well... As a true champion..... NO! "Tyson & Bowe" are Not in Marciano's class...... Not even close............. BUT! In a time machine; prime-4-prime; I'd pick BOTH Tyson and Bowe to clean Marciano's clock in a fight..... Fighting and Class are two different things.......

LOOK! Fellas, I love to pick on Riddick Bowe... Why? because he's a stupid slob....... However, the Bowe who weighed 235 pounds for Holy in 1992 was a very well trained and dangerous mother-fucker...... That was his ONE night he put it all together in the ring........ In a time machine, that version of Bowe would've beaten 99% of all the prior champs leading up to 1992........ Too bad Bowe couldn't maintain his focus and direction....

MR.BILL

[Bad_Intentions]

O dear god, here we go again
:lol::lol:

[Dempsey1238]

Well... As a true champion..... NO! "Tyson & Bowe" are Not in Marciano's class...... Not even close............. BUT! In a time machine; prime-4-prime; I'd pick BOTH Tyson and Bowe to clean Marciano's clock in a fight..... Fighting and Class are two different things.......

LOOK! Fellas, I love to pick on Riddick Bowe... Why? because he's a stupid slob....... However, the Bowe who weighed 235 pounds for Holy in 1992 was a very well trained and dangerous mother-fucker...... That was his ONE night he put it all together in the ring........ In a time machine, that version of Bowe would've beaten 99% of all the prior champs leading up to 1992........ Too bad Bowe couldn't maintain his focus and direction....

MR.BILL

Not sure on that, I mean we can never know if Tyson would beat Rock or vice vesa, hench why I dont relly used head to head imo.

I mean I was pretty sure Zab would beat Baldomir, I was pretty sure Tyson would walk though Douglas in a few rounds.
And Holyfiled by the way.

Hell the first time, I would have though there was NO way in Hell Rahman would ko Lewis.

Should Rocky relly be drop because we THINK or guess he might lose to Bowe?? It would be a great fight, and both would show there best, but we have no ideal who would win.

Hell for all we know Bowe might have beating Rocky, Louis and Dempsey on the same night one right after the other when he beat Holyfiled. All with first round kos, but we dont know.

[MRBILL]

Not sure on that, I mean we can never know if Tyson would beat Rock or vice vesa, hench why I dont relly used head to head imo.

I mean I was pretty sure Zab would beat Baldomir, I was pretty sure Tyson would walk though Douglas in a few rounds.
And Holyfiled by the way.

Hell the first time, I would have though there was NO way in Hell Rahman would ko Lewis.

Should Rocky relly be drop because we THINK or guess he might lose to Bowe?? It would be a great fight, and both would show there best, but we have no ideal who would win.

Hell for all we know Bowe might have beating Rocky, Louis and Dempsey on the same night one right after the other when he beat Holyfiled. All with first round kos, but we dont know.

Dempsey,

Check through your wording.... You lost me there... But I think I hear and see your point....:D

MR.BILL

[MRBILL]

Better..

I got "Bowe-Holy 2" rolling just to judge how Bowe had dipped in a mere single year...... Jesus.......

MR.BILL

[Dempsey1238]

I caught my self when I hit the send button.

When I made the Dempsey name. At the time I had Dempsey in the top 3. He look impressive vs Willard, Firpo and others. And the million $ gates. I belive in the myth.
But when relly thinking about it, Bert Suger relly rated Dempsey WAY too high. As high as I used to.

He gets drop for failing to face his number 1 and 2 for 7 long years. I know pople say Wills lost to Sharkey ete, but 7 years as number 1 is a long time. Marciano only had Valez slip in and out for a few months in 54, and 55, and people make a big deal on that.
But Wills had 7 years.

2nd outside of Gibbions, he didnt relly face top HEAVYWEIGHTs contenders. I mean what did George do in the heavyweights before he face Dempsey?? I commend him for his lightheayweight run. But it was still a easy picking for Dempsey. Firpo did hardly anything for a title shot outside of beating 47 year old Willard(Underated fighter imo)
But the worse part is the lay offs. No Champion did what Dempsey did and gets rated high. Dempsey did it.
Defends the title for a year, makes his first million $ gate, and fails to fight for 2 years about. Fights Gibbions and Firpo, and 3 years. Than Gene Tunney.

Thats nearly 5 years inactive in a 7 year span. Dempsey should have face Wills if anything in his inactive years.

I am almost temped in dropping Dempsey outside the top ten, but something holds me there from doing that.

[MRBILL]

I caught my self when I hit the send button.

When I made the Dempsey name. At the time I had Dempsey in the top 3. He look impressive vs Willard, Firpo and others. And the million $ gates. I belive in the myth.
But when relly thinking about it, Bert Suger relly rated Dempsey WAY too high. As high as I used to.

He gets drop for failing to face his number 1 and 2 for 7 long years. I know pople say Wills lost to Sharkey ete, but 7 years as number 1 is a long time. Marciano only had Valez slip in and out for a few months in 54, and 55, and people make a big deal on that.
But Wills had 7 years.

2nd outside of Gibbions, he didnt relly face top HEAVYWEIGHTs contenders. I mean what did George do in the heavyweights before he face Dempsey?? I commend him for his lightheayweight run. But it was still a easy picking for Dempsey. Firpo did hardly anything for a title shot outside of beating 47 year old Willard(Underated fighter imo)
But the worse part is the lay offs. No Champion did what Dempsey did and gets rated high. Dempsey did it.
Defends the title for a year, makes his first million $ gate, and fails to fight for 2 years about. Fights Gibbions and Firpo, and 3 years. Than Gene Tunney.

Thats nearly 5 years inactive in a 7 year span. Dempsey should have face Wills if anything in his inactive years.

I am almost temped in dropping Dempsey outside the top ten, but something holds me there from doing that.

I hear that.... Trust me, Old farts and "Dempsey" nut-grabbers will crucify you by reducing Jack Dempsey in the ratings......... But I agree with you...
:deal:bbb

MR.BILL

[MRBILL]

Okay.... Shoot me if you must but, after reviewing BOTH "Ali-Spinks" fights of 1978, I will say that Leon Spinks was in his physical prime in 1978 despite only having 7 pro fights under his belt buckle.... What Leon Spinks lacked in skills and experience, he made up for it in piss and vinegar.... Leon Spinks will NEVER be remembered fondly in the history books of boxing; I know that... However, again, in 1978, Leon Spinks was in his prime at age 24 and dangerous....

People can say this and that about Spinks, but he did own heart & soul in 1978.... Christ, he did go 30 rds with Ali....... However, like many before and after him, poor Leon Spinks had a short-lived prime.....

Come 1979, Spinks was dusted by Gerrie Coetzee in ONE round... That was the beginning of a spiral downfall in boxing for Spinks.... Poor Leon Spinks never fully recovered or regained his early success.....

Point Being: "Even with only 7 or 8 pro fights, Leon Spinks was in serious shape and ripped at 197 to 202 pounds in the year of '78." The title ruined him..... After winning the title, Spinks stopped learning his trade in the gym and began to either level off or dip..... By 1982, it was obvious that Spinks was a pug with a name.....

MR.BILL

[OLD FOGEY]

We went over this about Rocky many times before and I don't think we should do it again BUT.

Yes he did beat several Hall of Famers
Yes he was 49-0
Yes he had the Greatest winning percentage against Top 10 contenders and HOF.

BUT he fought only 8 different boxers that were rated in the Top 10, when he fought them, for a total of 11 times in his 49 bouts. Only LaStarza (2), Charles (2), Walcott (2), Louis, Cockell, Moore, Harry Matthews & Rex Layne were rated at the time Rocky fought them. Just to compare, 38 of Ali's bouts were against Top 10 contenders when he fought them.

I can add a lot more BUT I am in Florida on vacation right now and my wife is telling me to PLEASE get off the computer and come to bad, so I will leave it at that.

Yes, Marciano doesn't have as many fights or wins against rated opponents as Ali (or Louis), but he does have more wins against rated opponents and champions than Norton, Schmeling, Liston, Frazier, and Foreman, among others, and he also stacks up pretty well against Dempsey and Tunney, and it is important that he doesn't have a whole bunch of losses.

I don't rate him ahead of Ali and Louis BECAUSE they fought so many more highly rated fighters over a much longer period of time, but no one did better against the fighters they fought.

[MRBILL]

Yes, Marciano doesn't have as many fights or wins against rated opponents as Ali (or Louis), but he does have more wins against rated opponents and champions than Norton, Schmeling, Liston, Frazier, and Foreman, among others, and he also stacks up pretty well against Dempsey and Tunney, and it is important that he doesn't have a whole bunch of losses.

I don't rate him ahead of Ali and Louis BECAUSE they fought so many more highly rated fighters over a much longer period of time, but no one did better against the fighters they fought.

Some valid points there....:rasta

MR.BILL:bbb

[zadfrak]

Okay.... Shoot me if you must but, after reviewing BOTH "Ali-Spinks" fights of 1978, I will say that Leon Spinks was in his physical prime in 1978 despite only having 7 pro fights under his belt buckle.... What Leon Spinks lacked in skills and experience, he made up for it in piss and vinegar.... Leon Spinks will NEVER be remembered fondly in the history books of boxing; I know that... However, again, in 1978, Leon Spinks was in his prime at age 24 and dangerous....

People can say this and that about Spinks, but he did own heart & soul in 1978.... Christ, he did go 30 rds with Ali....... However, like many before and after him, poor Leon Spinks had a short-lived prime.....

Come 1979, Spinks was dusted by Gerrie Coetzee in ONE round... That was the beginning of a spiral downfall in boxing for Spinks.... Poor Leon Spinks never fully recovered or regained his early success.....

Point Being: "Even with only 7 or 8 pro fights, Leon Spinks was in serious shape and ripped at 197 to 202 pounds in the year of '78." The title ruined him..... After winning the title, Spinks stopped learning his trade in the gym and began to either level off or dip..... By 1982, it was obvious that Spinks was a pug with a name.....

MR.BILL

Hindsight.

Foresight at the time was that Spinks wasn't very much. A draw against Scott Ledoux in his biggest bout was what he brought to the table against Ali. And nobody was holding Ledoux in all that high of esteem at the time and he was thought of as a regional fighter that would hang tough. If he'd have fought at heavy in the olympics, everyone thought Stevenson would've destroyed him with that right hand. A 78 spinks has his hands full with lots of fighters and he was fortunate to be on par with a stan ward type guy.

And this all heads back to the Ali deterioration factor. He went 15 rounds with Shavers and nobody on the planet thought Earnie could or would go 15 in that one. Then, the 15 round fiasco with Evangelista. I thought Evangelista won the fight because he was the only guy doing anything in there. Ali was ready to be taken for a few years by trhAt point and really hadn't fought the top heavies since the 76 Norton bout. Every matchup thereafter was supposed to be a soft touch for the guy.

It's kind of like evaluating Holyfield and looking only at that late timeframe and those efforts against Bean onward. Or those Ruiz matchups. Or even that initial Ruiz matchup and nobody was picking that guy to win. Hardly the same guy that fought Douglas. You could make a case for the toolset of a John Ruiz based upon those Holyfield bouts much the same as Ali--Spinks.

[Bokaj]

Yes, Marciano doesn't have as many fights or wins against rated opponents as Ali (or Louis), but he does have more wins against rated opponents and champions than Norton, Schmeling, Liston, Frazier, and Foreman, among others, and he also stacks up pretty well against Dempsey and Tunney, and it is important that he doesn't have a whole bunch of losses.

I don't rate him ahead of Ali and Louis BECAUSE they fought so many more highly rated fighters over a much longer period of time, but no one did better against the fighters they fought.

Yeah, that's pretty much it. No one can be faulted for having Marciano at nr. 3 as I see it, but a ranking that doesn't have Ali and Louis in the top 2 isn't really that good IMO.

[he grant]

Spinks was in his prime from a physical conditioning standpoint but was still an unskilled amateur in the ring ... don't go on the Ali bouts as Ali was pretty shot ... the Coetzee fight is a more realistic representation of where he was ...

[MRBILL]

Spinks was in his prime from a physical conditioning standpoint but was still an unskilled amateur in the ring ... don't go on the Ali bouts as Ali was pretty shot ... the Coetzee fight is a more realistic representation of where he was ...

Leon Spinks was poorly managed. He was thrown to the lions upon turning pro. No real manager would allow their boy to fight for a title against a solid champion after only 7 pro fights if he really cared about his investment. The fights with Ali in '78 was a huge risk that luckily paid off. Then 1979 came about and Leon Spinks was tossed to Gerrie Coetzee. In truth, Coetzee was untested and not really considered a threat in '79, but the sum bitch had a fierce right hand. Well, it didn't take Spinks long to eat that right hand like a whopper from Burger King. Coetzee iced Spinks in round one... From that point onward, Leon Spinks never fully got back on track... Again, by the early 1980s and with less than 20 friggin' pro fights to his name, Spinks was reduced to a journeyman / trailhorse type of fighter.... Only his name kept him outta the dumpster..... Yes, Ol' Spinks went to hell seemingly overnight, however, he was peaked and tuff and willing to kick some ass in 1978....

In 1978 Leon Spinks won the WBC / WBA titles from Muhammad Ali. However, upon signing for the rematch, Spinks was stripped of his WBC title and left with just the WBA belt for failing to go forward with a title fight against Kenny Norton..... I'm curious how well Spinks would've dealt with Norton in 1978..... My guess is Kenny Norton would've butchered him..... Norton was still healthy and in control of his bodily functions in 1978..... Norton was aging himself by then, but still capable...... Cheers...

MR,BILL:bbb

[kolcade4]

marciano catches norton with a bomb somewhere in the fight around 6-7.

[he grant]

Pretty much agreed ... however, it is a long running question if you take a title shot when you can get one as they are few and far between ... Leon's team knew they were dealing with a manchild who would most likely turn out a bust because of his complete lack of discipline and common sense ... few fighters have the focus or determination of a Marciano or Frazier ... Leon was completely devoid ...

Norton would have crushed him in a round or two, no doubt in my mind or Ali's as he basically publicly begged for the rematch, going as far as to state that ex-champs are entitled to immediate rematches, as her gave Liston, ignoring the fact that he did not give Foreman one ...

[hhascup]

Yes, Marciano doesn't have as many fights or wins against rated opponents as Ali (or Louis), but he does have more wins against rated opponents and champions than Norton, Schmeling, Liston, Frazier, and Foreman, among others, and he also stacks up pretty well against Dempsey and Tunney, and it is important that he doesn't have a whole bunch of losses.

I don't rate him ahead of Ali and Louis BECAUSE they fought so many more highly rated fighters over a much longer period of time, but no one did better against the fighters they fought.


Your STATS are correct BUT like I stated before, if Tyson, Liston, Frazier, Holmes, Lewis and maybe even Bowe fought the same opponents as Rocky did at the same time in their careers, they too would have a Great record as well.

I know most of the Top boxing historians in the sport for over 30 years and most of them agree.

As far as Dempsey goes, in 1950, he was voted as the Greatest boxer ever, with Louis coming in 2nd, followed by Henry Armstrong. Still in the early 1960's most boxing historians had Dempsey at #1 BUT by the end of the decade, they turned to Louis. I have the ratings of 42 boxing historians and most of them rate Ali as #1 now.

I like Ali as #1 myself with Louis coming in at #2 BUT this is going by their overall career records. I also rate Rocky in my Top 10 too, BUT again this is going by his overall career record.

On a one on one, I still have Ali at #1 BUT Rocky would have trouble staying in my top 10 with guys like Liston, Holmes, Foreman, Lewis, Tyson & Frazier.

[Bummy Davis]

Here's what my good friend Bert had:

Sugar's top 10 heavyweights: 2006

1. Joe Louis
2. Muhammad Ali
3. Jack Dempsey
4. Jack Johnson
5. Gene Tunney
6. Rocky Marciano
7. Ezzard Charles
8. George Foreman
9. Joe Frazier
10. Larry Holmes

Source: "Ringside: The Ten Greatest Heavyweights," ESPN Classic


Bert Sugar, 1991

1.Jack Dempsey
2.Joe Louis
3.Muhammad Ali
4.Jack Johnson
5.Gene Tunney
6.Rocky Marciano
7.Joe Frazier
8.Larry Holmes
9.Sonny Liston
10.Mike Tyson

I asked him why did he change several rtaings such as Dempsey from #1 to #3. He said that he learned to listen to what others had to say. I also asked him about Rocky, and why he was rated at #6 and he said because of his record, and if he lost to either Lowry or LaStarza, which could have gone either way, he would be rated out of his top 10.



Well Im sure he would have said if Ali lost the nod to Young or the 2 Norton fights that most felt Ken won, Ali's rating would have been lower. I listened to Sugar speak he has a decent opinion but a lot of what he says is political, He took tyson out of the ratings for his fights past prime. I like the respect he gives Louis and Charles but why Drop Dempsey after having him at # 1...bottom line is its just an opinion...

[Bummy Davis]

carefully managed you mean the way his management sent him in the ring in 5 out of his 6 title defenses vs Ring Magazine # 1 contenders, and that they ducked nobody during his title reigning years?


LOL these guys are monday morning quarterbacks., all but one of of Marciano title opponents were # 1 contenders and came off of impressive wins..Charles with a 2 impressive KO's over Satterfield and Wallace...Moore with 2 wins over Valdez,KO over Baker and a Ko over Harold Johnson...Lastarza 53-3 and beat rvery man he faced except Marciano...and Walcott ( the wrong guy to fight for any style)..Foreman was carefully managed and had a real 70's like padded record and Nortons management almost screwed up putting him with 188 lb Jose Garcia, and Garcia was a no-one at the time....Flaws come out with fighter and Rocky's were few but carefully managed is the wrong term to use those men were all tests and look at the fighters they beat to become # 1 contenders

[SuzieQ49]

Your STATS are correct BUT like I stated before, if Tyson, Liston, Frazier, Holmes, Lewis and maybe even Bowe fought the same opponents as Rocky did at the same time in their careers, they too would have a Great record as well.

Henry,

This is a matter of opinion though



On a one on one, I still have Ali at #1 BUT Rocky would have trouble staying in my top 10 with guys like Liston, Holmes, Foreman, Lewis, Tyson & Frazier.


I think Marciano rates very well head to head. Not at the top, but certainly near the top. He had a very effective style that could cause pure hell for anyone who ever stepped in the ring with him.

[MRBILL]

SuzieQ49,

Don't laugh, because I'm not sure...... Q: Are you a man or woman?

Second question: You wouldn't happen to be overly favorable to Rocky Marciano because your are listed from Brockton, MA. would you??

MR.BILL

[MRBILL]

NOW! Speaking of Ol' Rocco defending against all these # 1 rated heavies by Ring Magazine.... Okay, fine, I can see that accomplishment...... We still must consider the times / era and who the opponents / victims were and their overall situation at the time of their title shots........

I am not gonna go into great detail about Rocco's POST Joe Louis fights of 1951.... We ALL know who they were here on this thread..... BUT! I will say that a HANDFUL of heavies from several KEY era's could've beaten / handled "Walcott at age 38 or an aging Charles and Moore." As for "LaStarza" and "Cockell," they were good fighters but nothing really special....... Okay, yes, agreed, Marciano's record does sparkle, but I really do NOT believe his competition came from a really tough / great era in boxing.......

HOWEVER! Marciano's competition in title fights clearly EXCEEDS all the hype surrounding Jack Dempsey's reign from the 1920s..... No shit there.........

Hell, while I think Jack Johnson was far superior of a talented boxer / fighter than Marciano, I never was too sold on Johnson's title challengers either....... I think Johnson had some of his toughest fights coming up the ladder.......

Last but not least, the great Joe Louis defended his title 25 times...... AGAIN! 18 or 19 of them victims were bums and stiffs who were out-gunned and totally out-classed...... It's ironic that Joe Walcott was Louis' greatest foe in the ring, and that fight / fights didn't occur until the tail end of Louis' reign....

LASTLY, without a doubt, Muhammad Ali fought the greatest group of bad-ass dudes the boxing world has ever seen...... With Evander Holyfield riding up Ali's ass in that area........ Holy's comp was wicked........... Peace......

MR.BILL

[BITCH ASS]

Wladimir Klitschko in the top ten?

Please....

Show me some video evidence of Klitschko bending at the waist. I believe that you have to be able to bend at the waist before even being considered for the top 10.

Wladimir Klitschko is a limited fighter.

He fights like a tall man, straight up and down, never ducks, and seems to be incapable of bending at the waist, unable to throw a right uppercut.

Klitschko looked as helpless as a puppy against Ibriganov, a man that had skill, but lacked the courage or fortitude to commit to his offense and by looking at him, lacked the stamina and the athletic ability to a carry through with anything meaninful except for a solitary punch.

Klitschko is in undeniably excellent shape and that plus his own reluctance to engage an opponent when his fundamental offensive weapon fails, allowed him to lean back and away and avoid everything that Ibriganov didn't throw.

If you put a guy like Louis, Tyson, or Marciano in Irbriganov's place, Klitscko's limited offensive ability would cause him to miss shot after shot as punches sailed over his opponents head, and he was countered until retailating by using his height as his defense until his nerves and legs let him down and he finds himself trapped in a corner or against the ropes with no place to go, and punches rain down upon him, and a loud crash is heard by the audience.

Klitschko is not a top 10 guy. It's just the level of opposition does not know how to fight.

[BITCH ASS]

Mr. Bill...

I'm still waiting on your top 10.

[BITCH ASS]

And you got the audacity to call his opponents stiffs when the majority of guys today are complete stiffs......literaly, and comparitively speaking.

[kolcade4]

bill, are u saying holyfield could beat ali?

[MRBILL]

Axe,

You, like several others, have Wlad Klit all ass backwards...... Wlad Klit is very skilled and fluid..... I will say his confidence and chin is indeed "Iffy" at times or in the past, but eversince he's KO'd Chris Byrd for the IBF title in '06, the guy has been on a roll and beaten everybody put forth in front of him.... The hell more can you ask for??

NOW! I like Vitali Klitschko..... That is a dangerous MO FO who can cause severe damage....... Vitali is NOT as mobile or fluid like his brother Wlad, but Vitali Klit is the better man because of his strength, power & durability.....

If Wlad Klit had the chin and resistance of his older brother, Wlad Klit would be wicked... Right here in 2009, the only thing that hinders Wlad Klit is his chin / stamina...... Though, Manny Steward has seemingly got Wlad Klit to work on his stamina; it hasn't been a factor as of late..... The Chin? Well, nothing you can do there except cover it up.....

Wlad Klit will KO this hype job David Haye in June....... Peace.........

MR.BILL

[MRBILL]

bill, are u saying holyfield could beat ali?

NO! I'm saying Holy's competition was incredible..... Close to Ali's comp....... I think Ali and Holy fought the greatest list of dudes who could actually kill a MO FO in the ring....... That's all I meant there.......
:rasta

MR.BILL

[BITCH ASS]

See, I don't even agree with you about your thoughts regarding each individual brother.

I think Vitali is an example of a big man with skill. I've seen Vitali bend at the waist multiple times, and while he's not an excellent athlete, he is very tough, but like his brother is still prone to making the same mistakes as Wladimir.

Vitali does posses a decent left hand, which works very well against his straight up and down opposition who shows little inclination to get in shape or move thier head, as they come straight in with their hands up, hoping to beat their opponent with brute force.

However he lacks speed, and still appears a bit stiff, but unlike his brother Wladimir, showed that he actually has the skill level to compete with similiar opponents with athleticism.

Wladimir has gotten himself in better shape no doubt, but he seems incapable at dealing with real pressure where his opponent is either battering him or making him miss, and when his opponent has the roughly the same physical stature, but just as much or greater speed, and moreso, the willingness to commit to their offensive attack, Wladimir shows his limited skill and speculatively his lack of nerves as he goes into a shell until his body gives up.

Wladimir is skilled for a big man, key word big man, but like all big men who share his physical characteristics and the way he acheived them, also have the downfall of being big men, especially when their opponent has the skill to make them miss and counter with hard punches.

And speaking of Wladimir, did his size give him a chin?

[BITCH ASS]

And by the way, God willing and if Haye deserves it, his nerves won't let him down, and Klitschko's punches will miss and Haye will make him look helpless and desperate before he knocks him out.

And I cannot predict the future, but Haye has the style to give Wladimir a nightmare and I think he's going to knock Klitschko out, much to your and many people's astonishment.

[MRBILL]

Mr. Bill...

I'm still waiting on your top 10.

I already posted it earlier on the thread..... People balked..... What else is new?
:huh:shock::twisted:

MR.BILL:patsch

1. Ali
2. Holmes
3. Johnson
4. Louis
5. Foreman / Lewis (Tie)
6. Vitali Klit
7. Holy
8. Tyson
9. Frazier
10. Liston / Bowe / Marciano (Take a Pick):huh

NOTE:

I am NOT happy with Joe Frazier above Liston or Bowe.... Why? Cause Peak-4-peak, I think Liston and Bowe could hammer Frazier.... However, Joe Frazier is very popular and the fans love him....:D

"Frazier-Marciano" would've been a war...... Placing these two at around # 10 seems right / fair to me..........:yep

Let the arrows fly.....:twisted:

MR.BILL:bbb:admin

[BITCH ASS]

I already posted it earlier on the thread..... People balked..... What else is new?
:huh:shock::twisted:

MR.BILL:patsch

1. Ali
2. Holmes
3. Johnson
4. Louis
5. Foreman / Lewis (Tie)
6. Vitali Klit
7. Holy
8. Tyson
9. Frazier
10. Liston / Bowe / Marciano (Take a Pick):huh

NOTE:

I am NOT happy with Joe Frazier above Liston or Bowe.... Why? Cause Peak-4-peak, I think Liston and Bowe could hammer Frazier.... However, Joe Frazier is very popular and the fans love him....:D

"Frazier-Marciano" would've been a war...... Placing these two at around # 10 seems right / fair to me..........:yep

Let the arrows fly.....:twisted:

MR.BILL:bbb:admin

I'm sorry, I meant your 10 fighters that you believe can beat Marciano.

[MRBILL]

Axe,

Where you from and how old are you? This will allow me to get a feel of where your angle is at....

I trust you are not 16 and living in England.?.?

MR.BILL

[kolcade4]

I already posted it earlier on the thread..... People balked..... What else is new?
:huh:shock::twisted:

MR.BILL:patsch

1. Ali
2. Holmes
3. Johnson
4. Louis
5. Foreman / Lewis (Tie)
6. Vitali Klit
7. Holy
8. Tyson
9. Frazier
10. Liston / Bowe / Marciano (Take a Pick):huh

NOTE:

I am NOT happy with Joe Frazier above Liston or Bowe.... Why? Cause Peak-4-peak, I think Liston and Bowe could hammer Frazier.... However, Joe Frazier is very popular and the fans love him....:D

"Frazier-Marciano" would've been a war...... Placing these two at around # 10 seems right / fair to me..........:yep

Let the arrows fly.....:twisted:

MR.BILL:bbb:admin
we are all entitled to our own opinions i guess. refering to the list

[MRBILL]

I'm sorry, I meant your 10 fighters that you believe can beat Marciano.

That list IS the guys who could've beaten Marciano...... BUT! I could also add several key players from the post 1960s to the present that could've either beaten Marciano or givin him lotsa' hell.......:D

WBA chumps or not, "Weaver, Dokes, Coetzee, Page, Tubbs & Spoon" were all capable of doin' harm to Marciano upon winning their WBA title fights.......... Same goes for other chumps like "Thomas, Berbick, Douglas & Tucker." Not that these guys could or would beat Marciano, but they'd give him a good tussle if they were prepared like the day they won their paper belts in the ring....... Nothing real solid there.......:-(
:huh:admin

MR.BILL:bbb

[BITCH ASS]

You need to know my race too? And where I live?

I get my angle from watching film and attempting to replicate the things that I see as being helpful when I can in training and against another opponent.

I've come to the conclusion that these methods employed by some of the great boxers of the past work today, and if you combine certain factors within each skill set such as power, speed, etc, depending on the style, you can make an incredibly lethal boxer that when trained well is almost impossible to beat.

Look, I'm sorry for attacking you personally. That was childish and disrespectful, and while honestly I don't like spreading my knowledge with others because of my lack of trust, I feel like I can contribute certain aspects to help people understand facets of the game and why people during that time period truly believed the fighters to be the best.

Watching Ray Robinson and Joe Louis, and many others on film, to me when I observe certain intricities of their game, helps me to realize what these people were seeing.

And it's not just me. I know of another guy that watches what I tell him and while he's rarely in the condition he should be, his athletic ability and tallent are some of the best I've ever seen.

His combination of speed, power, and agility is like something in a video game. But he needs to work on getting his rhythmm and his timing down. And he definitely needs to commit to more cardio.

Anyway......that's just bullshittin......

I gotta go....

[MRBILL]

You need to know my race too? And where I live?

I get my angle from watching film and attempting to replicate the things that I see as being helpful when I can in training and against another opponent.

I've come to the conclusion that these methods employed by some of the great boxers of the past work today, and if you combine certain factors within each skill set such as power, speed, etc, depending on the style, you can make an incredibly lethal boxer that when trained well is almost impossible to beat.

Look, I'm sorry for attacking you personally. That was childish and disrespectful, and while honestly I don't like spreading my knowledge with others because of my lack of trust, I feel like I can contribute certain aspects to help people understand facets of the game and why people during that time period truly believed the fighters to be the best.

Watching Ray Robinson and Joe Louis, and many others on film, to me when I observe certain intricities of their game, helps me to realize what these people were seeing.

And it's not just me. I know of another guy that watches what I tell him and while he's rarely in the condition he should be, his athletic ability and tallent are some of the best I've ever seen.

His combination of speed, power, and agility is like something in a video game. But he needs to work on getting his rhythmm and his timing down. And he definitely needs to commit to more cardio.

Anyway......that's just bullshittin......

I gotta go....

Okay, Axe, have it your way...... But that is where we differ to a degree.... Not so much about the fighters and the reviewing process, I do a lot of that myself.... However, only to fighters that I am truly interested in..... I like "Louis & Robinson." Truly all-time greats.....

But I am NOT secretive nor do I hide behind any masks..... I am up front with an open door..... I don't change my Avatar left and right or post under alias names, etc..... I use my real name and photo on ESB.... I also give out my e-mail address to other posters and attackers.... In truth, I receive VERY LITTLE hate mail in my box.... I am proud of that..... I've been doing / covering boxing for 30 yrs.... been recording fights for 25 yrs...... Been on ESB for 5 yrs......... Cancelled all boxing mag subscriptions in 2005......... I'm serious..... Cheers......
:deal:thumbsup:bbb:rasta:good:yep:shock:

MR.BILL

[Bummy Davis]

I have the DVD too, and i choose to use better sources than some "narrator" who doesnt know the information hes getting. According to Peter Marciano, Rocky was 220lb for the computer fight cutting down from 50-60lb.

Btw did you checkout the rare footage of Rocky throwing Rocks? he was as chizzled as they come. Imagine with modern ehancements if he lifted weights and got modern nutrtion...hed come into today at a ripped 205lb and be unbeatable.


Some guys dont get it...I have gained weight that was muscle and I HAVE gained weight that was bloat. I have put on an amazing amount of muscle,no fat and then when I did extreme cardio, the muscle changed...I dont think it ever effected my punching power but when I was heavier my punches may have been heavier but my stamina became less....In Marciano's day he needed stamina for 15 rounders against guys that were experience going 15...Today we have a lot of BIG guys that cant breath after four rounds throwing 4 punches a rd....If Marciano was fighing today he would have to adjust to handling 12 rds and he could definatly put on weight that would be muscle, Tyson who was Marcianos height went from 200lbs to 215, was Mike a bit muscle bound, perhaps a touch, Frans Botha also put on weight and Riddick Bowe was a a good lightheavy even though he was 6"5 but as you can see with even Bowe,Briggs and a lot of the big guys they got too fat and easy to hit....Lewis,and the Klitschko are big men that are fit but there injuries and Ko losses make me wonder if the bigger you are the harder it is to get up...some people have a fixation on size and put too much emhpisis on it

[OLD FOGEY]

Your STATS are correct BUT like I stated before, if Tyson, Liston, Frazier, Holmes, Lewis and maybe even Bowe fought the same opponents as Rocky did at the same time in their careers, they too would have a Great record as well.

I know most of the Top boxing historians in the sport for over 30 years and most of them agree.

As far as Dempsey goes, in 1950, he was voted as the Greatest boxer ever, with Louis coming in 2nd, followed by Henry Armstrong. Still in the early 1960's most boxing historians had Dempsey at #1 BUT by the end of the decade, they turned to Louis. I have the ratings of 42 boxing historians and most of them rate Ali as #1 now.

I like Ali as #1 myself with Louis coming in at #2 BUT this is going by their overall career records. I also rate Rocky in my Top 10 too, BUT again this is going by his overall career record.

On a one on one, I still have Ali at #1 BUT Rocky would have trouble staying in my top 10 with guys like Liston, Holmes, Foreman, Lewis, Tyson & Frazier.

Good morning, Henry. Glad to see you posting.

1. Tyson, Liston, Frazier, Holmes, Lewis, Bowe would beat Marciano's opponents.

I think Lewis sweeps the opposition of Sullivan, Jeffries, Johnson, Dempsey, Tunney, and Louis also. Let's take Louis, who fought probably the most good men of this group. Which one of his opponents would you favor over Lennox Lewis? The same is true of the other fighters you named. Liston would have actually terrorized Jeff's opposition.

It also might not be true, especially if the modern fighters don't get to use supplements. If they had never fought, who would have picked Schmeling to ko Louis? Douglas to ko Tyson? Marshall to defeat Liston? One would always expect great fighters to sweep non-great opposition, but it doesn't always actually work out that way.

2. I want to explain my thinking. I was listening to the Rick Barry talk show on the radio a few years back when I was living in the Bay Area. A caller put it to Barry that the gridiron football team the Oakland Raiders, who had a losing record that year, were better than the Lombardi Packers of the 1960's and would defeat them easily if the two teams played. I think the man is correct. I grew up in Wisconsin and was a big Packer fan back then, but the biggest player on that team was Ron Kostelnik at 260. They would be tiny by modern standards. I also think skills have evolved. The Packer placekickers could not kick for a modern college team. There are more great athletes playing gridiron today.
Barry replied that greatness is based on what you do in your own time. The Packers were a historically great team, winning five championships. The Raiders were mediocre. They don't become better than mediocre by fantasy matchups with gridiron teams of generations earlier, and this sort of matchup can't deny the Packers their historical achievements.

3. Dempsey--I don't know where he came from in this discussion, but I think Marciano's opposition was better than Dempsey's, at least the opposition he actually defeated. Had Dempsey fought and defeated Wills, it might be different, but he didn't. Historical fact.

4. I rate these fighters historically myself in this order---Ali, Louis, Marciano, Lewis, Holmes, Johnson, Holyfield, Foreman, Frazier, Jeffries.
Marciano is that high because he cleaned out his era, ko'd all his major opponents, and fought the best available opposition, without drawing the color line.

5. I don't usually get into it, but the head to head list would be much different. Lewis would come first. Ali and Louis would be high, but I think Vitali Klitschko might well make the top five of this sort of list, but I can see the argument against him as he blew his big chances against Bryd and Lewis. Holyfield, Holmes, and Foreman would also make this list, and probably Bowe and maybe Wlad Klitschko. No pre-1960's champion would be in the top ten except Louis.

Bowe or Vitali Klitschko might well defeat Jack Johnson, but there is no way I consider them as great as Johnson. I think historical ratings should always be kept separate from head to head ratings.

[MRBILL]

This thread does kick some ass.... I'll say that much..... Every swingin' dick in town wants in on this action.......

MR.BILL

[MRBILL]

The only reason why The "K" brothers get a bad rap is because they are the "In" thing right now..... After they finish up and retire, people will get a better reading on them two....... Again, I am a fan of both bros., but I think Vitali is more so wicked and dangerous.......... Peace....

MR.BILL

[Dempsey1238]

Could see them making a top 15 perhaps, or even top ten, if they clean out the era. Of couse poltics gets in the way of that of couse. They are more like the Larry Holmes of the divsion, than say the Ali's or Marciano's who defeated the best of there hey days.

Wlad beating Haye will be a first step, and in the end, if they DO clean out the divsion between them(They dont even have to face each other) I can see a top ten for both.

[MRBILL]

Does anyone really give a damn about "Valubum-Chagaev 2" in a few weeks? That's for the WBA chumpionship of the world..... WEAK!!

MR.BILL

[hhascup]

Well Im sure he would have said if Ali lost the nod to Young or the 2 Norton fights that most felt Ken won, Ali's rating would have been lower. I listened to Sugar speak he has a decent opinion but a lot of what he says is political, He took tyson out of the ratings for his fights past prime. I like the respect he gives Louis and Charles but why Drop Dempsey after having him at # 1...bottom line is its just an opinion...

Yes but Ali fought a lot more of them, so losing 1 or 2 more wouldn't mean that much.

Henry,

This is a matter of opinion though

RIGHT! and that is my opinion.


I think Marciano rates very well head to head. Not at the top, but certainly near the top. He had a very effective style that could cause pure hell for anyone who ever stepped in the ring with him.

Again, I think different. I rate Rocky better career wise then I do head to head.

Good morning, Henry. Glad to see you posting.

1. Tyson, Liston, Frazier, Holmes, Lewis, Bowe would beat Marciano's opponents.

I think Lewis sweeps the opposition of Sullivan, Jeffries, Johnson, Dempsey, Tunney, and Louis also. Let's take Louis, who fought probably the most good men of this group. Which one of his opponents would you favor over Lennox Lewis? The same is true of the other fighters you named. Liston would have actually terrorized Jeff's opposition.

It also might not be true, especially if the modern fighters don't get to use supplements. If they had never fought, who would have picked Schmeling to ko Louis? Douglas to ko Tyson? Marshall to defeat Liston? One would always expect great fighters to sweep non-great opposition, but it doesn't always actually work out that way.

2. I want to explain my thinking. I was listening to the Rick Barry talk show on the radio a few years back when I was living in the Bay Area. A caller put it to Barry that the gridiron football team the Oakland Raiders, who had a losing record that year, were better than the Lombardi Packers of the 1960's and would defeat them easily if the two teams played. I think the man is correct. I grew up in Wisconsin and was a big Packer fan back then, but the biggest player on that team was Ron Kostelnik at 260. They would be tiny by modern standards. I also think skills have evolved. The Packer placekickers could not kick for a modern college team. There are more great athletes playing gridiron today.
Barry replied that greatness is based on what you do in your own time. The Packers were a historically great team, winning five championships. The Raiders were mediocre. They don't become better than mediocre by fantasy matchups with gridiron teams of generations earlier, and this sort of matchup can't deny the Packers their historical achievements.

3. Dempsey--I don't know where he came from in this discussion, but I think Marciano's opposition was better than Dempsey's, at least the opposition he actually defeated. Had Dempsey fought and defeated Wills, it might be different, but he didn't. Historical fact.

4. I rate these fighters historically myself in this order---Ali, Louis, Marciano, Lewis, Holmes, Johnson, Holyfield, Foreman, Frazier, Jeffries.
Marciano is that high because he cleaned out his era, ko'd all his major opponents, and fought the best available opposition, without drawing the color line.

5. I don't usually get into it, but the head to head list would be much different. Lewis would come first. Ali and Louis would be high, but I think Vitali Klitschko might well make the top five of this sort of list, but I can see the argument against him as he blew his big chances against Bryd and Lewis. Holyfield, Holmes, and Foreman would also make this list, and probably Bowe and maybe Wlad Klitschko. No pre-1960's champion would be in the top ten except Louis.

Bowe or Vitali Klitschko might well defeat Jack Johnson, but there is no way I consider them as great as Johnson. I think historical ratings should always be kept separate from head to head ratings.

OLD FOGEY, we agree on just about everything BUT Marciano, I just think that there several ex-heavyweight Champions that would have done as good as he did if they faced the same opponents. So lets say that we can agree to disagree, as we both made Great points.

Don't get me wrong, I LOVE Rocky & the Marciano family, like I stated before, I was the MC when they unveiled the Rocky Marciano Stamp back in 1999. I was asked to be the MC by the Marciano family. I would LOVE to say that Rocky was the best ever, BUT I have to be honest with myself.

[MRBILL]

Yes but Ali fought a lot more of them, so losing 1 or 2 more wouldn't mean that much.



RIGHT! and that is my opinion.




Again, I think different. I rate Rocky better career wise then I do head to head.



OLD FOGEY, we agree on just about everything BUT Marciano, I just think that there several ex-heavyweight Champions that would have done as good as he did if they faced the same opponents. So lets say that we can agree to disagree, as we both made Great points.

Don't get me wrong, I LOVE Rocky & the Marciano family, like I stated before, I was the MC when they unveiled the Rocky Marciano Stamp back in 1999. I was asked to be the MC by the Marciano family. I would LOVE to say that Rocky was the best ever, BUT I have to be honest with myself.

Yeah, I'll buy into all of this...... But, you gotta be prepared to be de-balled by a group of Marciano terrorists.... They are fanatical and vicious.... And, sometimes talking to a Marciano terrorist is like talking to a brick wall.... It's fruitless...... People think your delusional if you can make a claim that Rocco Marciano was beatable..... Unreal..... Cheerio......
:deal:thumbsup:rasta:bbb:good

MR.BILL

[Dempsey1238]

Rocky can be beating, any one can.
But at the same time, try not to underated the Rock when you mention guys like Willams, Bone Smith, Berbick, Thomas, Tucker ete would walk though Marciano if he was nothing.

I relly do belive had Marciano been in Tyson's era, He would have sweep Tysons foes, and even beat Douglas to boot.