Tyson vs. Marciano: The myth of "intagibles"

[ironchamp]

Everytime this match up is brought up, the results are similar;

Tyson wins by KO/TKO in a decisive manner

or

"If Marciano can make it out of the first 3-4 rounds then Rocky stops Tyson late"

For those that pick the latter:

Out of curiousity what happens if Marciano makes it out the first 3-4 rounds?

Because based on that premise it seems to be that the majority of those that pick Rocky to win if he weathers the storm are in effect conceding that the first 3-4 rounds are most likely going to be won by Tyson. It seems to be the consensus amongst this thread even by those who pick Rocky. If that is in fact the case what is it that leads you to believe, or anyone for that matter that Marciano trailing on points would all of a sudden start to land more accurate punches, have a better punch resistance and outwork an increasingly confident Mike Tyson who is building up a lead on the scorecard?

If were are talking about both fighters at thier best then lasting the distance shouldnt be an issue. Why would Mike all of a sudden crumble just because Marciano (who is behind on points) is still standing?

I'd like to think that my questions are valid but my observation is that this is a match up in which Tyson has a stylistic advantage which is why people seem to concede that he takes the early lead. From what I'm observing from some you, the only way Marciano takes this is if Tyson somehow gives up and stops fighting as a result of being discouraged that he hasnt stopped THe ROCK. I can't picture Tyson quitting a fight in which he's ahead. For Tyson to be ahead it means that he's connecting, he's dictating the pace. Usually in a fight when a fighter dictates the pace of a fight the only time the momentum changes is if:

A. His opponent adjusts and adopts a slightly different style/approach

B. His opponent lands a big punch and puts him on the defensive.

C. He runs out of gas.

Trouble is:

A. Marciano only fights one way.

B. Tyson has never lost a fight because of a momentum changing punch

C. In Tyson's prime he could fight hard for 12 rounds.


So please enlighten me what Marciano will do to win this fight.


Thank you.

[Maxmomer]

People say the same thing about Marciano VS Dempsey, and I don't agree. With that logic you could say that Marciano would beat anyone just by "outlasting" them and "wearing them down" with his stamina, durability, high workrate and chin. That might work for someone with a tendency to fade in tough fight, but it doesn't work for a lot of others. Besides, if Marciano goes against a puncher the caliber of Tyson (or Dempsey) He'll be getting worn down, too, and much worse as either Tyson and Dempsey had faster hands, better defense and better acuraccy than Marciano. Of course, there's always the "Tyson was mentally weak" argument, and that may be true, but since I can't imagine any point where Tyson wouldn't be dominating Marciano, I don't think he'd lose confidence and crumble mentally.

[brooklyn1550]

I see an early to mid round stoppage for Mike

[ironchamp]

I agree about the Dempsey arguement as well.

[Manassa]

Marcino will ko Tyson. he HAD Eishewer on his side lol.

[janitor]

So please enlighten me what Marciano will do to win this fight.


Thank you.

Dosn't follow that he will of course but as the fight progreses certain elements will start to come into play.

1. Workrate

Tysons punch output per round falls off after about four rounds while Marcianos just gets better as the fight progreses. Tyson will start out at about 60 punches per round and drop to 40 while Marciano will start off at about 60 and work up to 80 peaking at about 100 if he has Tyson in trouble.

2. Infighting ability

Tyson is esentialy a mid range fighter and dose not react well on the inside as the Holyfield fight shows. How is he going to react to a smaller infighter who has a terific punch and is phenomenaly busy.

Hard to say.

3. Intangibles

While I don't agree with those who say that Tyson folds when the heat is on a fight between two come forward fighters will somtimes come down to who wants it most if both guys are getting the snot beaten out of them. Rocky will want it more.

In all I think that this much more complicated match up than some might think.

[ChrisPontius]

B. Tyson has never lost a fight because of a momentum changing punch



He was already losing the fight at that point, but when Holyfield landed that overhand right on Tyson in the 10th round, it was a big change in momentum. Tyson went from into the fight to pretty much out of the fight.
Considering Marciano punches harder than Holyfield, it is possible.

Now i do think fatigue and conditioning had a lot to do with that example because Tyson had taken quite a beating already over those 10 rounds and was prepared for a 3 round Mathis-Bruno like fight in addition to being past his best.


I think the scenario many people think of is that Marciano starts picking up the pace after the 4th and outworks Tyson for the rest of the fight. Or that while losing the first rounds, he comes out fresher in the second half and knocks a tired Tyson out. Something i can envision him doing against a lot of fighters, but not against Tyson, by the way... not if they're going toe to toe, anyway.

[Ezzard]

Depends so much on how much damage is done to Marciano early.

[MrMagic]

Too small. Tyson is ahead of Marciano in every department.. maybe not willpower but this should be a slaughter. Marciano would get TKO'd

[Duodenum]

Marciano took eleven opponents out in a single round (including Jersey Joe Walcott), and seven more out in two (including Kid Matthews). The only comparable opponent Mike Spinks took out relatively quickly was Marvin Johnson (in four rounds). Much of Tyson's reputation as a fast starter stems from his performances against boxers who were not noted as fast starters themselves, or sacrificial tomato cans and journeymen.

I see both getting off to a solid start, and the match going beyond the opening rounds, to become a battle of attrition. Tyson would find himself in the uncharacteristic position of being the taller man, having to give ground to the lower Marciano. Tyson was capable of employing lateral movement, and he would need to. When he passed in front of Rocky, his uppercut would be a key punch. Marciano's hook and overhand right could get around Tyson's peek-a-boo defense. He would need to counter with punches inside whatever wide hooks and overhands Marciano throws at him, not an easy task considering Rocky's shorter arms. In close, Marciano's shorter arms would become an asset, not a liability.

Tyson would begin to wear as the match continued. While Rocky did sustain a couple of flash knockdowns, his resistance to pain was demonstrated by his tolerance of his split nose in the Charles rematch. Nor was Marciano ever stunned or wobbled in any way. Tyson may be dealing with an opponent who actually is impervious to seeing stars, something not true for Tyson. Sure, Tyson might drop Rocky for a flash KD, but that would be about it. If it was a 15 rounder, Tyson would falter before the final bell, as his arms become a Marciano target in the employment of his peak-a-boo cover.

[Luigi1985]

Too small. Tyson is ahead of Marciano in every department.. maybe not willpower but this should be a slaughter. Marciano would get TKO'd


Both had the same size. Marciano was naturally heavier than Tyson, but he trained so hard to go down in weight for his phenomenal stamina. Tyson wasn´t that big like you do, with the roids he took it´s no wonder that he had bigger muscles than a Marciano for example, btw, the Lacy- Calzaghe- fight should finally show some of you that muscles aren´t the most important thing in boxing...


Tyson is in fantasy matchups heavily overrated, I really don´t know why. He´s typical, like many others, against mediocre contenders he looked great, but against very good fighters at HW (not a LHW or a shot ex-champ) like Holyfield, Lewis, etc. he didn´t look that spectacular, I would bet for a Marciano- stoppage. He had the heart to suffer hard punches and he would trade with Mike. Tyson wouldn´t last the distance, I know, for some of you it sounds strange that the black bad boy would probably lose, but it´s the truth...

[prime]

Marciano took eleven opponents out in a single round (including Jersey Joe Walcott), and seven more out in two (including Kid Matthews). The only comparable opponent Mike Spinks took out relatively quickly was Marvin Johnson (in four rounds). Much of Tyson's reputation as a fast starter stems from his performances against boxers who were not noted as fast starters themselves, or sacrificial tomato cans and journeymen.

I see both getting off to a solid start, and the match going beyond the opening rounds, to become a battle of attrition. Tyson would find himself in the uncharacteristic position of being the taller man, having to give ground to the lower Marciano. Tyson was capable of employing lateral movement, and he would need to. When he passed in front of Rocky, his uppercut would be a key punch. Marciano's hook and overhand right could get around Tyson's peek-a-boo defense. He would need to counter with punches inside whatever wide hooks and overhands Marciano throws at him, not an easy task considering Rocky's shorter arms. In close, Marciano's shorter arms would become an asset, not a liability.

Tyson would begin to wear as the match continued. While Rocky did sustain a couple of flash knockdowns, his resistance to pain was demonstrated by his tolerance of his split nose in the Charles rematch. Nor was Marciano ever stunned or wobbled in any way. Tyson may be dealing with an opponent who actually is impervious to seeing stars, something not true for Tyson. Sure, Tyson might drop Rocky for a flash KD, but that would be about it. If it was a 15 rounder, Tyson would falter before the final bell, as his arms become a Marciano target in the employment of his peak-a-boo cover.

When Marciano fought for the title, he was immediately dropped by 38-year-old Walcott in the very first round. When Tyson fought for the title, he immediately began to shock and rock a much taller, heavier and stronger man in Berbick, awesomely stopping him inside 2.

Based on these two fighters' actual performances on film, not on mythology, Tyson blasts through Marciano early as soon as he lands his first powerful punch, which the comparatively small, slow, defensively-deficient Marciano would not avoid for more than a couple of minutes.

[Luigi1985]

When Marciano fought for the title, he was immediately dropped by 38-year-old Walcott in the very first round. When Tyson fought for the title, he immediately began to shock and rock a much taller, heavier and stronger man in Berbick, awesomely stopping him inside 2.

Based on these two fighters' actual performances on film, not on mythology, Tyson blasts through Marciano early as soon as he lands his first powerful punch, which the comparatively small, slow, defensively-deficient Marciano would not avoid for more than a couple of minutes.


Berbick was bigger than Walcott, that´s right. But Walcott was a much better fighter, who had at least twice the punch Trevor had. Jersey Joe could for example KO Tyson if he would land a good shot (for example one of his unexpected left hooks). Before you guys always talk about size, strengths, height, etc. it would be better, to make yourself experiences in boxing practice, than you wouldn´t always talk about ridiculous weight advantages (we´re talking about perhaps 15 lbs or that, that´s nothing, it´s not so that we talk about 100 lbs)...

[Amsterdam]

Luigi, bad argument using Lacy-Calzaghe, because Tyson was 4x as quick as Marciano.

It would be a wipe out because Rocky lacks the defence to not absord the combinations that would come at him.

[Luigi1985]

Luigi, bad argument using Lacy-Calzaghe, because Tyson was 4x as quick as Marciano.

It would be a wipe out because Rocky lacks the defence to not absord the combinations that would come at him.


I wasn´t a bad example. I only said to some kids, who never stood in a ring, that muscles at boxing aren´t automatically a advantage, sometimes too much muscles are even a disadvantage. In this case, Tyson had better handspeed, threw faster combinations, etc., but Marciano had the better chin, and had more rare power, and every punch he threw he threw with power, so i can´t see Tyson lasting the distance, because he didn´t have the chin/fighting spirit to win against a great fighter in his prime...

[Amsterdam]

I wasn´t a bad example. I only said to some kids, who never stood in a ring, that muscles at boxing aren´t automatically a advantage, sometimes too much muscles are even a disadvantage. In this case, Tyson had better handspeed, threw faster combinations, etc., but Marciano had the better chin, and had more rare power, and every punch he threw he threw with power, so i can´t see Tyson lasting the distance, because he didn´t have the chin/fighting spirit to win against a great fighter in his prime...

Marciano did not have the better chin, he had the better heart. Tyson's chin was of such quality that it took sustained beatings from big 1 punch KO HW's to put him out.

Tyson is severely underrated in this respect. There is no way Marciano had more power at the end of the day also.

[Luigi1985]

Marciano did not have the better chin, he had the better heart. Tyson's chin was of such quality that it took sustained beatings from big 1 punch KO HW's to put him out.

Tyson is severely underrated in this respect. There is no way Marciano had more power at the end of the day also.


Both had very good chins, hard to say who´s better. But I say Marciano, he was never KO´d against fighters like Douglas, McBride, Williams, etc. Marciano had the better one-punch, he showed that with some great one-punch KO- wins over opposition Tyson in general never beat, KOing fighters like Etienne, Botha, etc. with one punch doesn´t count that much for me...

[Amsterdam]

Both had very good chins, hard to say who´s better. But I say Marciano, he was never KO´d against fighters like Douglas, McBride, Williams, etc. Marciano had the better one-punch, he showed that with some great one-punch KO- wins over opposition Tyson in general never beat, KOing fighters like Etienne, Botha, etc. with one punch doesn´t count that much for me...

We're talking about a peak Tyson Luigi.

It took Douglas 10 rounds of a sustained beating to win by KO. The Williams and McBride losses were KO's losses, but 'collapses', Tyson was not 'KOed', he was concious.

Marciano was decked by Moore, a LHW hitter. Where as Tyson took monster bombs from Lennox Lewis, bombs that I don't think Marciano could take the same.

Tyson is a superior fighter to Marciano, as is Frazier a superior fighter to Marciano. Most people feel Tyson beats Frazier, most people also feel Frazier beats Rocky, let's put everything together and see that Tyson should obviously be favoured.

[Luigi1985]

We're talking about a peak Tyson Luigi.

It took Douglas 10 rounds of a sustained beating to win by KO. The Williams and McBride losses were KO's losses, but 'collapses', Tyson was not 'KOed', he was concious.

Marciano was decked by Moore, a LHW hitter. Where as Tyson took monster bombs from Lennox Lewis, bombs that I don't think Marciano could take the same.

Tyson is a superior fighter to Marciano, as is Frazier a superior fighter to Marciano. Most people feel Tyson beats Frazier, most people also feel Frazier beats Rocky, let's put everything together and see that Tyson should obviously be favoured.


We´re talking about prime, what a new thing. In a matchup, we always take both at their absolutely best. Douglas was a mediocre hitter, it´s normal that he couldn´t KO someone with only one punch. Moore was a former LHW, that´s right. But he proved even at HW that he could KO big, good and durable HW´s with one punch. A thing Douglas for example couldn´t. Marciano was KD against Archie and Jersey Joe, but that were only flash KD´s and we all know how "The Rock" reacted, with your example about "Frazier better than Marciano, Tyson better than Frazier etc." perhaps exists in the General Boxing Forum, where 15 years-old teenagers look at both fighters (just the looking) and immediately say "Tyson would murder him!", but real boxing experts don´t espouse this false and fabulous these...

[godking]

Marciano took eleven opponents out in a single round (including Jersey Joe Walcott), and seven more out in two (including Kid Matthews). The only comparable opponent Mike Spinks took out relatively quickly was Marvin Johnson (in four rounds). Much of Tyson's reputation as a fast starter stems from his performances against boxers who were not noted as fast starters themselves, or sacrificial tomato cans and journeymen.

I see both getting off to a solid start, and the match going beyond the opening rounds, to become a battle of attrition. Tyson would find himself in the uncharacteristic position of being the taller man, having to give ground to the lower Marciano. Tyson was capable of employing lateral movement, and he would need to. When he passed in front of Rocky, his uppercut would be a key punch. Marciano's hook and overhand right could get around Tyson's peek-a-boo defense. He would need to counter with punches inside whatever wide hooks and overhands Marciano throws at him, not an easy task considering Rocky's shorter arms. In close, Marciano's shorter arms would become an asset, not a liability.

Tyson would begin to wear as the match continued. While Rocky did sustain a couple of flash knockdowns, his resistance to pain was demonstrated by his tolerance of his split nose in the Charles rematch. Nor was Marciano ever stunned or wobbled in any way. Tyson may be dealing with an opponent who actually is impervious to seeing stars, something not true for Tyson. Sure, Tyson might drop Rocky for a flash KD, but that would be about it. If it was a 15 rounder, Tyson would falter before the final bell, as his arms become a Marciano target in the employment of his peak-a-boo cover.You are assuming that Rocky will land enough on Tyson.

People often forget that peak Tyson was very hard to land cleanly on and was a dangerous counterpuncher who made you pay a heavy price for missing any punch. Which is part of the reason why guys became hesitant to throw against Tyson. Not because they where ''petrified'but because Tyson made you pay for every missed punch.

Trying to brawl with a combination puncher with the chin to take your best shot and the defense and countering skills to make you pay for every missed punch is a bad idea

[Vanboxingfan]

I'm not a huge Tyson fan, but if this fight could somehow take place, my money would be on him. I believe there is a myth that needs clarification. Firstly I don't care if you're name is Marciano, Ali, Foreman, Tyson or Holyfield, if you get hit hard enough and often enough you go down period. These are after all human beings we're talking about. And while you can will yourself to fight through pain, and blood, you really can't will yourself not to get KO'd because the lights simply go out.

Speed clearly goes to Tyson, as does defense, these factors alone would matter. Chin in my opinion also goes to Tyson, getting hit by Moore, isn't in the same league as taking bombs from Lewis. I really can't imagine many fighters taking the type of bombs Lewis threw at Tyson, which were in the same ballpark as he punch which KO Rahman and the uppercuts were similar to the one's Grant and V.K. ate.

I'm not sure who hits harder, although I would suspect Tyson, but given the speed and defensive advantages it really wouldn't matter, nor would a single punch do the job in any event, but repeatedly landing combinations would. So
unfortunately I think the lights would go out on Marciano and that would be that. Add to that is my belief that this isn't a marathon event, it wouldn't likely go beyond the mid rounds, so Marciano's legendary stamina, isn't the huge factor some had thought it might be.

As to other issues namely the weight difference and who starts off faster, I personally would sooner weigh more than less, and I think starting off quickly, is better than not. Both are fairly obvious I would think.

[janitor]

Of course one uncertainty here is that neither Tyson or Marciano has ever fought anybody remotely like the other.

[Duodenum]

You are assuming that Rocky will land enough on Tyson.

People often forget that peak Tyson was very hard to land cleanly on and was a dangerous counterpuncher who made you pay a heavy price for missing any punch. Which is part of the reason why guys became hesitant to throw against Tyson. Not because they where ''petrified'but because Tyson made you pay for every missed punch.

Trying to brawl with a combination puncher with the chin to take your best shot and the defense and countering skills to make you pay for every missed punch is a bad ideaTyson was indeed hard to hit cleanly with scoring blows. Marciano did damage with non-scoring blows (like the one to LaStarza's bicep which turned a round Marciano was deducted for a low blow into one where he actually came out ahead). Ali, Tunney and Holmes would have done better against Marciano by minimizing getting hit flush anywhere on their bodies.

Any suggestion that Tyson would somehow put out Marciano's lights is extremely presumptuous. Nobody ever came close to doing this.

In the first match with Walcott, Jersey Joe surprised Rocky by immediately trying to tear his head off. Tyson would have been expected by Marciano and Goldman to start that way, and have been prepared accordingly. (For the rematch, Marciano and Goldman were prepared for the possibility of a strong aggressive start by Jersey Joe, and Walcott paid the consequences.)

Concerning Archie Moore, it's helpful to remember that he had a hand in developing both Shavers and Foreman, helping each to cultivate their own punching power. Ted Lowry went 20 rounds with Marciano, and pegged Moore as the hardest puncher he ever was hit by, regardless of weight. Moore was also the most prolific knockout artist in history, producing a much higher percentage of stoppage wins than Stribling. (If Stribling had boxed until retirement, the knockout record he would have left would have been completely out of Archie's reach, but the Mongoose's knockout percentage would have still been much higher.)

Archie Moore was also involved in training Eddie Mustafa Muhammad for a time, yet another noted power puncher with superb technique.

Marciano was momentarily dropped by what was probably the hardest single punch of Moore's long distinguished career.

Keep in mind that Marciano might not be aiming for Tyson's head. How hard was his body to hit cleanly on?

Rocky was used to dealing with taller opponents with a longer reach. Tyson wasn't. Tyson would be the bigger target in this situation, and Marciano generated power with his punches coming up. Big strong Rex Layne discover how hard it was to try bulling Rocky around. Tyson would be the one forced to concede territory to the anchor footed Blockbuster, and with Marciano holding the centerline, Tyson would be facing an arduous task indeed.

[My dinner with Conteh]

We´re talking about prime, what a new thing. In a matchup, we always take both at their absolutely best. Douglas was a mediocre hitter, it´s normal that he couldn´t KO someone with only one punch. Moore was a former LHW, that´s right. But he proved even at HW that he could KO big, good and durable HW´s with one punch. A thing Douglas for example couldn´t. Marciano was KD against Archie and Jersey Joe, but that were only flash KD´s and we all know how "The Rock" reacted, with your example about "Frazier better than Marciano, Tyson better than Frazier etc." perhaps exists in the General Boxing Forum, where 15 years-old teenagers look at both fighters (just the looking) and immediately say "Tyson would murder him!", but real boxing experts don´t espouse this false and fabulous these...


...and many classic posters take it to the other extreme. Some of you would love to believe that 185 pound brawlers could be dominant in today's heavyweight game (in, say, a catchweight contest), but it's just unrealistic, despite the rubbish that's around today. One-off wins here and there maybe but nothing more. Archie Moore, for example, likely couldn't take the kind of punches he did against Marciano if he was fighting Tyson. He be Ko'd fairly quickly if we're truly going to predict with our heads not hearts. He certainly wouldn't have the wherewithal to bounce up four times. I don't think Marciano has much chance here, he'd cut early forcing the ref's intervention around the 6th.

[My dinner with Conteh]

Maybe he was on 'roids', but the 1988 version of Tyson beats the 1953 version of Marciano any day. Now, if Rocky was allowed to take roids we may have a different story.

[My dinner with Conteh]

whatever, this is just a battle of People who would have been destroyed by a Peak larry holmes. Nobody can withstand the brutual assault of a prime mighty mallard



:lol:

[My dinner with Conteh]

what?


Just laughing at the whole 'kerboodle', especially your 'new' name. :good

[My dinner with Conteh]

Not much. Bill's been banned from coming on by Larry because he only gave Peanut Head 8 rounds in the first Spinks fight. He's banned from Larry's gym too, until he re-scores giving The Mallard at least a 12-3 margin.

[ironchamp]

Tyson was indeed hard to hit cleanly with scoring blows. Marciano did damage with non-scoring blows (like the one to LaStarza's bicep which turned a round Marciano was deducted for a low blow into one where he actually came out ahead). Ali, Tunney and Holmes would have done better against Marciano by minimizing getting hit flush anywhere on their bodies.

Any suggestion that Tyson would somehow put out Marciano's lights is extremely presumptuous. Nobody ever came close to doing this.

In the first match with Walcott, Jersey Joe surprised Rocky by immediately trying to tear his head off. Tyson would have been expected by Marciano and Goldman to start that way, and have been prepared accordingly. (For the rematch, Marciano and Goldman were prepared for the possibility of a strong aggressive start by Jersey Joe, and Walcott paid the consequences.)

Concerning Archie Moore, it's helpful to remember that he had a hand in developing both Shavers and Foreman, helping each to cultivate their own punching power. Ted Lowry went 20 rounds with Marciano, and pegged Moore as the hardest puncher he ever was hit by, regardless of weight. Moore was also the most prolific knockout artist in history, producing a much higher percentage of stoppage wins than Stribling. (If Stribling had boxed until retirement, the knockout record he would have left would have been completely out of Archie's reach, but the Mongoose's knockout percentage would have still been much higher.)

Archie Moore was also involved in training Eddie Mustafa Muhammad for a time, yet another noted power puncher with superb technique.

Marciano was momentarily dropped by what was probably the hardest single punch of Moore's long distinguished career.

Keep in mind that Marciano might not be aiming for Tyson's head. How hard was his body to hit cleanly on?

Rocky was used to dealing with taller opponents with a longer reach. Tyson wasn't. Tyson would be the bigger target in this situation, and Marciano generated power with his punches coming up. Big strong Rex Layne discover how hard it was to try bulling Rocky around. Tyson would be the one forced to concede territory to the anchor footed Blockbuster, and with Marciano holding the centerline, Tyson would be facing an arduous task indeed.

Here's the thing,

Against Big Punchers Tyson is more proven. There is not a single fighter that Marciano faced that can compare in terms of power with the top three punchers that Tyson faced (Ruddock, Lewis, Bruno).

In terms of power Tyson is more proven. Not only is he 30 pounds heavier but he has a better delivery system* and better speed compounding the effects of his blows. And if Tyson wore the same size gloves that The Rock wore he would have ended careers.

In terms skill, I dont like how people underrate Marciano because any Heavyweight Champion, particularly one as small as he was, to retire undefeated means that on every occasion, he got the job done. So he was skilled. But objectively speaking Tyson was the more talented of the two. He was harder to hit with scoring blows, and he was just as resiliant in terms of punch resistance than Marciano. His punches were more compact, better arsenal and fundamentals and he was a deadly counter puncher.

In the end you a fighter with better fundamentals, a better chin, speed and power. The odds favor Mike.

[brownpimp88]

I wasn´t a bad example. I only said to some kids, who never stood in a ring, that muscles at boxing aren´t automatically a advantage, sometimes too much muscles are even a disadvantage. In this case, Tyson had better handspeed, threw faster combinations, etc., but Marciano had the better chin, and had more rare power, and every punch he threw he threw with power, so i can´t see Tyson lasting the distance, because he didn´t have the chin/fighting spirit to win against a great fighter in his prime...
Which great fighter in his prime did rocky beat? Exactly he beat a shot ex champ and a bunch of LHWs.

[janitor]

Here's the thing,

Against Big Punchers Tyson is more proven. There is not a single fighter that Marciano faced that can compare in terms of power with the top three punchers that Tyson faced (Ruddock, Lewis, Bruno).

In terms of power Tyson is more proven. Not only is he 30 pounds heavier but he has a better delivery system* and better speed compounding the effects of his blows. And if Tyson wore the same size gloves that The Rock wore he would have ended careers.

In terms skill, I dont like how people underrate Marciano because any Heavyweight Champion, particularly one as small as he was, to retire undefeated means that on every occasion, he got the job done. So he was skilled. But objectively speaking Tyson was the more talented of the two. He was harder to hit with scoring blows, and he was just as resiliant in terms of punch resistance than Marciano. His punches were more compact, better arsenal and fundamentals and he was a deadly counter puncher.

In the end you a fighter with better fundamentals, a better chin, speed and power. The odds favor Mike.

This is a solid analysis but the issues are not as straightforward as you make out. In a real world fight things don't efortlesly fall into place the way they do in a fantasy fight and a number of other factors come into play.

Just pretend for a seacond that this is a real fight that is gioing to take place tomorrow and everybody on the forum is going to see how good or bad your prediction is. Even if you were confident a week ago certain doubts would be creeping into your mind right now.

What are they?

[janitor]

Which great fighter in his prime did rocky beat? Exactly he beat a shot ex champ and a bunch of LHWs.

I could argue that the best oponents Marciano beat were better than the best that Tyson beat.

Who on Tysons record would you rate better than Walcott, Charles, Moore or even a shot Louis?

His best wins were a shot ex champ (Holmes) and a LHW (Spinks).

[brownpimp88]

I could argue that the best oponents Marciano beat were better than the best that Tyson beat.

Who on Tysons record would you rate better than Walcott, Charles, Moore or even a shot Louis?

His best wins were a shot ex champ (Holmes) and a LHW (Spinks).
I can argue that head to head, tucker, ruddock, and several of those other ex abc champs that tyson beat were better than the other people on marciano's record in a head to head sense. I mean don cockell is horrible.

The michael Spinks that tyson beat was a better win than the moore and ezzard that rocky beat and tyson blew him out in 1 round.

[Quick Cash]

I can argue that head to head, tucker, ruddock, and several of those other ex abc champs that tyson beat were better than the other people on marciano's record in a head to head sense. I mean don cockell is horrible.

The michael Spinks that tyson beat was a better win than the moore and ezzard that rocky beat and tyson blew him out in 1 round.

The Michael Spinks that beat Cooney might have been arguably better than the Charles or Moore that the Rock beat, but the Spinks that Tyson beat was terrified dry. It's all irrelevant though because resumes won't come into play. None of the fighters mentioned are of any consequence since they didn't fight like the participants of this match.

Generally, go-forward fighters who are slow starters will lose against Iron Mike Tyson. That's an absurd combination going against Tyson.

[janitor]

[quote=brownpimp88]I can argue that head to head, tucker, ruddock, and several of those other ex abc champs that tyson beat were better than the other people on marciano's record in a head to head sense.

You could argue that but you would probably be wrong. Certainly based on resume these guys are not better than Walcott, Charles, Moore etc.

Where tyson mainly has the edge on Marciano is in terms of volume of ranked oponents beaten.

I mean don cockell is horrible.

He is not that bad really. A No2 ranked contender with a few good wins. You would not complain if Wladamir Klitschko fought the No 3 ranked ring contender for comparision.


The michael Spinks that tyson beat was a better win than the moore and ezzard that rocky beat and tyson blew him out in 1 round.


I think that Charles and Moore were much more proven at heavyweight than Spinks. The only thing that sets this fight apart from Marciano's best is the decisive way in which Tyson won.

[janitor]

Generally, go-forward fighters who are slow starters will lose against Iron Mike Tyson. That's an absurd combination going against Tyson.

I have never been sold on the idea that Rocky was a slow starter. While his style was one of cumulative atrition he did beat some of his better oponents in the first two rounds.

[brownpimp88]

[quote]

You could argue that but you would probably be wrong. Certainly based on resume these guys are not better than Walcott, Charles, Moore etc.

Where tyson mainly has the edge on Marciano is in terms of volume of ranked oponents beaten.



He is not that bad really. A No2 ranked contender with a few good wins. You would not complain if Wladamir Klitschko fought the No 3 ranked ring contender for comparision.



I think that Charles and Moore were much more proven at heavyweight than Spinks. The only thing that sets this fight apart from Marciano's best is the decisive way in which Tyson won.
Also the fact that spinks was alot closer to his prime then they were and he is one of the linear heavyweight champs unlike archie moore.

Mike Tyson beat more proven "natural" Heavyweights too. I mean 2/3 of rocky's opponents were tomato cans that were never ranked contenders at any point in thier careers.

[ChrisPontius]

His best wins were a shot ex champ (Holmes) and a LHW (Spinks).

That is a remarkable choice of words, especially defending Marciano.

You're calling Spinks a LHW but so were Charles & Moore. You're calling Holmes shot, he wasn't shot, he was aging but very well prepared and most people thought he beat Spinks in the rematch. Louis was old but not shot either. Walcott was just as old as Holmes.

Marciano's wins are a bit better but Tyson has more depth. Of course, Tyson also has more losses. Achievement-wise, Marciano should rate higher (i have him at #4), but head to head i think Mike takes it.

[Bummy Davis]

Lets not forget Tyson would feel Rocky power and if he went in aggressively he would feel it early, I have seen Tyson rocked early in fights(Tucker) Smith, Lewis and was reluctant to pursue recklessly, with Marciano he could not pursue recklessly because he could get hurt but Marciano was a differcult guy to hit with 3 punches in a row without getting hit back,even pinpointboxer/punchers like WALCOTT AND CHARLES could not do this. Tyson was at his best and looked good KOing the scared and the cannon fodder type but against guys that came to fight like Holyfield,Lewis,Douglas,Williams,McBride he had a change of heart. a fight with Marciano would be early danger for both men and both guys had solid JAWS but I think this battle would start to unfold depending on the pace after the 7-8th round and Marciano has the better track record after the mid rounds. I think the early Tyson was on a roll to be one of the ATG's but fell off the mark to being the best that he can be and I got to tell you, he had everything but being the bad guy and the bully caught up with him(once Cus went away) and showed a different side(Holyfield fights) and the Williams, Mcbride and Lewis fights stick in my head. He did not get going when the going got tough, and never got off the floor to win, Marciano did

[joe33]

Frank bruno rocked a prime or near prime bruno,so for me for people to say marciano aint got a chance is rubbish,it would be a vicious battle though,id say if they had 3 bouts,they may get a win each and maybe a draw,or tyson just takes the other.

[Senya13]

1. Workrate

Tysons punch output per round falls off after about four rounds while Marcianos just gets better as the fight progreses. Tyson will start out at about 60 punches per round and drop to 40 while Marciano will start off at about 60 and work up to 80 peaking at about 100 if he has Tyson in trouble.
Where was that workrate late in the 1st Walcott fight? Alas, this whole point is a myth that Marciano nuthuggers want everyone to believe to make him look better than he really was. He didn't show such ability on any even semi-regular basis to believe it would come into play in any matchup vs big superheavyweights who will wear him down (with his lack of any good defense it'll be easy) to the point where he can't hold his hands up anymore, even less so increase his workrate.

[Senya13]

Moore was a former LHW, that´s right. But he proved even at HW that he could KO big, good and durable HW´s with one punch.
As I pointed out long time ago, citing multiple newspaper reports, Moore did not show such ability in his life against heavyweights of 210+, it always took him a continued beat-down, usually a lot of punches to the body and then some more punishment to the head to finally drop then and even then they often got up and the fight was stopped by the referee while they were still on their feet. This is just another myth by uneducated Marciano nut-huggers.

[Jersey Joe]

anThe trouble with all theoretical Tyson matchups is that everyone rates Tyson based on his prime. Mike's prime lasted about 2-3 years. The rest of his career he was just not that good. He lost twice to Holyfield, a blown-up cruiserweight. He got KOd by Douglas and lost almost eveyr round! He got totally humilated against Lennox Lewis. 4/5ths of Tyson's career, he was basically a contender or a jailbird, not a champ.

Just watch the footage, the difference between the Tyson who unified the division, and later Tyson, was as clear as night & day. Prime Tyson had great defence, incredible hand speed, great combinations, good footwork, great stamina. Normal Tyson had non-existent footwork, no body movement, was easy to hit, his speed was much lower, his combos far less common. Under Cus he trained intensely and had great will to win; from Douglas on, he trained half-assed and his mind wasn't all there.

Prime Tyson IMO would be extremely difficult for any fighter, only a small handful could beat him (Ali, Louis, Foreman, possibly Liston and Holmes i.e. really dangerous true champion heavyweights). But "normal" Tyson was definitely beatable even by journeymen like Douglas. Maricano never entered a fight in anything less than top condition, he would annihilate "normal" Tyson with the latter's total lack of training & discipline. But prime Tyson would be a different story altogether.

You can't judge a guy from his prime 2-3 years, versus someone who sustained their prime for 5 years +. You have to compare their whole careers. Say over 3 fights, prime Tyson would win the first, then after slacking off he would get beat on the 2nd and humilated McBride style in the 3rd.

Overall, based on total career/consistency, Marciano is the better fighter and would win head to head in a best of 3.

[JohnThomas1]

Not much. Bill's been banned from coming on by Larry because he only gave Peanut Head 8 rounds in the first Spinks fight. He's banned from Larry's gym too, until he re-scores giving The Mallard at least a 12-3 margin.

:lol:

Apparently Larry accepted Bill's draw vs Holyfield however as well as his mere 6 point buffer vs Norton. He was also satisfied that Bill had the cards even whilst waiting for The Mallard to rise from the last KD vs Tyson (He'd chalked up his 4th round card as Larry hit the canvas, knowing full well the mighty Mallard was a shoe in to rise and last the few seconds needed, only to see, much to his horror, 4 men jump on Larry's chest making it impossible for him to get up)

[JohnThomas1]

His best wins were a shot ex champ (Holmes) and a LHW (Spinks).

Given your love and support for smaller fighters being able to whip bigger fighters of similar standard (147 Walcott beating Bob Foster, Fitzimmons having good chances vs Lewis etc) i'm surprised that you fob Spinks off as a mere LHW Janitor. It goes entirely against your normal view.

But of course i wholeheartedly agree, Spinks was indeed a bit light on at Heavyweight and only beat Holmes because of Holmes penchant to take seemingly lesser challengers for granted as well as Mike's excellent effort and strategy. In Tyson's defense i'll add many many people including the experts gave Spinks a helluva chance of the upset here.

[maracho]

Even Mike says its 90% mental and so once he took a chunk out of Marciano's ears he would have entered even deeper into Marciano's world quickly recieving an assortment of eye-socket busting forarms and headbutts before being literally kicked out of the ring.

[Dempsey1238]

Berbick was bigger than Walcott, that´s right. But Walcott was a much better fighter, who had at least twice the punch Trevor had. Jersey Joe could for example KO Tyson if he would land a good shot (for example one of his unexpected left hooks). Before you guys always talk about size, strengths, height, etc. it would be better, to make yourself experiences in boxing practice, than you wouldn´t always talk about ridiculous weight advantages (we´re talking about perhaps 15 lbs or that, that´s nothing, it´s not so that we talk about 100 lbs)...

Just saw the Berbick Ali fight, and Berbick for the most part had his hands full with a total shot ALi. This was no Holmes remake. Walcott is levels above Berbick imo. If Anything I think Ali perhaps won a close points victory.

[ironchamp]

Lets not forget Tyson would feel Rocky power and if he went in aggressively he would feel it early, I have seen Tyson rocked early in fights(Tucker) Smith, Lewis and was reluctant to pursue recklessly, with Marciano he could not pursue recklessly because he could get hurt but Marciano was a differcult guy to hit with 3 punches in a row without getting hit back,even pinpointboxer/punchers like WALCOTT AND CHARLES could not do this. Tyson was at his best and looked good KOing the scared and the cannon fodder type but against guys that came to fight like Holyfield,Lewis,Douglas,Williams,McBride he had a change of heart. a fight with Marciano would be early danger for both men and both guys had solid JAWS but I think this battle would start to unfold depending on the pace after the 7-8th round and Marciano has the better track record after the mid rounds. I think the early Tyson was on a roll to be one of the ATG's but fell off the mark to being the best that he can be and I got to tell you, he had everything but being the bad guy and the bully caught up with him(once Cus went away) and showed a different side(Holyfield fights) and the Williams, Mcbride and Lewis fights stick in my head. He did not get going when the going got tough, and never got off the floor to win, Marciano did

This is a prime example of the "intangibles" myth that I talked about in the original post.

"when the going got tough" premise is used in fantasy match-ups that people use to overcompensate for a fighter's short comings. Marciano fought a tough fight against Walcott much like Frazier did against Ali.

But Frazier despite being mentally stronger than George was unable to use his "intangibles" to outlast and outwork Foreman. It just didnt apply. He simply could not do the same against Foreman. He was simply overmatched. Frazier can hit, has a somewhat sturdy chin. why didnt he start turning it up in the 7-8th round and start increasing his punch output and have the ref save George?

Intangibles only matter when your style matches up well with your opponent. If it does not match up then you can have the heart and determination of Holyfield + Ali + Frazier x Lamotta and still get your ass kicked because of your limited ability in a particular circumstance.

The same reason why Marciano wouldnt be able to do the same against Tyson.


Tyson and Marciano are come forward fighters.

Tyson has the better Chin, Power, Speed and technical ability. And he has 30 pounds on him. Furthermore If you want to be technical, Marciano's power would be less effective if he used the same size gloves that Mike Tyson used. And if Tyson were to use the same size glove as Marciano, he stop him inside 3 rounds.

Styles make fights. Marciano just can't win. He is greater in terms of Legacy but that's where it ends.

Janitor to answer your post regarding doubts. I would have absolutely none. Actually my biggest doubt would be predicting the round in which its stopped but not so much the outcome.

[Manassa]

Tyson can not take Marchianos pressure,, HE will crack. Same with Jim Jeffies he would also make Tyson crack I sure. Or something like that lol.

[My dinner with Conteh]

Given your love and support for smaller fighters being able to whip bigger fighters of similar standard (147 Walcott beating Bob Foster, Fitzimmons having good chances vs Lewis etc) i'm surprised that you fob Spinks off as a mere LHW Janitor. It goes entirely against your normal view.


The 'he did better at heavyweight' line amuses me too. Fighters in the 40s and 50s stepped up and often took on fellas weighing 185, 190. Big deal. :huh

[My dinner with Conteh]

Larry hit the canvas, knowing full well the mighty Mallard was a shoe in to rise and last the few seconds needed, only to see, much to his horror, 4 men jump on Larry's chest making it impossible for him to get up)


Ha ha, it looks like Tyson paid some 'heavies' to put some 'hurtin' on Larry. :good

[My dinner with Conteh]

Manassa's new posting style has been cracking me up. lol :lol:

[Manassa]

Though I need too dumb myself down lol.

[godking]

Lets not forget Tyson would feel Rocky power and if he went in aggressively he would feel it early, I have seen Tyson rocked early in fights(Tucker) Smith, Lewis and was reluctant to pursue recklessly, with Marciano he could not pursue recklessly because he could get hurt but Marciano was a differcult guy to hit with 3 punches in a row without getting hit back,even pinpointboxer/punchers like WALCOTT AND CHARLES could not do this. Tyson was at his best and looked good KOing the scared and the cannon fodder type but against guys that came to fight like Holyfield,Lewis,Douglas,Williams,McBride he had a change of heart. a fight with Marciano would be early danger for both men and both guys had solid JAWS but I think this battle would start to unfold depending on the pace after the 7-8th round and Marciano has the better track record after the mid rounds. I think the early Tyson was on a roll to be one of the ATG's but fell off the mark to being the best that he can be and I got to tell you, he had everything but being the bad guy and the bully caught up with him(once Cus went away) and showed a different side(Holyfield fights) and the Williams, Mcbride and Lewis fights stick in my head. He did not get going when the going got tough, and never got off the floor to win, Marciano did:roll: :roll: This myth again once you hit Tyson cleanly he immediatelly gave up .

Rocky is NOT going to land consistently on Tyson . People seem to forget Tyson defense and countering abilities and seem to think that it was easy to land on Tyson.

[joe33]

:roll: :roll: This myth again once you hit Tyson cleanly he immediatelly gave up .

Rocky is NOT going to land consistently on Tyson . People seem to forget Tyson defense and countering abilities and seem to think that it was easy to land on Tyson.


Lewis seemed to land with ease on him though.Yeah yeah i know he was finished by then,but still,and bruno landed on him ok in the first fight,he just then shit himself and did not try again.

[Luigi1985]

Roids? WHAT roids? First of all, they are NOT the same size. Not even close. They are close in HEIGHT but in terms of body size it is not comparable. Maybe Marciano weighed more than Tyson when he was out of shape and not training but that's all.

Second of all, WHAT roids? :huh did you even see Tyson as an amateur? he was bigger than a full grown Rocky when he was only 15. Tyson's bones were SO much bigger than Rocky's, he'd have to chop off his legs to make 185 pounds.


Look for example at both after their career, Marciano weighed for example in the sparring against Ali ca. 250 lbs, he was a natural big guy, Tyson on the other side had to gain his muscles in his prime. The post-prison- Tyson took roids, insiders knows it...

[Nemesis]

Though I need too dumb myself down lol.

have you discovered weed?

[Luigi1985]

As I pointed out long time ago, citing multiple newspaper reports, Moore did not show such ability in his life against heavyweights of 210+, it always took him a continued beat-down, usually a lot of punches to the body and then some more punishment to the head to finally drop then and even then they often got up and the fight was stopped by the referee while they were still on their feet. This is just another myth by uneducated Marciano nut-huggers.


My point is simply, that Moore even at HW proved to have very good power, because he KO´d much bigger men than himself and who were all good ranked, a thing Spinks (one of Tyson´s best wins) didn´t prove...

[Bummy Davis]

This is a prime example of the "intangibles" myth that I talked about in the original post.

"when the going got tough" premise is used in fantasy match-ups that people use to overcompensate for a fighter's short comings. Marciano fought a tough fight against Walcott much like Frazier did against Ali.

But Frazier despite being mentally stronger than George was unable to use his "intangibles" to outlast and outwork Foreman. It just didnt apply. He simply could not do the same against Foreman. He was simply overmatched. Frazier can hit, has a somewhat sturdy chin. why didnt he start turning it up in the 7-8th round and start increasing his punch output and have the ref save George?

Intangibles only matter when your style matches up well with your opponent. If it does not match up then you can have the heart and determination of Holyfield + Ali + Frazier x Lamotta and still get your ass kicked because of your limited ability in a particular circumstance.

The same reason why Marciano wouldnt be able to do the same against Tyson.


Tyson and Marciano are come forward fighters.

Tyson has the better Chin, Power, Speed and technical ability. And he has 30 pounds on him. Furthermore If you want to be technical, Marciano's power would be less effective if he used the same size gloves that Mike Tyson used. And if Tyson were to use the same size glove as Marciano, he stop him inside 3 rounds.

Styles make fights. Marciano just can't win. He is greater in terms of Legacy but that's where it ends.

Janitor to answer your post regarding doubts. I would have absolutely none. Actually my biggest doubt would be predicting the round in which its stopped but not so much the outcome.

Frazier was a much different fighter in the Ali 1 fight, then the 1st Foreman fight or for that matter the Ali 2 and 3 fights, Frazier was not used to the fame that he recieved after the 1st fight vs Ali and went on a partying (woman +) binge, he did not even look good in his fights vs Ron Stander and Terry Daniels, club fighters. I am not saying that Frazier would have had the style to beat Foreman, Frazier was rocked and dropped by Bonavena,(not a big puncher) Manual Ramos,Dropped early in his career by a nobody and was shook a few times in his short career. Frazier only had 26 total fights under his belt and even at that point he showed that he could be hurt when hit and Foreman could hit. Looking at photos of Frazier after Ali and you could see he could never get his body in that condition again. Marciano was always fit. Tyson looked great coming up but Berbick(Nothing) Tucker,Thomas( backon Herion by then) were fighters looking for a way out when they got hit and never thought they could win. The logic you use that a fighters will to win can only take him so far can be used vs Tyson also. What would have happened if Tyson and Holyfield would have fought earlier? We know Evander came to win and Handled Mike easy and exposed his biggest weakness(that was there all the while) Evander did not fold at the presence of Mike and fought the fight to win, his heart and determination(intangables) made a big difference and something that only one fighter(Douglas) could muster on one night, and we know the results. Later on we saw Mike's weakness unfold again. Look at Mikes first 36 opponents leading up to Douglas and tell me one fighter that went into the fight that showed he had a chance to win or really tried, Smith,Tillis,Green, decided that they were going to survive and did. Leading up to the Holyfield fight only Rudduck and Bruno gave it there all and were in it to win it. Holyfield struggled to stop blown up Middleweight Bobby Cyz and based on that did not look like he had a chance(only the HEART vs Tyson) but THAT intangable exposed MIKES weakness again and would do so again vs Williams and Mcbride, Tyson never got off the floor to win and got discouraged when the guy he hit with his hardest did not fold, look at all of his fights leading up to his loses. I think if he had that Intangable(HEart and Will) in his package it would have made a big difference for his LEGASY

[Luigi1985]

Frazier was a much different fighter in the Ali 1 fight, then the 1st Foreman fight or for that matter the Ali 2 and 3 fights, Frazier was not used to the fame that he recieved after the 1st fight vs Ali and went on a partying (woman +) binge, he did not even look good in his fights vs Ron Stander and Terry Daniels, club fighters. I am not saying that Frazier would have had the style to beat Foreman, Frazier was rocked and dropped by Bonavena,(not a big puncher) Manual Ramos,Dropped early in his career by a nobody and was shook a few times in his short career. Frazier only had 26 total fights under his belt and even at that point he showed that he could be hurt when hit and Foreman could hit. Looking at photos of Frazier after Ali and you could see he could never get his body in that condition again. Marciano was always fit. Tyson looked great coming up but Berbick(Nothing) Tucker,Thomas( backon Herion by then) were fighters looking for a way out when they got hit and never thought they could win. The logic you use that a fighters will to win can only take him so far can be used vs Tyson also. What would have happened if Tyson and Holyfield would have fought earlier? We know Evander came to win and Handled Mike easy and exposed his biggest weakness(that was there all the while) Evander did not fold at the presence of Mike and fought the fight to win, his heart and determination(intangables) made a big difference and something that only one fighter(Douglas) could muster on one night, and we know the results. Later on we saw Mike's weakness unfold again. Look at Mikes first 36 opponents leading up to Douglas and tell me one fighter that went into the fight that showed he had a chance to win or really tried, Smith,Tillis,Green, decided that they were going to survive and did. Leading up to the Holyfield fight only Rudduck and Bruno gave it there all and were in it to win it. Holyfield struggled to stop blown up Middleweight Bobby Cyz and based on that did not look like he had a chance(only the HEART vs Tyson) but THAT intangable exposed MIKES weakness again and would do so again vs Williams and Mcbride, Tyson never got off the floor to win and got discouraged when the guy he hit with his hardest did not fold, look at all of his fights leading up to his loses. I think if he had that Intangable(HEart and Will) in his package it would have made a difference


Very good post, but unfortunately some ignorant people won´t understand that, they say "Tyson surely had a better chin", although he was KO´d in his prime by the mediocre- hitting Buster Douglas for example. For me personally it really makes no sense to discuss with some of them...

[prime]

Tyson looked great coming up but Berbick(Nothing) Tucker,Thomas( backon Herion by then) were fighters looking for a way out when they got hit and never thought they could win.

Why would seasoned professional fighters (in some cases world champions) be reduced to simply "looking for a way out", "never thinking they could win", if not because they realized they were up against a true knockout threat in the awesome specimen that was young Tyson? When Larry Holmes is visibly intimidated for the only time in his career and left defenseless on the canvas, it is clear he faced a great talent.

Evander did not fold at the presence of Mike and fought the fight to win, his heart and determination(intangables) made a big difference and something that only one fighter(Douglas) could muster on one night, and we know the results.

True. Whoever beats peak Tyson needs to exert tremendous self-control and channel fear into fire. But Douglas and Holy also had the physical and technical tools to beat these subpar versions of Tyson. And it is clear from the film that, while Douglas was in a sublime state that night in Tokyo, Tyson showed nothing close to his best, say like when he won the title against Berbick.

The argument is "intangibles" can only get you so far. You also need the physical and technical tools. When imagining fantasy fights, we assume both fighters are mentally all there, inspired: Tyson by his love for Cus, Marciano as the people's champion. None of these ATGs are wimps, Tyson included of course. No young man who faces down grown men all the way to the title and worldwide awe is a wimp. So it first comes down to a technical analysis.

We cannot, based on "intangibles", say Marciano would do more than he ever showed on film. The film shows Tyson had faster hands, equally devastating power in both hands, and a greater variety of stunning blows. Marciano had a powerful straight right, yet needed 13 rounds to dispose of the oldest champ in history at the time. Tyson knocked larger men out for ten counts inside of 1, 4, 6 rounds. And, again, Walcott floored Marciano in the first round with a punch I do not believe more powerful than the Thomas straight right Tyson shook off in the first round in 1987.

Yes, Tyson became rattled when losing and always would. But, based on film analysis, I don't believe Marciano would be the one to put him in that situation.

[Dempsey1238]

Tyson didnt have the defenses of say a Walcott of Charles, and on the films, it seem Marciano was landed pretty consistently on them. Marciano was not the guy that misss and misss as legend would make one belive. Marciano would land some thundaring shots on Tyson.

[janitor]

[quote=JohnThomas1]Given your love and support for smaller fighters being able to whip bigger fighters of similar standard (147 Walcott beating Bob Foster, Fitzimmons having good chances vs Lewis etc) i'm surprised that you fob Spinks off as a mere LHW Janitor. It goes entirely against your normal view.


I was (rather mischeivously) aplying the same line of argument to Tysons opposition that critics of Marciano aply to his. My point is that like Marciano his best wins are over older or smaller heavyweights.

Were Holmes and Spinks the best oponents available at the time?

Absolutely.

Are they great wins?

Yes given the decisive nature with which they were disposed of.

By the same token Marciano should be given unqualified credit for defeating Walcott Charles and Moore who were the best around at the time.


But of course i wholeheartedly agree, Spinks was indeed a bit light on at Heavyweight and only beat Holmes because of Holmes penchant to take seemingly lesser challengers for granted as well as Mike's excellent effort and strategy. In Tyson's defense i'll add many many people including the experts gave Spinks a helluva chance of the upset here.


I think that if we are going to compare opposition here the best fighters Marciano beat were better than the best that Tyson beat but that they were more competitive against him.

The place where Tysons resume really shines (which his suportes don't seem to notice) is volume of quality oponents despite his short prime. If you acualy tot it up he beat a hell of a lot of ranked fighters both in his prime and outside it.

[Duodenum]

I still am not noticing anybody addressing the fact that Marciano would have been lower than Tyson for this one, and going downstairs, to the body, arms, or whatever part of Tyson happened to be in the way of Rocky's fists.

Regarding the punching power Rocky prevailed against, Vingo was no slouch. Cockell dropped Matthews three times in one match. Decisioned him in another, and stopped him in a final encounter. Twice, he beat Matthews in the Kid's own Seattle. He'd also decisioned LaStarza, and won over the 15 round distance twice.

Walcott dropped Louis three times, and took out Charles with a single hookercut, a shot which dropped Marciano for just a couple seconds.

After Frazier's first match with Bonavena, Jimmy Cannon wrote about the similarities in the approach to training taken by both Marciano and Frazier. Cannon also noted that Smoke didn't quite have the chin necessary to support his style, where as Rocky did. Still, nobody ever counted ten over Frazier, regardless of his physical condition, or how badly he was getting beaten. The same cannot be said for Tyson.

Marciano withstood a severe beating in his title winning effort against Walcott, and was not deterred. He came from behind to overtake Charles in Ezz's performance of a lifetime. Tyson never prevailed in such a situation.

Marciano was a bleeder, but his eyes did not swell shut, and Goldman was an experienced cut man. No matter what Tyson did, Rocky would keep coming (just as a shot Frazier kept getting up against Foreman).

Tyson never prevailed after sustaining the sort of beating Walcott administered to Marciano the first time.

Bonecrusher Smith rocked Tyson at the end of 12. If that match had been for 15 rounds, Tyson would not have reached the final bell. (However, Smith should have been disqualified, and his purses withheld before the end of his matches with Bruno and Tyson, for not being competitive. Against Walcott, Rocky never stopped trying, and neither did Weaver against Tate, as Big John aggressively smothered Hercules.)

How would Tyson react to a shorter bodypunching opponent who would be coming up with his blows? Tyson was used to being the shorter man with the lower center of gravity.

Charley Goldman wrote PART FOUR of Rocky Marciano's Book of Boxing and Bodybuilding titled, "How We Would Whip Floyd Patterson." This is revealing, because Patterson of course was a Cus D'Amato protege, just like Tyson. Goldman and Marciano make it clear that Patterson's arms would indeed be a target. They also make it a point to mention how Marciano would block Patterson's right uppercut with his own right forearm. (Against Rex Layne, Rocky demonstrates extremely well how he would have neutralized Tyson's uppercut in this way.) They also emphasize how they would go after Patterson's body, an interesting fixation considering that Patterson's glass jaw had already been exposed by French MW Jacques Royer Crecy (the first match of Floyd's run to the title). Goldman and Marciano acknowledge Patterson's tremendous edge in speed, an advantage they also would have taken into account for Tyson.

Check out all the footage of Marciano's low center of gravity, and how he smothered Layne inside. (Also the speed with which he came back after a miss.) Tyson's body was considerably wider than Layne's, and thus an easier target.

Tyson's preferred distance is mid range. Marciano would close quickly inside that, and make his own shorter arms an asset, not giving Tyson room to breathe. Rocky would be under Tyson's overhand right, forcing Tyson to rely on his hook more than usual. Tyson would also need to be aware of Marciano's elbows when he followed through.

Marciano prevailed over a greater number of far more experienced competitors than Tyson did. He would not have been intimidated by Tyson, who had many of his victims beaten before they even stepped in the ring with him. No matter what Tyson did, Marciano would never stop coming.

[janitor]

Tyson's preferred distance is mid range. Marciano would close quickly inside that, and make his own shorter arms an asset, not giving Tyson room to breathe. Rocky would be under Tyson's overhand right, forcing Tyson to rely on his hook more than usual. Tyson would also need to be aware of Marciano's elbows when he followed through.


This is the big uncertainty for Tyson.

How he would handel a small pressure fighter who worked in the no mans land between his optimum punching distence (mid range) and his chin.

That was the area where Tyson was most vulnerable.

[C. M. Clay II]

Just saw the Berbick Ali fight, and Berbick for the most part had his hands full with a total shot ALi. This was no Holmes remake. Walcott is levels above Berbick imo. If Anything I think Ali perhaps won a close points victory.

I said the same thing about 9 months ago, and I was called a nuthugger for that. Glad to see I'm not alone on this issue.:good

[ironchamp]

This is the big uncertainty for Tyson.

How he would handel a small pressure fighter who worked in the no mans land between his optimum punching distence (mid range) and his chin.

That was the area where Tyson was most vulnerable.

If a Tyson vs. Marciano bout (both at thier best) was taking place next week saturday. Who would you feel more comfortable betting on?

[janitor]

If a Tyson vs. Marciano bout (both at thier best) was taking place next week saturday. Who would you feel more comfortable betting on?

To be brutaly honest I would not feel comfortable betting on either of them and the closer the fight came the less comfortable I would feel.

Please do not think that this is a simple match up. It might well be a short match up but there are a lot of unknowns.

[Senya13]

Vingo was a weak puncher, even though he was a cruiserweight himself and never fought a single heavyweight by modern standards (200lb+).
Cockell was a blown-up light heavyweight with not a very good punch either and a weak chin (still it took Marciano 9 rounds to stop him, so much for his supposed punching power, blah).
Walcott got Charles only once in 4 fights, by a lucky punch, despite landing often in their slug-fests, and despite Charles' weak chin.
Marciano prefered mid-range, not the close-range. This won't be an issue at all.
Also, even though Tyson and Patterson used similar defense, but their offensive style was clearly different.

[janitor]

This is a prime example of the "intangibles" myth that I talked about in the original post.


Intangibles are no myth.

Mike Tyson is perhaps the most naturaly talented heavyweight who ever breathed and he did not fulfill his full potential.

Evander Holyfield is not a hard puncher or a master boxer but he often won through against physicaly superior oponents and arguably did more than Tyson on paper.

If you could put Holyfields heat on Tysons shoulders you would have the ultimate frankensteins monster of the heavyweight division.

[janitor]

[quote=Senya13]Vingo was a weak puncher, even though he was a cruiserweight himself and never fought a single heavyweight by modern standards (200lb+).


Contemporary opinion strongly suggests otherwise.

Cockell was a blown-up light heavyweight

He was in no worse condition than some of the curent beltholders. If they are superheavyweight monsters then at leat give Cockle credit as a true heavyweight.


with not a very good punch either and a weak chin (still it took Marciano 9 rounds to stop him, so much for his supposed punching power, blah).


You can discredit anybodys power by finding a single fight where they needed 9 rounds to get a knockout.

Modern fighters are not held up to this standard. They are given credit if the scrape a win.


Walcott got Charles only once in 4 fights, by a lucky punch, despite landing often in their slug-fests, and despite Charles' weak chin.


Lucky punch?

I call it perfection.


Marciano prefered mid-range, not the close-range. This won't be an issue at all.


It will be a huge issue.

Marciano came up and under shoulder to shoulder against oponents who went toe to toe.

[Senya13]

What contemporary opinion? The guy was a feather-fisted cruiserweight.
Cockell started as a middleweight. His natural/best weight should be around 180, he was no true heavyweight at all. Well, just like many other Marciano's opponents.
Several other fighters stopped Cockell quicker than Marciano. Tyson would need less than 1 round to stop him, that's absolutely certain.
Walcott had how many rounds to drop Charles? How many times has he done that, despite their bouts consisting mostly of mutual slugging at mid and close range.
Like who, exactly, he came shoulder to shoulder?

[janitor]

[quote=Senya13]What contemporary opinion? The guy was a feather-fisted cruiserweight.


In the press at the time he seems to have been hyped as a puncher.

Cockell started as a middleweight.

So did Gerry Cooney.

His natural/best weight should be around 180, he was no true heavyweight at all.

He was as much a heavyweight as Chagev, Peter, Maskaev or Ibragimov are superheavyweights. I have no doubt about that.


Several other fighters stopped Cockell quicker than Marciano. Tyson would need less than 1 round to stop him, that's absolutely certain.


Nothing is ever certain in a boxing match. See Tyson Douglas.


Walcott had how many rounds to drop Charles? How many times has he done that, despite their bouts consisting mostly of mutual slugging at mid and close range.


How many rounds did Tysonhave to drop Rudock?


Like who, exactly, he came shoulder to shoulder?


Watch the Louis fight.

[Bummy Davis]

I still am not noticing anybody addressing the fact that Marciano would have been lower than Tyson for this one, and going downstairs, to the body, arms, or whatever part of Tyson happened to be in the way of Rocky's fists.

Regarding the punching power Rocky prevailed against, Vingo was no slouch. Cockell dropped Matthews three times in one match. Decisioned him in another, and stopped him in a final encounter. Twice, he beat Matthews in the Kid's own Seattle. He'd also decisioned LaStarza, and won over the 15 round distance twice.

Walcott dropped Louis three times, and took out Charles with a single hookercut, a shot which dropped Marciano for just a couple seconds.

After Frazier's first match with Bonavena, Jimmy Cannon wrote about the similarities in the approach to training taken by both Marciano and Frazier. Cannon also noted that Smoke didn't quite have the chin necessary to support his style, where as Rocky did. Still, nobody ever counted ten over Frazier, regardless of his physical condition, or how badly he was getting beaten. The same cannot be said for Tyson.

Marciano withstood a severe beating in his title winning effort against Walcott, and was not deterred. He came from behind to overtake Charles in Ezz's performance of a lifetime. Tyson never prevailed in such a situation.

Marciano was a bleeder, but his eyes did not swell shut, and Goldman was an experienced cut man. No matter what Tyson did, Rocky would keep coming (just as a shot Frazier kept getting up against Foreman).

Tyson never prevailed after sustaining the sort of beating Walcott administered to Marciano the first time.

Bonecrusher Smith rocked Tyson at the end of 12. If that match had been for 15 rounds, Tyson would not have reached the final bell. (However, Smith should have been disqualified, and his purses withheld before the end of his matches with Bruno and Tyson, for not being competitive. Against Walcott, Rocky never stopped trying, and neither did Weaver against Tate, as Big John aggressively smothered Hercules.)

How would Tyson react to a shorter bodypunching opponent who would be coming up with his blows? Tyson was used to being the shorter man with the lower center of gravity.

Charley Goldman wrote PART FOUR of Rocky Marciano's Book of Boxing and Bodybuilding titled, "How We Would Whip Floyd Patterson." This is revealing, because Patterson of course was a Cus D'Amato protege, just like Tyson. Goldman and Marciano make it clear that Patterson's arms would indeed be a target. They also make it a point to mention how Marciano would block Patterson's right uppercut with his own right forearm. (Against Rex Layne, Rocky demonstrates extremely well how he would have neutralized Tyson's uppercut in this way.) They also emphasize how they would go after Patterson's body, an interesting fixation considering that Patterson's glass jaw had already been exposed by French MW Jacques Royer Crecy (the first match of Floyd's run to the title). Goldman and Marciano acknowledge Patterson's tremendous edge in speed, an advantage they also would have taken into account for Tyson.

Check out all the footage of Marciano's low center of gravity, and how he smothered Layne inside. (Also the speed with which he came back after a miss.) Tyson's body was considerably wider than Layne's, and thus an easier target.

Tyson's preferred distance is mid range. Marciano would close quickly inside that, and make his own shorter arms an asset, not giving Tyson room to breathe. Rocky would be under Tyson's overhand right, forcing Tyson to rely on his hook more than usual. Tyson would also need to be aware of Marciano's elbows when he followed through.

Marciano prevailed over a greater number of far more experienced competitors than Tyson did. He would not have been intimidated by Tyson, who had many of his victims beaten before they even stepped in the ring with him. No matter what Tyson did, Marciano would never stop coming.


:good :good Good post

[Marciano Frazier]

Because based on that premise it seems to be that the majority of those that pick Rocky to win if he weathers the storm are in effect conceding that the first 3-4 rounds are most likely going to be won by Tyson. It seems to be the consensus amongst this thread even by those who pick Rocky. If that is in fact the case what is it that leads you to believe, or anyone for that matter that Marciano trailing on points would all of a sudden start to land more accurate punches, have a better punch resistance and outwork an increasingly confident Mike Tyson who is building up a lead on the scorecard?

If were are talking about both fighters at thier best then lasting the distance shouldnt be an issue. Why would Mike all of a sudden crumble just because Marciano (who is behind on points) is still standing?

I'd like to think that my questions are valid but my observation is that this is a match up in which Tyson has a stylistic advantage which is why people seem to concede that he takes the early lead. From what I'm observing from some you, the only way Marciano takes this is if Tyson somehow gives up and stops fighting as a result of being discouraged that he hasnt stopped THe ROCK. I can't picture Tyson quitting a fight in which he's ahead. For Tyson to be ahead it means that he's connecting, he's dictating the pace. Usually in a fight when a fighter dictates the pace of a fight the only time the momentum changes is if:

A. His opponent adjusts and adopts a slightly different style/approach

B. His opponent lands a big punch and puts him on the defensive.

C. He runs out of gas.

Trouble is:

A. Marciano only fights one way.

B. Tyson has never lost a fight because of a momentum changing punch

C. In Tyson's prime he could fight hard for 12 rounds.


So please enlighten me what Marciano will do to win this fight.


Thank you.
I find myself wondering here if you've ever seen most of Marciano's big fights. It was a continual pattern that he would lose the first few rounds to top opponents with difficult styles for him, but would gradually break them down and turn the tide as the fight progressed. Walcott was shellacking him at the beginning of their match and was outboxing him for much of its main body, but Marciano rallied to knock him out. LaStarza was ahead through six in the rematch, but Marciano broke him down and stopped him. Charles was soundly outboxing Marciano during the first five to six rounds of their first fight, but Marciano's endless pressure broke him down to where he was gasping for breath and sagging all around the ring by the final bell. Moore came out strong and had an early knockdown on Rocky, but was unable to cope with the volume and force of Marciano's punches for more than 5-6 rounds and broke down to be KO'd in nine.

Walcott, LaStarza, Charles and Moore were all men who had displayed excellent stamina during their careers and were capable of fighting a hard 15 rounds, let alone 12. If we follow your logic, then, since they won the first few rounds against Marciano, they should have continued to dominate and won the fights.

The problem here is that you clearly don't understand the way Marciano's style operated. You might have some skills or physical assets that would allow you to outfight him for a round or two or three, but he would never tire or slow down or be discouraged by your punches, while his punches and his offense would be taking a heavy toll on you.

Let me draw you an analogy; I'm a long-distance runner. There are quite a few guys I run against who can run a faster 100, 800 or even 1600 meters than I can, but who I beat every time in a race three miles or longer- and I'm doing more or less the exact same thing the whole race. If those guys could outrun me for the first half-mile or mile, and I don't change what I'm doing, why shouldn't they continue beating me? Because even though I'm running about the same speed the entire time and they can outrun me for a given distance, they can't hang with the pace I set for the entire race.

No one could fight Marciano at Marciano's pace for a whole 15 rounds without breaking down, and no one could match him in a contest of wills. The only real way to beat Marciano is not to be drawn into that sort of scenario.

Tyson was a guy who was very dangerous for the first six to seven rounds, but lost steam after that(NOTE: your premise that he could fight hard for 12 rounds is somewhat false). He had only one stoppage after seven rounds in his entire career, that being against the mediocre Ribalta.

If Marciano was a distance runner, Tyson was a sprinter. And a distance runner always beats a sprinter over an extended race- and that's even more pronounced in a boxing match such as this one, because Marciano's extremely physical and rugged style physically sapped the strength of his opponents and broke down their wills. If Tyson is going to win, he needs to make it a sprint and take Marciano in the first lap, because even though he's capable of mounting a more impressive short spurt of fighting, he's terribly outmatched over the long haul.

[Luigi1985]

Yes, weighing heavy due to fat and out of shape weight :deal

Had to gain muscles? The guy was fucking RIPPED when he was 15, you could have easily mistaken him for someone in their twenties. Yeah, the same thing is said about Holyfield, but is there proof? No.



Look, I searched now for only a few seconds viá google, and look what I found, look at his skinny girlie-legs, and now say to me, where did he have a great genetic or shit like that? He started weight-lifting very early, and he had to train very hard to gain muscles, Tyson- nuthuggers comes often with that fabolous stories....











[Only registered and activated users can see links]

[Senya13]

So did Gerry Cooney.
Source of Cooney ever fighting as a middleweight in the pros?

[My dinner with Conteh]

I said the same thing about 9 months ago, and I was called a nuthugger for that. Glad to see I'm not alone on this issue.:good


You are a nuthugger, you're embarrassing. Don't you realise this bloke just wants to believe a peak Berbick lost to Ali because it makes the Marciano argument look stronger. You really are a tit. :good

[My dinner with Conteh]

Source of Cooney ever fighting as a middleweight in the pros?


He didn't. His pro debut vs Bill Jackon was at heavyweight. :good

[Holmes' Jab]

Tyson takes this, by mid-round TKO.

[janitor]

Source of Cooney ever fighting as a middleweight in the pros?

He fought at midleweight as an amateur. Not if he was fighting in the 30s or 50s it is quite likley that he would have been fighting profesionaly at this stage.

[JohnThomas1]

Ha ha, it looks like Tyson paid some 'heavies' to put some 'hurtin' on Larry. :good

:lol:

[Senya13]

He fought at midleweight as an amateur. Not if he was fighting in the 30s or 50s it is quite likley that he would have been fighting profesionaly at this stage.
And Thomas Hearns fought Pryor at lightweight, does that mean he was a blown-up lightweight as a pro?
The fact is Cooney never fought anywhere below heavyweight as a pro. Cockell started as a middleweight, and fought most of his career at or near the light-heavyweight limit, that was his best and natural weight, and he had no business in the heavy's if it weren't for the weakness of that weight division.

[fists of fury]

Basically, we have the immovavble object (Marciano) vs. the irresistble force (Tyson.)

Let's look at what we can pretty much say are concrete facts about both men:

*Tyson was an incredibly fast starter. Perhaps only Dempsey started as fast.
It was uncanny how quickly Tyson would find his groove in fights. No probing of defences, no exploratory jabs, no feeling out process. He pretty
much ripped into the oppositon from the get-go. It was often so overwhelming he scored many first-round KO's this way.

* Tyson's handspeed was phenomenal, and this combined with his blazing start was too hot to handle for many. His speed allowed him to land lead hooks or right hands on opponents or rattle off a three or four punch combo in the blink of an eye. It also provided him with many countering opportunities.

* Power. Tyson had it in spades. My personal standpoint is that he was naturally quite heavy-handed and fusing this together with his lightning speed gave him stunning punching ability. He had the sort of power that could knock an opponent down with even a grazing punch.

* Tyson had underrated defensive abilities. His reflexes were super sharp, and he could get under a quick jab in his sleep. In his prime, he was hit with only about a fistful of punches that landed flush and hard. (Bruno, Tucker, Smith come to mind)

*Tyson tended to fling himself into clinches too often. Tyson was a stop-start kind of fighter. He'd come at you, throw a volley of big punches, and initiate a clinch. The clinch was kind of like a reset button. Inside, Tyson did little. Once seperated, he'd be on 'offense' mode again. Until the next clinch.

*Such a fast start and high-energy output in the first few rounds had the drawback of Tyson losing some intensity and focus in the latter rounds. Nobody can keep up that sort of pace forever. That's not to say he was altogether ineffective late, but it's safe to say if one survived the first 8 rounds or so, one could say that most of Tyson's fury had been seen already.

*Even prime Mike could be frustrated and taken out of his game at times. We tend to sometimes paint the picture of an unbeatble monster who just rolled over everyone.
However, Smith (although having no intention of winning) managed to make Mike look rather ineffective and Thomas after barely surviving the first round, came back quite strongly in rounds 2-5. Certainly Tyson did not have it all his own way for a while there.
Tucker gave Tyson a good fight until self-preservation kicked in.
So, while a prime Tyson was a bit of a monster, he wasn't without flaws.



*Rocky had the mentality of: 'when the going gets tough, the tough get going.' The words 'lose' or 'quit' were not in Marciano's dictionary. He commented once that when Joe Walcott knocked him down he thought "Geez, this guy could knock me down five or six times tonight. It could be a tough fight."
That shows the Marciano mentality. Only after 5 or 6 knockdowns is it a tough fight. Yes, my tongue is firmly planted in my cheek right now, but you get the idea.

* Marciano had an incredible punch output. Moore said that fighting Marciano is "like fighting a propeller." Marciano wasn't as slow a starter as is sometimes made out but nevertheless, if Compubox had existed those days, I would not be surprised to see Marciano's punch output increasing in the later rounds. He was just nonstop action. To boot, all his punches were hard punches; Rocky didn't know the meaning of 'soft'.

* Marciano had an underrated defense. Not to say he was Floyd Mayweather, but he wasn't always as sloppy or easy to hit as is made out. Even 'home-run Rocky' instantly went defensive when missing with a haymaker. He'd throw a bomb and if it missed, he ducked or leaned to the side, anticipating a counter-attack. Louis, Moore and Charles, all fine pinpoint punchers, commented that Marciano was more difficult to hit cleanly than people realized.

* Marciano's stamina is possibly the best ever at heavyweight. Certainly, only a few fighters come close in this regard. Not only did it allow him to throw hundreds of punches in a fight, but he also had late round KO power as a result. The overall effect of getting hit by hundreds of hard punches round after round without let up was too much for well, all of his opponents. Great stamina is also beneficial in taking hard punches and evading punches. Basically, you can do everything better when you're not tired.

* Marciano tended to cut later in his career. Not a bleeder per se, but better opponents did seem to be able to slice him up some, notably Louis, Walcott and Charles. (excluding the nose cut in the second Charles fight.)

*Although Marciano did become more and more refined during his career, he never quite shook off the sloppiness altogether. The Moore knockdown was directly as a result of Marciano lunging in and being on one foot precisely at the moment when Moore hit him.
One reporter even went to far as to say Marciano "fought like a gorilla" in the first Charles match.

* Marciano just wasn't big. 5'10", 185-190 pounds, 67 inch reach. Not a small man by normal standards, but against big heavyweights his numbers just aren't impressive.

Those are what we can safely say are pretty much fact. What we don't know is what gloves they are using, what ruleset they are fighting under and who the ref will be.
Will the ref allow the fighters to work inside, or will he break them quickly? Is he a disciplinarian who will strictly enforce the rules or will he allow Tyson and Rocky (both not exacly gentlemen in the ring) to throw the odd elbow, punch after the bell or low blow?
These unknowns can make a huge difference in the outcome.

The really big 'X factor' for me (and possibly the thing on which the whole fight hinges) is whether Marciano can survive the real 'danger rounds' (1-6) against Tyson. It may seem odd to ask, considering this is Rocky Marciano after all who takes a back seat to nobody, but Tyson was such an immense offensive machine early on that Rocco has no choice but to perhaps try and survive early on, and take Tyson into the later rounds where he is usually less dangerous.

Thing is, how does a guy who constantly comes forward and who has never ever given ground to any man suddenly learn to become more defensive? How do you teach someone who relies on wearing the other man down to suddenly change his inherent nature?
One may ask if Rocky needs to, but I'd say yes. Tyson's strong points are apparent early, Marciano's more late in a fight. Only a fool would engage Tyson at his own game when he is at his most dangerous. If Marciano chugs forward and starts throwing bombs, his going to come off worst. Tyson's handpseed alone gives him a decided edge. He will find Marciano's chin and probably with more regularity than Marciano would like. Slugging with Tyson gets Mike the knockout he wants.

So, Marciano needs to be more defensive, but perhaps he isn't altogether badly equipped to do so. For one thing, Rocky is short, and by constantly bobbing and making himself a smaller target, Tyson may find it hard to hit anything other than the top of Rocky'd head or body.

Secondly, Marciano doesn't want to go backwards. That's a mistake. Lateral movement or going straight backwards is going to play into Tyson's hands as it gives him punching room. Marciano needs to crowd Mike and get inside his straight right and left hook.
Then and only then, does he go to work. Basically, don't fight when Tyson fighting, and fight when Tyson wants to rest. Bang him downstairs in the clinches. Take him out of his reset period.

IF Rocky can survive and fight a canny fight for 5-7 rounds, he can gradually start applying more pressure and taking the fight to Tyson. I can reasonably assume that IF Rocky is still there and throwing back hard shots in the 8th, it will have quite a discouraging effect on Tyson.

History has pretty much proven that once Tyson has lost the momentum, he never regains it. Granted, he nearly pulled a rabbit out of the hat against Dougles, but that was one punch rather than a sustained comeback. Naturally, while Tyson is upright he is dangerous and Marciano will have to constantly guard against becoming too ambitious, but I have little doubt that the second half of the fight would belong to Marciano.

Ultimately though, I think the IF in this case is a little too big. Nobody Marciano fought ever had such a lethal combination of power and speed, not to mention ferocity. It was an overwhelming combination that very few men could ever deal with, and it usually took a very sound and brave strategic gameplan (Holyfield) or an absolutely stellar boxing performance (Douglas) to get the better of 'prime' Mike Tyson.

While Rocky's intangibles are usually Tyson kryptonite, I don't think physically Marciano is suited to making these intagibles work for him against Tyson.
I'd pick Tyson t win on knockout/stoppage between rounds 1-6.

For what it's worth, while it lasts Marciano will give it his all and come out of it with a ton of respect, and if Rocky was brought into the modern age he could possibly win.
As it stands though, the '88 Tyson beats the '56 Marciano.

[Bummy Davis]

I find myself wondering here if you've ever seen most of Marciano's big fights. It was a continual pattern that he would lose the first few rounds to top opponents with difficult styles for him, but would gradually break them down and turn the tide as the fight progressed. Walcott was shellacking him at the beginning of their match and was outboxing him for much of its main body, but Marciano rallied to knock him out. LaStarza was ahead through six in the rematch, but Marciano broke him down and stopped him. Charles was soundly outboxing Marciano during the first five to six rounds of their first fight, but Marciano's endless pressure broke him down to where he was gasping for breath and sagging all around the ring by the final bell. Moore came out strong and had an early knockdown on Rocky, but was unable to cope with the volume and force of Marciano's punches for more than 5-6 rounds and broke down to be KO'd in nine.

Walcott, LaStarza, Charles and Moore were all men who had displayed excellent stamina during their careers and were capable of fighting a hard 15 rounds, let alone 12. If we follow your logic, then, since they won the first few rounds against Marciano, they should have continued to dominate and won the fights.

The problem here is that you clearly don't understand the way Marciano's style operated. You might have some skills or physical assets that would allow you to outfight him for a round or two or three, but he would never tire or slow down or be discouraged by your punches, while his punches and his offense would be taking a heavy toll on you.

Let me draw you an analogy; I'm a long-distance runner. There are quite a few guys I run against who can run a faster 100, 800 or even 1600 meters than I can, but who I beat every time in a race three miles or longer- and I'm doing more or less the exact same thing the whole race. If those guys could outrun me for the first half-mile or mile, and I don't change what I'm doing, why shouldn't they continue beating me? Because even though I'm running about the same speed the entire time and they can outrun me for a given distance, they can't hang with the pace I set for the entire race.

No one could fight Marciano at Marciano's pace for a whole 15 rounds without breaking down, and no one could match him in a contest of wills. The only real way to beat Marciano is not to be drawn into that sort of scenario.

Tyson was a guy who was very dangerous for the first six to seven rounds, but lost steam after that(NOTE: your premise that he could fight hard for 12 rounds is somewhat false). He had only one stoppage after seven rounds in his entire career, that being against the mediocre Ribalta.

If Marciano was a distance runner, Tyson was a sprinter. And a distance runner always beats a sprinter over an extended race- and that's even more pronounced in a boxing match such as this one, because Marciano's extremely physical and rugged style physically sapped the strength of his opponents and broke down their wills. If Tyson is going to win, he needs to make it a sprint and take Marciano in the first lap, because even though he's capable of mounting a more impressive short spurt of fighting, he's terribly outmatched over the long haul.


:good :good :good EXCELLENT POST

[JohnThomas1]

[quote]


I was (rather mischeivously) aplying the same line of argument to Tysons opposition that critics of Marciano aply to his. My point is that like Marciano his best wins are over older or smaller heavyweights.

Were Holmes and Spinks the best oponents available at the time?

Absolutely.

Are they great wins?

Yes given the decisive nature with which they were disposed of.

By the same token Marciano should be given unqualified credit for defeating Walcott Charles and Moore who were the best around at the time.



I think that if we are going to compare opposition here the best fighters Marciano beat were better than the best that Tyson beat but that they were more competitive against him.

The place where Tysons resume really shines (which his suportes don't seem to notice) is volume of quality oponents despite his short prime. If you acualy tot it up he beat a hell of a lot of ranked fighters both in his prime and outside it.

Sorry mate, didn't read enough of the thread. Agree with you for sure.

[Luigi1985]

I find myself wondering here if you've ever seen most of Marciano's big fights. It was a continual pattern that he would lose the first few rounds to top opponents with difficult styles for him, but would gradually break them down and turn the tide as the fight progressed. Walcott was shellacking him at the beginning of their match and was outboxing him for much of its main body, but Marciano rallied to knock him out. LaStarza was ahead through six in the rematch, but Marciano broke him down and stopped him. Charles was soundly outboxing Marciano during the first five to six rounds of their first fight, but Marciano's endless pressure broke him down to where he was gasping for breath and sagging all around the ring by the final bell. Moore came out strong and had an early knockdown on Rocky, but was unable to cope with the volume and force of Marciano's punches for more than 5-6 rounds and broke down to be KO'd in nine.

Walcott, LaStarza, Charles and Moore were all men who had displayed excellent stamina during their careers and were capable of fighting a hard 15 rounds, let alone 12. If we follow your logic, then, since they won the first few rounds against Marciano, they should have continued to dominate and won the fights.

The problem here is that you clearly don't understand the way Marciano's style operated. You might have some skills or physical assets that would allow you to outfight him for a round or two or three, but he would never tire or slow down or be discouraged by your punches, while his punches and his offense would be taking a heavy toll on you.

Let me draw you an analogy; I'm a long-distance runner. There are quite a few guys I run against who can run a faster 100, 800 or even 1600 meters than I can, but who I beat every time in a race three miles or longer- and I'm doing more or less the exact same thing the whole race. If those guys could outrun me for the first half-mile or mile, and I don't change what I'm doing, why shouldn't they continue beating me? Because even though I'm running about the same speed the entire time and they can outrun me for a given distance, they can't hang with the pace I set for the entire race.

No one could fight Marciano at Marciano's pace for a whole 15 rounds without breaking down, and no one could match him in a contest of wills. The only real way to beat Marciano is not to be drawn into that sort of scenario.

Tyson was a guy who was very dangerous for the first six to seven rounds, but lost steam after that(NOTE: your premise that he could fight hard for 12 rounds is somewhat false). He had only one stoppage after seven rounds in his entire career, that being against the mediocre Ribalta.

If Marciano was a distance runner, Tyson was a sprinter. And a distance runner always beats a sprinter over an extended race- and that's even more pronounced in a boxing match such as this one, because Marciano's extremely physical and rugged style physically sapped the strength of his opponents and broke down their wills. If Tyson is going to win, he needs to make it a sprint and take Marciano in the first lap, because even though he's capable of mounting a more impressive short spurt of fighting, he's terribly outmatched over the long haul.



:clap:

[Senya13]

Where was Walcott's and Charles' 'excellent stamina' in the fights between themselves? They were going at it rather slowly and lacklustre, as if fearing they wouldn't last the distance if they increased the tempo.

[Dempsey1238]

Walcott and Charles were mostly counter punchers, neither one was going to charge head first against each other. It was a styles thing.

[Mendoza]

Everytime this match up is brought up, the results are similar;

Tyson wins by KO/TKO in a decisive manner

or

"If Marciano can make it out of the first 3-4 rounds then Rocky stops Tyson late"

For those that pick the latter:

Out of curiousity what happens if Marciano makes it out the first 3-4 rounds?

So please enlighten me what Marciano will do to win this fight.


Thank you.


While Tyson lacked intangibles, the fighters who got to him late had a very different style than Marciano did. Douglas, Holyfield, and Lewis used skills, height, a superior jab, and solid clinching skills to foil Tyson late.

Marciano could not fight this way. In my opinion, Tyson beats Marciano to the punch. Rocky would have to take it, then come back. This is not a good match up for Rocky.


I would give Marciano a chance in the mid rounds if he’s still upright. With Tyson, he tended to slow down a bit round five and good shot could steal his heart.

Best Guess, Tyson via 3rd round TKO.

[Senya13]

They weren't circling much around each other, they were slugging out a lot at mid to close range. But were doing this at slow rate.

[OLD FOGEY]

And Thomas Hearns fought Pryor at lightweight, does that mean he was a blown-up lightweight as a pro?
The fact is Cooney never fought anywhere below heavyweight as a pro. Cockell started as a middleweight, and fought most of his career at or near the light-heavyweight limit, that was his best and natural weight, and he had no business in the heavy's if it weren't for the weakness of that weight division.

When you are talking size, I think age is more important than the fact that one turns pro in his mid-teens. Dempsey, Louis, Ali, Tunney, Schmeling, etc all competed below the heavyweight class at some point early in their amateur or pro careers. So what? People grow. Your argument that once a middle or lightheavy, always a middle or lightheavy, is simply not valid.
By the way, not to open a can of worms, but because of poorer nutrition, men once reached full growth at a much older age than currently. As a matter of fact, I think studies show children even reach puberty years earlier than they once did.

[Senya13]

He's always talking about trim heavyweights would weigh so low (doesn't matter the age, as most of today's top heavys are 30 and older), so I'm using his own argument to point out that Cockell was supposed to weigh as a light heavyweight when he fought Marciano. He fought there, and with some effort he could keep that weight at 26 years old.

[mr. magoo]

When you are talking size, I think age is more important than the fact that one turns pro in his mid-teens. Dempsey, Louis, Ali, Tunney, Schmeling, etc all competed below the heavyweight class at some point early in their amateur or pro careers. So what? People grow. Your argument that once a middle or lightheavy, always a middle or lightheavy, is simply not valid.
By the way, not to open a can of worms, but because of poorer nutrition, men once reached full growth at a much older age than currently. As a matter of fact, I think studies show children even reach puberty years earlier than they once did.

Good post.

And not to get off topic here, but the same principal applies to highschool and college athletes. A 17 year old kid who goes into college, often grows substatially during a four year period in both height and weight. What's more, it particularly becomes evident if proper nutritional and exercise guidelines are applied. I've known guys who graduated highschool at 5'10" and 160 Lbs, then four years later, stood 6'1", and weighed over 200. For some folks, there's a lot of physical maturing between ages 17 and 22.

[OLD FOGEY]

He's always talking about trim heavyweights would weigh so low (doesn't matter the age, as most of today's top heavys are 30 and older), so I'm using his own argument to point out that Cockell was supposed to weigh as a light heavyweight when he fought Marciano. He fought there, and with some effort he could keep that weight at 26 years old.

He moved up to heavyweight because making 175 weakened him. There is no doubt that heavyweights are bigger now than they were in earlier eras, but a 190 to 200 lb man was a good sized heavyweight back then. Cockell felt confortable fighting over 200 lbs and could and did go 15 with that weight. What exactly is the problem? As has been pointed out, many recent heavies carry as much of a spare tire as Cockell did.

[ironchamp]

Basically, we have the immovavble object (Marciano) vs. the irresistble force (Tyson.)

Let's look at what we can pretty much say are concrete facts about both men:

*Tyson was an incredibly fast starter. Perhaps only Dempsey started as fast.
It was uncanny how quickly Tyson would find his groove in fights. No probing of defences, no exploratory jabs, no feeling out process. He pretty
much ripped into the oppositon from the get-go. It was often so overwhelming he scored many first-round KO's this way.

* Tyson's handspeed was phenomenal, and this combined with his blazing start was too hot to handle for many. His speed allowed him to land lead hooks or right hands on opponents or rattle off a three or four punch combo in the blink of an eye. It also provided him with many countering opportunities.

* Power. Tyson had it in spades. My personal standpoint is that he was naturally quite heavy-handed and fusing this together with his lightning speed gave him stunning punching ability. He had the sort of power that could knock an opponent down with even a grazing punch.

* Tyson had underrated defensive abilities. His reflexes were super sharp, and he could get under a quick jab in his sleep. In his prime, he was hit with only about a fistful of punches that landed flush and hard. (Bruno, Tucker, Smith come to mind)

*Tyson tended to fling himself into clinches too often. Tyson was a stop-start kind of fighter. He'd come at you, throw a volley of big punches, and initiate a clinch. The clinch was kind of like a reset button. Inside, Tyson did little. Once seperated, he'd be on 'offense' mode again. Until the next clinch.

*Such a fast start and high-energy output in the first few rounds had the drawback of Tyson losing some intensity and focus in the latter rounds. Nobody can keep up that sort of pace forever. That's not to say he was altogether ineffective late, but it's safe to say if one survived the first 8 rounds or so, one could say that most of Tyson's fury had been seen already.

*Even prime Mike could be frustrated and taken out of his game at times. We tend to sometimes paint the picture of an unbeatble monster who just rolled over everyone.
However, Smith (although having no intention of winning) managed to make Mike look rather ineffective and Thomas after barely surviving the first round, came back quite strongly in rounds 2-5. Certainly Tyson did not have it all his own way for a while there.
Tucker gave Tyson a good fight until self-preservation kicked in.
So, while a prime Tyson was a bit of a monster, he wasn't without flaws.



*Rocky had the mentality of: 'when the going gets tough, the tough get going.' The words 'lose' or 'quit' were not in Marciano's dictionary. He commented once that when Joe Walcott knocked him down he thought "Geez, this guy could knock me down five or six times tonight. It could be a tough fight."
That shows the Marciano mentality. Only after 5 or 6 knockdowns is it a tough fight. Yes, my tongue is firmly planted in my cheek right now, but you get the idea.

* Marciano had an incredible punch output. Moore said that fighting Marciano is "like fighting a propeller." Marciano wasn't as slow a starter as is sometimes made out but nevertheless, if Compubox had existed those days, I would not be surprised to see Marciano's punch output increasing in the later rounds. He was just nonstop action. To boot, all his punches were hard punches; Rocky didn't know the meaning of 'soft'.

* Marciano had an underrated defense. Not to say he was Floyd Mayweather, but he wasn't always as sloppy or easy to hit as is made out. Even 'home-run Rocky' instantly went defensive when missing with a haymaker. He'd throw a bomb and if it missed, he ducked or leaned to the side, anticipating a counter-attack. Louis, Moore and Charles, all fine pinpoint punchers, commented that Marciano was more difficult to hit cleanly than people realized.

* Marciano's stamina is possibly the best ever at heavyweight. Certainly, only a few fighters come close in this regard. Not only did it allow him to throw hundreds of punches in a fight, but he also had late round KO power as a result. The overall effect of getting hit by hundreds of hard punches round after round without let up was too much for well, all of his opponents. Great stamina is also beneficial in taking hard punches and evading punches. Basically, you can do everything better when you're not tired.

* Marciano tended to cut later in his career. Not a bleeder per se, but better opponents did seem to be able to slice him up some, notably Louis, Walcott and Charles. (excluding the nose cut in the second Charles fight.)

*Although Marciano did become more and more refined during his career, he never quite shook off the sloppiness altogether. The Moore knockdown was directly as a result of Marciano lunging in and being on one foot precisely at the moment when Moore hit him.
One reporter even went to far as to say Marciano "fought like a gorilla" in the first Charles match.

* Marciano just wasn't big. 5'10", 185-190 pounds, 67 inch reach. Not a small man by normal standards, but against big heavyweights his numbers just aren't impressive.

Those are what we can safely say are pretty much fact. What we don't know is what gloves they are using, what ruleset they are fighting under and who the ref will be.
Will the ref allow the fighters to work inside, or will he break them quickly? Is he a disciplinarian who will strictly enforce the rules or will he allow Tyson and Rocky (both not exacly gentlemen in the ring) to throw the odd elbow, punch after the bell or low blow?
These unknowns can make a huge difference in the outcome.

The really big 'X factor' for me (and possibly the thing on which the whole fight hinges) is whether Marciano can survive the real 'danger rounds' (1-6) against Tyson. It may seem odd to ask, considering this is Rocky Marciano after all who takes a back seat to nobody, but Tyson was such an immense offensive machine early on that Rocco has no choice but to perhaps try and survive early on, and take Tyson into the later rounds where he is usually less dangerous.

Thing is, how does a guy who constantly comes forward and who has never ever given ground to any man suddenly learn to become more defensive? How do you teach someone who relies on wearing the other man down to suddenly change his inherent nature?
One may ask if Rocky needs to, but I'd say yes. Tyson's strong points are apparent early, Marciano's more late in a fight. Only a fool would engage Tyson at his own game when he is at his most dangerous. If Marciano chugs forward and starts throwing bombs, his going to come off worst. Tyson's handpseed alone gives him a decided edge. He will find Marciano's chin and probably with more regularity than Marciano would like. Slugging with Tyson gets Mike the knockout he wants.

So, Marciano needs to be more defensive, but perhaps he isn't altogether badly equipped to do so. For one thing, Rocky is short, and by constantly bobbing and making himself a smaller target, Tyson may find it hard to hit anything other than the top of Rocky'd head or body.

Secondly, Marciano doesn't want to go backwards. That's a mistake. Lateral movement or going straight backwards is going to play into Tyson's hands as it gives him punching room. Marciano needs to crowd Mike and get inside his straight right and left hook.
Then and only then, does he go to work. Basically, don't fight when Tyson fighting, and fight when Tyson wants to rest. Bang him downstairs in the clinches. Take him out of his reset period.

IF Rocky can survive and fight a canny fight for 5-7 rounds, he can gradually start applying more pressure and taking the fight to Tyson. I can reasonably assume that IF Rocky is still there and throwing back hard shots in the 8th, it will have quite a discouraging effect on Tyson.

History has pretty much proven that once Tyson has lost the momentum, he never regains it. Granted, he nearly pulled a rabbit out of the hat against Dougles, but that was one punch rather than a sustained comeback. Naturally, while Tyson is upright he is dangerous and Marciano will have to constantly guard against becoming too ambitious, but I have little doubt that the second half of the fight would belong to Marciano.

Ultimately though, I think the IF in this case is a little too big. Nobody Marciano fought ever had such a lethal combination of power and speed, not to mention ferocity. It was an overwhelming combination that very few men could ever deal with, and it usually took a very sound and brave strategic gameplan (Holyfield) or an absolutely stellar boxing performance (Douglas) to get the better of 'prime' Mike Tyson.

While Rocky's intangibles are usually Tyson kryptonite, I don't think physically Marciano is suited to making these intagibles work for him against Tyson.
I'd pick Tyson t win on knockout/stoppage between rounds 1-6.

For what it's worth, while it lasts Marciano will give it his all and come out of it with a ton of respect, and if Rocky was brought into the modern age he could possibly win.
As it stands though, the '88 Tyson beats the '56 Marciano.

Great Post its exactly how I see this.

Marciano, Dempsey, Tyson, Frazier those are my favorite kind of fighters. So I have no bias.

[Senya13]

He moved up to heavyweight because making 175 weakened him.
As you can look up, my original post was:
Cockell started as a middleweight. His natural/best weight should be around 180, he was no true heavyweight at all.

[C. M. Clay II]

Both had the same size. Marciano was naturally heavier than Tyson, but he trained so hard to go down in weight for his phenomenal stamina. Tyson wasn´t that big like you do, with the roids he took it´s no wonder that he had bigger muscles than a Marciano for example, btw, the Lacy- Calzaghe- fight should finally show some of you that muscles aren´t the most important thing in boxing...


Tyson is in fantasy matchups heavily overrated, I really don´t know why. He´s typical, like many others, against mediocre contenders he looked great, but against very good fighters at HW (not a LHW or a shot ex-champ) like Holyfield, Lewis, etc. he didn´t look that spectacular, I would bet for a Marciano- stoppage. He had the heart to suffer hard punches and he would trade with Mike. Tyson wouldn´t last the distance, I know, for some of you it sounds strange that the black bad boy would probably lose, but it´s the truth...

:patsch Now I've heard everything.

[C. M. Clay II]

Look, I searched now for only a few seconds viá google, and look what I found, look at his skinny girlie-legs, and now say to me, where did he have a great genetic or shit like that? He started weight-lifting very early, and he had to train very hard to gain muscles, Tyson- nuthuggers comes often with that fabolous stories....











[Only registered and activated users can see links]

His calves were never really that big, so I don't see what this picture proves.

[Only registered and activated users can see links]

Remember this? Look at 13 year old Tyson. I guess he was taking steroids then, right? Even at that age he was bigger than Marciano, so how in the world are you gonna say Marciano was "naturally bigger" than Tyson?:-(

[C. M. Clay II]

You are a nuthugger, you're embarrassing. Don't you realise this bloke just wants to believe a peak Berbick lost to Ali because it makes the Marciano argument look stronger. You really are a tit. :good

I know what he's tring to do, idiot. I was just pointing out something that I always thought that he mentioned. Mind your own business.

[ChrisPontius]

:patsch Now I've heard everything.
Yeah, that really was a ridiculous statement.


The funny thing is that you'll often first hear a Marciano worshipper say that size doesn't matter, he can overcome that, etc.

Fine, if that's your opinion then stick to it.

But then half an hour later they go on the most desperate attempt to prove that Marciano was not really small, that he was in fact a 250 pound monster but trained down to 185lb. Kind of shows that deep inside, beyond all that emotional attachement, they know damn well that size matters.

[OLD FOGEY]

As you can look up, my original post was:

You understand that 180 lbs was a true heavyweight in that era. Charles, Marciano, and Patterson all won the championship weighing less than 185 lbs. "Modern" standards don't mean diddly because they were not fighting in the "modern" era. They were fighting in their own era. In the future the cut-off point for the heavyweight division might be something like 250 lbs. That does not mean Wlad Klitschko today is not a "real heavyweight."

As for Cockell, when was he exactly a middleweight? It would have had to be when he was only seventeen or something. By 19, he has a listed weight of 172 lbs. By 21 he is fighting at 183 lbs. He only makes the lightheavyweight limit for championship fights, the last at 23 and then goes way up in weight. I think in top shape he would have gone about 190 by the mid-fifties.

A whole slew of champions back in those days probably would have been lighter than Cockell at 21. Johnson, Dempsey, Tunney, Schmeling, Braddock, Charles, Marciano, and Patterson, for certain.

[C. M. Clay II]

Yeah, that really was a ridiculous statement.


The funny thing is that you'll often first hear a Marciano worshipper say that size doesn't matter, he can overcome that, etc.

Fine, if that's your opinion then stick to it.

But then half an hour later they go on the most desperate attempt to prove that Marciano was not really small, that he was in fact a 250 pound monster but trained down to 185lb. Kind of shows that deep inside, beyond all that emotional attachement, they know damn well that size matters.

Exactly. If Tyson trained as hard as Marcino, maybe he would be 210 or something like that, but not less than 185 as Luigi said. Tyson already had a rigorous training regiment and was all natural at 215-217. He ran 7-10 miles a day and sparred many rounds as well as hitting the bag and skipping rope for long periods of time which builds up stamina as well.:good

[janitor]

Yeah, that really was a ridiculous statement.


The funny thing is that you'll often first hear a Marciano worshipper say that size doesn't matter, he can overcome that, etc.

Fine, if that's your opinion then stick to it.

But then half an hour later they go on the most desperate attempt to prove that Marciano was not really small, that he was in fact a 250 pound monster but trained down to 185lb. Kind of shows that deep inside, beyond all that emotional attachement, they know damn well that size matters.

Can you actualy find an instance of anybody on this board saying that size dose not matter?

It is an acusation often banded about by the bigger is better crew. Like the mythical Marciano fan who thinks that Rocky Marciano would beat anybody that the Marciano critics get so riled about, real examples are hard to find.

[Dempsey1238]

Can you actualy find an instance of anybody on this board saying that size dose not matter?

It is an acusation often banded about by the bigger is better crew. Like the mythical Marciano fan who thinks that Rocky Marciano would beat anybody that the Marciano critics get so riled about, real examples are hard to find.

Like Rahman Lewis or Sanders Wlad.

[joe33]

For fucks sake who cares,marciano still holds the record and will stay unbeaten for ever,so fuck all the haters on him,he was a decent man and a fighter who was beyond brave,as far as i can see the main reason he gets hated on,is because of his colour,people skirt around it as much as they can,but its frigging obvious thats the reason,some black dudes cant accept he still holds the record, and beat up a older joe louis,well fucking tough get over it,black fighters dominated the scene since up till late,so why not just get the hell over it.

[Senya13]

You understand that 180 lbs was a true heavyweight in that era.
If you followed the discussion in this topic, the size difference was being discussed at the time of my post. In particular, was Marciano really proven against big enough and powerful enough heavyweights as what he would be facing in Tyson. Literally, 180 pounds was indeed a heavyweight in that era. But in the context of the discussion and the matchup, a true heavyweight is someone who's natural weight is at least 200lb. So I was adressing an argument that the Cockell fight was any proof at all of Marciano's ability to handle modern heavyweight in Tyson. I also mentioned that that epoch was weak, well, you should be aware that such opinion was expressed during that time (perhaps even from early to mid 1940's).

As for Cockell, when was he exactly a middleweight? It would have had to be when he was only seventeen or something.
As you should be able to see in my post, I didn't put much accent on the fact that he started as a middleweight. Instead I worded it as "a blown-up light heavyweight", and even clarified my words by guessing that his best weight should be about 180, give or take a few pounds.

By 21 he is fighting at 183 lbs. He only makes the lightheavyweight limit for championship fights, the last at 23 and then goes way up in weight.
June 10, 1952. Cockell weighs in at 174 1/2 pounds.
October 14, 1952. He weighs 201 1/2 pounds.
That's 4 months and 4 days. He gained 27 pounds, 19 pounds heavier than his maximum weight prior to that fight. If you think that was natural increase and it was caused just by age, then I don't know what else to say to this.

I think in top shape he would have gone about 190 by the mid-fifties.
According to janitor, who I was replying to, he would not be in top shape at that weight. And he certainly wasn't in top shape for the Marciano fight either, being some 15 pounds above your guess at his best weight.

[ChrisPontius]

Exactly. If Tyson trained as hard as Marcino, maybe he would be 210 or something like that, but not less than 185 as Luigi said. Tyson already had a rigorous training regiment and was all natural at 215-217. He ran 7-10 miles a day and sparred many rounds as well as hitting the bag and skipping rope for long periods of time which builds up stamina as well.:good

The Tyrell Biggs fight was originally scheduled for which he weighed in at a sharp 216 pounds. I doubt he could make 210 without cutting off a hand. He's been over 210lb every single time since he was 19 years old!

[janitor]

The Tyrell Biggs fight was originally scheduled for which he weighed in at a sharp 216 pounds. I doubt he could make 210 without cutting off a hand. He's been over 210lb every single time since he was 19 years old!

I believe that he was under 200 lbs in prison. Now it is possible in the 1930s to imagine a young tyson coming off the breadlines starting out at under 200 and growing into a heavyweight body.

[ChrisPontius]

I don't.

Walcott was reportedly very poor yet he was hardly anything lighter than he was during his days as champion when he did have money. In fact, his weight is exactly stable when compensating for the fact that fighters (and people in general) put on a few pounds from the age of 30 on.


If Tyson was 200lb in prison then he was severly malnourished and/or undertrained. What would it prove?! That his "prison weight" is 200lb? Big deal. His fighting weight is 215-220lb.

[C. M. Clay II]

I don't.

Walcott was reportedly very poor yet he was hardly anything lighter than he was during his days as champion when he did have money. In fact, his weight is exactly stable when compensating for the fact that fighters (and people in general) put on a few pounds from the age of 30 on.


If Tyson was 200lb in prison then he was severly malnourished and/or undertrained. What would it prove?! That his "prison weight" is 200lb? Big deal. His fighting weight is 215-220lb.

:good

[janitor]

I don't.

Walcott was reportedly very poor yet he was hardly anything lighter than he was during his days as champion when he did have money. In fact, his weight is exactly stable when compensating for the fact that fighters (and people in general) put on a few pounds from the age of 30 on.


If Tyson was 200lb in prison then he was severly malnourished and/or undertrained. What would it prove?! That his "prison weight" is 200lb? Big deal. His fighting weight is 215-220lb.

Taking tyson as a raw untrained fighter we might expect him to start at 215 lbs work down to 200 and then build himself back up to 215 again swaping a soft 15 lbs for a solid 15 lbs.

In another era where he was underfed I can imagine him starting his fighting career at under 200 lbs having no excess whatsoever and then building up to 215.

[ChrisPontius]

Possible. Bottomline is that his prime fighting weight is between 215 and 220 pounds no matter how you look at it.

[janitor]

Possible. Bottomline is that his prime fighting weight is between 215 and 220 pounds no matter how you look at it.

Prime fighting weight was a verry diferent concept in Tyson's day to Marciano's day.

The ideas of what constituted a proper training regime were somewhat different. Rightly or wrongly a much higher emphasis was placed on aerobic work in the 50s and fighters generaly came in like a well trained greyhound.

[C. M. Clay II]

Taking tyson as a raw untrained fighter we might expect him to start at 215 lbs work down to 200 and then build himself back up to 215 again swaping a soft 15 lbs for a solid 15 lbs.

In another era where he was underfed I can imagine him starting his fighting career at under 200 lbs having no excess whatsoever and then building up to 215.

Actually janitor, young Tyson didn't have much to eat as a kid, but he still grew. Sometimes there would be nothing to eat in his house but flour and water and he still was about 190 as a 12 year old. (Not in fighting shape, but ripped and not fat):good

[C. M. Clay II]

Prime fighting weight was a verry diferent concept in Tyson's day to Marciano's day.

The ideas of what constituted a proper training regime were somewhat different. Rightly or wrongly a much higher emphasis was placed on aerobic work in the 50s and fighters generaly came in like a well trained greyhound.

Although Tyson lived in a different "era", his training methods were taken from the old school, as his groomer, mentor, and father figure weas Cus D' Amato. Tyson did all the things that the old-time fighters did. That's what captivated the people's imagination. He had an old school style, old school training methods, even old school demeanor and ring apparel (Solid black trunks and shoes when others are donning more flashy togs)

[C. M. Clay II]

Tyson was a bitch.

You are a bitch.

[janitor]

Although Tyson lived in a different "era", his training methods were taken from the old school, as his groomer, mentor, and father figure weas Cus D' Amato. Tyson did all the things that the old-time fighters did. That's what captivated the people's imagination. He had an old school style, old school training methods, even old school demeanor and ring apparel (Solid black trunks and shoes when others are donning more flashy togs)

You are right to say that Tysons training methods were a lot more like Marcianos than any subsequent champions.

Even allowing for that their was a lot more emphasis on getting weight low pre 1960 than post 1960. I am not saying that this obsesion with coming in as low as possible was necisarily right.

[C. M. Clay II]

Shouldn't you be swinging on Ali's nutsack right about now?

Quarry beat the crap out of you, Spencer!:lol:

[C. M. Clay II]

You are right to say that Tysons training methods were a lot more like Marcianos than any subsequent champions.

Even allowing for that their was a lot more emphasis on getting weight low pre 1960 than post 1960. I am not saying that this obsesion with coming in as low as possible was necisarily right.

I think prime Tyson got it as low as he could with out it becoming a liability. At that time he walked around at about 250-260lbs, so he did train down so to speak for his fights, weighing in at about 215-218.

[OLD FOGEY]

If you followed the discussion in this topic, the size difference was being discussed at the time of my post. In particular, was Marciano really proven against big enough and powerful enough heavyweights as what he would be facing in Tyson. Literally, 180 pounds was indeed a heavyweight in that era. But in the context of the discussion and the matchup, a true heavyweight is someone who's natural weight is at least 200lb. So I was adressing an argument that the Cockell fight was any proof at all of Marciano's ability to handle modern heavyweight in Tyson. I also mentioned that that epoch was weak, well, you should be aware that such opinion was expressed during that time (perhaps even from early to mid 1940's).


As you should be able to see in my post, I didn't put much accent on the fact that he started as a middleweight. Instead I worded it as "a blown-up light heavyweight", and even clarified my words by guessing that his best weight should be about 180, give or take a few pounds.


June 10, 1952. Cockell weighs in at 174 1/2 pounds.
October 14, 1952. He weighs 201 1/2 pounds.
That's 4 months and 4 days. He gained 27 pounds, 19 pounds heavier than his maximum weight prior to that fight. If you think that was natural increase and it was caused just by age, then I don't know what else to say to this.


According to janitor, who I was replying to, he would not be in top shape at that weight. And he certainly wasn't in top shape for the Marciano fight either, being some 15 pounds above your guess at his best weight.

I wouldn't disagree that Marciano would have a very difficult time if one assumes Tyson would have been just as large in the 1950's. But would he have been? Nutrition, medical care, prenatal nutrition for mothers, etc, has changed so much that these men lived in different worlds. Tyson was not a big heavyweight for his era. He was frequently outweighed. He would have been a giant in Marciano's world. But, don't forget, Marciano would have been a much bigger heavyweight in earlier eras. He would have been a pretty good sized man in the 1880's, for example.
Tyson and Marciano are two of the minority examples of smaller than average (for their own eras) heavyweights, along with Dempsey, who managed to be dominant.

As for Cockell, he felt that he was drained and weak at 174 in 1952. Certainly, I would expect he would be in better shape if he kept his weight around 190 or so. But it is hard to argue with success. He won ten straight heavyweight fights carrying the extra pounds. Maybe the extra weight did not effect his stamina that much and any loss of speed was offset by being harder to handle in clinches.
Be that as it may, you are correct that beating Cockell proves less than nothing concerning a fantasy matchup with Tyson.

[mr. magoo]

[quote=OLD FOGEY]I wouldn't disagree that Marciano would have a very difficult time if one assumes Tyson would have been just as large in the 1950's. But would he have been? Nutrition, medical care, prenatal nutrition for mothers, etc, as changed to much that these men lived in different worlds. Tyson was not a big heavyweight for his era. He was frequently outweighed. He would have been a giant in Marciano's world. But, don't forget, Marciano would have been a much bigger heavyweight in earlier eras. He would have been a pretty good sized man in the 1880's, for example.

You can't make debate out of what fighters might have been had they been raised under different guidelines. If you're going to make head to head match ups, then you have to go by what each fighter actually looked like at his best. Otherwise we'd have to change the whole universe, and in the end, everything would be so far removed the matchup wouldn't even be worth discussing.

[C. M. Clay II]

[quote]

You can't make debate out of what fighters might have been had they been raised under different guidelines. If you're going to make head to head match ups, then you have to go by what each fighter actually looked like at his best. Otherwise we'd have to change the whole universe, and in the end, everything would be so far removed the matchup wouldn't even be worth discussing.

Well said mr. magoo, well said.:good

[OLD FOGEY]

[quote]

You can't make debate out of what fighters might have been had they been raised under different guidelines. If you're going to make head to head match ups, then you have to go by what each fighter actually looked like at his best. Otherwise we'd have to change the whole universe, and in the end, everything would be so far removed the matchup wouldn't even be worth discussing.


That is right. If you want to match Tyson from 1988 with Marciano from 1952, you must change the whole universe. About the only way to make these type of comparisions meaningfully at all is to figure out how large Marciano was compared to the other heavyweights of his own era and how large Tyson was compared to the other heavyweights of his era, but this isn't that great of a system either.

My own view is that a historical judgement, a judgement based on record, is the only meaningful yardstick.

Anyway. Go on with your debate. My criticism is just don't claim a man who was a heavyweight in his own era was not really a heavyweight because the "modern" criteria for heavyweight has changed. The majority of historical heavyweight champions and challengers could not meet such a criteria and the few who did were not by any means the most outstanding fighters.

[Luigi1985]

Yeah, that really was a ridiculous statement.


The funny thing is that you'll often first hear a Marciano worshipper say that size doesn't matter, he can overcome that, etc.

Fine, if that's your opinion then stick to it.

But then half an hour later they go on the most desperate attempt to prove that Marciano was not really small, that he was in fact a 250 pound monster but trained down to 185lb. Kind of shows that deep inside, beyond all that emotional attachement, they know damn well that size matters.


WTF are you and Clay talking about? What desperate things? It´s a forum, nothing more, I looked for a Marciano-pic shortly after his boxing career and I found this one:



[Only registered and activated users can see links] On this one he weighed way more than 200 lbs, but it´s not like he had just a fat belly or something like that. He was naturally a heavy guy who built quickly mass, he showed this after his career. Like I always wrote, size and weight is an advantage, nothing more. I´m just tired to hear and read from Tyson- nuthuggers that he was such a natural big muscled guy when it wasn´t so. He was naturally not bigger than Marciano (and he fought 3 decades later), that´s the fact. One thing I would like to say yet: When you guys don´t know shit about bodybuilding/ gaining muscles/ genetic things or anything like that, than just STFU or informate yourself before you post something...

[fists of fury]

Marciano wasn't a small man really. He'd look pretty darn small next to a Lewis or Klitschko sure, but then most do.
If you ask me, he was a natural 200 pounder who trained down to between 180-190. In his amateur days, he weighed mostly above 190.

Today, he'd weigh about 210 or so.

Still, Tyson is naturally heavier by about 20 to 25 pounds or so. Perhaps not a massive difference, but still a difference.

[ChrisPontius]

WTF are you and Clay talking about? What desperate things? It´s a forum, nothing more, I looked for a Marciano-pic shortly after his boxing career and I found this one:



[Only registered and activated users can see links] On this one he weighed way more than 200 lbs, but it´s not like he had just a fat belly or something like that. He was naturally a heavy guy who built quickly mass, he showed this after his career. Like I always wrote, size and weight is an advantage, nothing more. I´m just tired to hear and read from Tyson- nuthuggers that he was such a natural big muscled guy when it wasn´t so. He was naturally not bigger than Marciano (and he fought 3 decades later), that´s the fact. One thing I would like to say yet: When you guys don´t know shit about bodybuilding/ gaining muscles/ genetic things or anything like that, than just STFU or informate yourself before you post something...

Wow, so he looks 200lb+ next to someone 5'6 150lb when he's years into retirement.
If bringing that up is not desperate, then i don't know what is. Why don't you stop talking about "Marciano is naturally bigger" and face the FACTS:
Tyson's fighting weight was 215-220lb. Marciano's fighting weight was 185-190lb. That's a 30lb weight advantage.

[Luigi1985]

Wow, so he looks 200lb+ next to someone 5'6 150lb when he's years into retirement.
If bringing that up is not desperate, then i don't know what is. Why don't you stop talking about "Marciano is naturally bigger" and face the FACTS:
Tyson's fighting weight was 215-220lb. Marciano's fighting weight was 185-190lb. That's a 30lb weight advantage.


What is here desperate when I´m getting angry when people talk who had probably never a barbell in their hand? This pic is some months after his retirement old, not "some years" like you wrote. Did you know in what weight Marciano came in for the sparring with Ali for the computer- fight for example?

[ChrisPontius]

What is here desperate when I´m getting angry when people talk who had probably never a barbell in their hand? This pic is some months after his retirement old, not "some years" like you wrote. Did you know in what weight Marciano came in for the sparring with Ali for the computer- fight for example?

I have had a barbell in my hand, but that's not relevant here.

Do you know what weight Marciano came in for his peak fights against Joe Louis and Jersey Joe Walcott? And do you know what weight Mike Tyson came in at in his peak fights against Larry Holmes and Michael Spinks?

[janitor]

Do you know what weight Marciano came in for his peak fights against Joe Louis and Jersey Joe Walcott? And do you know what weight Mike Tyson came in at in his peak fights against Larry Holmes and Michael Spinks?

Do you agree that if Marciano had been brought alomg in the late 80s he would probably have been heavier than 185-190 lbs simply due to the diference in training regime?

[mr. magoo]

Do you agree that if Marciano had been brought alomg in the late 80s he would probably have been heavier than 185-190 lbs simply due to the diference in training regime?

There is always the possibility that through modern training techniques and nutritional guidlines, Marciano could have very conceivably weighed 200 Lbs or more. The other possibility however, is that he may have chosen to stay at 185 Lbs, and fought at cruiserweight, given that this was what he perceived as his best and most comfortable fight weight, as well as having a chance to win a world title without facing much larger and stronger opponents.

Also think about what you're saying for a moment. You clearly suggested that had he been brought along in the 1980's using a different training regimen, that he might be better suited for fighting in a modern era. I'm not going to put words in your mouth, but is this an implication that you feel modern training techniques and methods are somewhat superior to that of previous eras?

[Quick Cash]

Do you agree that if Marciano had been brought alomg in the late 80s he would probably have been heavier than 185-190 lbs simply due to the diference in training regime?

Marciano doesn't need an extra 10-20 pounds to beat all the men he could beat in hypothetical match-ups. 185 was his optimum fighting weight.

Had he been brought up in the 80's, even if he was involved with all the same trainers from his title reign, there's a huge possibility that he would not have fought in the way he was famous for anyway so technically the discussion would be for naught. The simplest and most effective way to gauge the merits of both men's fighting styles would be to pit the Marciano of the 1950's against Tyson of the late 1980's.

[McGrain]

Marciano doesn't need an extra 10-20 pounds to beat all the men he could beat in hypothetical match-ups. 185 was his optimum fighting weight.

I agree, it's still reasonable to pick him over a lot of top guys even though he's outweighed. So what if he's outweighed? I would have thought most guys here would have been passed that argument.

Still, Tyson sure as shit isn't one of the guys i'd pick him over, whether he weighs 180, 190 or 220lbs.

[Quick Cash]

I agree, it's still reasonable to pick him over a lot of top guys even though he's outweighed. So what if he's outweighed? I would have thought most guys here would have been passed that argument.

Still, Tyson sure as shit isn't one of the guys i'd pick him over, whether he ways 180, 190 or 220lbs.

Yep, my sentiments exactly.

[janitor]

[quote=mr. magoo]There is always the possibility that through modern training techniques and nutritional guidlines, Marciano could have very conceivably weighed 200 Lbs or more.

Forgett weightlifting and suplements. Consider that Marciano might have come in close to the curent cruiserweight limit simply through not having to train down for a 15 round fight.


Also think about what you're saying for a moment. You clearly suggested that had he been brought along in the 1980's using a different training regimen, that he might be better suited for fighting in a modern era. I'm not going to put words in your mouth, but is this an implication that you feel modern training techniques and methods are somewhat superior to that of previous eras?


It is not so much that modern training methods are better but more suited to the curent era.

[McGrain]

[quote]

It is not so much that modern training methods are better but more suited to the curent era.

Specific to the number of rounds a fighter has to do or is there something else?

[janitor]

[quote=janitor]

Specific to the number of rounds a fighter has to do or is there something else?

The number of rounds is the most important factor. Having a 15 round limit places a much greater emphasis on conditioning and having a 45 round limit places a huge emphasis on conditioning.

If Rocky Marciano or Bob Fitzsimmons only had to go 12 rounds they might come in 5 or 10 pounds heavier and have nothing to show for it except water.

[McGrain]

huge[/I] emphasis on conditioning.




I would agree then.

[ChrisPontius]

Forgett weightlifting and suplements. Consider that Marciano might have come in close to the curent cruiserweight limit simply through not having to train down for a 15 round fight.


The 15 round weight limit does not result in the difference between a cruiserweight and a heavyweight.

As said before, Tyson's fight with Biggs was scheduled for 15 rounds and he came in at a trim 216 pounds. Ali had to fight 15 rounds all the time yet was 212+lb.

[McGrain]

The 15 round weight limit does not result in the difference between a cruiserweight and a heavyweight.

As said before, Tyson's fight with Biggs was scheduled for 15 rounds and he came in at a trim 216 pounds. Ali had to fight 15 rounds all the time yet was 212+lb.

As usual, you are spot on.

But can you see why an argument about a figher like Marciano and his weight would be impacted by rounds fought?

The kind of fighter he is, all aggression and pressure, makes conditioning absolutley paramount. If Marciano fades after 11 he will lose a 15 round fight. And as we know, going ten rounds is more than twice as difficult as going five - going 15 is significantly harder than going 12.

I don't mean for this to impact the argument as other valid arguments exsist, but as a side, do you really think Tyson was gunning for a 15 round fight?

[mr. magoo]

The number of rounds is the most important factor. Having a 15 round limit places a much greater emphasis on conditioning and having a 45 round limit places a huge emphasis on conditioning.

You clearly used the 80's as an example. In the 1980's, 15 round fights were still in effect, at least up until around 1987. There were many heavyweights and cruisers who were well conditioned and capable of going 15 rounds.


If Rocky Marciano or Bob Fitzsimmons only had to go 12 rounds they might come in 5 or 10 pounds heavier and have nothing to show for it except water.


That depends on how well trained they'd be. A fighter like Evander Holyfield, had to put on a significant amount of weight in order to be competitive in the heavyweight divsion, but most of the pounds were muscle, with little water or excess bagage. If fitz or Rock were making such a jump, they would likely have to do the same, or they may find themselves at a disadvantage.

[janitor]

The 15 round weight limit does not result in the difference between a cruiserweight and a heavyweight.

As said before, Tyson's fight with Biggs was scheduled for 15 rounds and he came in at a trim 216 pounds. Ali had to fight 15 rounds all the time yet was 212+lb.

There is always a lag time between the rule set changing and training regime adapting to it.

Marciano was basicaly a throwback to the era of the 45 round fight. His training regime was more like that of Fitzsimmons or Jeffries than Ali or Frazier.

Joe Louis had a training regime perhaps more natural to the 20 round era than the 15 round era. A distence for which some of his fights were scheduled.

Tyson to my mind was the last of the champions who trained the 15 round way despit the fact that only one of his fights was scheduled for that distence. Holyfield was probably the first true 12 round champion.

Dont underestimate the importance of all this roadwork. If you walked 40 miles in a day you could lose more than a stone despite eating and hydrating yourself regularly. It would take you 48 hours to get it back.

Now if a fighter is runing 12 miles a day for more than two months and steping up to 16 in the last two weeks he is going to be a human greyhound.

[mr. magoo]

Holyfield was probably the first true 15 round champion.

How so?

You already explained how Marciano's and Louis's training regimens were similar to that of earlier eras, but what about guys like Patterson, Frazier, Johansen, Ali, and Holmes?

How was Holyfield the first true 15 round champion?

[cross_trainer]

How so?

You already explained how Marciano's and Louis's training regimens were similar to that of earlier eras, but what about guys like Patterson, Frazier, Johansen, Ali, and Holmes?

How was Holyfield the first true 15 round champion?

I think he meant 12 round.

[janitor]

How so?

You already explained how Marciano's and Louis's training regimens were similar to that of earlier eras, but what about guys like Patterson, Frazier, Johansen, Ali, and Holmes?

How was Holyfield the first true 15 round champion?

Cross Trainer is correct.

I meant to say that Holyfield was the first heavyweight champion to use what I would consider to be the typical 12 round regime.

[ChrisPontius]

As usual, you are spot on.

But can you see why an argument about a figher like Marciano and his weight would be impacted by rounds fought?

The kind of fighter he is, all aggression and pressure, makes conditioning absolutley paramount. If Marciano fades after 11 he will lose a 15 round fight. And as we know, going ten rounds is more than twice as difficult as going five - going 15 is significantly harder than going 12.

I don't mean for this to impact the argument as other valid arguments exsist, but as a side, do you really think Tyson was gunning for a 15 round fight?

Maybe Marciano could bulk up a bit, but i strongly doubt he'd be able to carry more than 200lb without big consequences. People for some reason think anyone can do it succesfully just because one man managed to do it succesfully (Holyfield). We can only go by what we know, which is that Marciano hated to be over 190lb because he felt out of shape.


I don't really understand your last question because i'm unfamilair with some slang - did you mean whether Tyson wanted to have a 15 round fight?
In that case, i doubt he liked it.

On the other hand, he did have that boyish appreciation for old school fighters (courtesy of d'Amato) who went 15 rounds or more. And he sound very proud of himself after going 10 rounds for the first time. So who knows.

[ChrisPontius]

There is always a lag time between the rule set changing and training regime adapting to it.

Marciano was basicaly a throwback to the era of the 45 round fight. His training regime was more like that of Fitzsimmons or Jeffries than Ali or Frazier.

Joe Louis had a training regime perhaps more natural to the 20 round era than the 15 round era. A distence for which some of his fights were scheduled.

Tyson to my mind was the last of the champions who trained the 15 round way despit the fact that only one of his fights was scheduled for that distence. Holyfield was probably the first true 12 round champion.

Dont underestimate the importance of all this roadwork. If you walked 40 miles in a day you could lose more than a stone despite eating and hydrating yourself regularly. It would take you 48 hours to get it back.

Now if a fighter is runing 12 miles a day for more than two months and steping up to 16 in the last two weeks he is going to be a human greyhound.


There is some truth in this, but you do realise that from roughly the 50's/60's, new generations grew a lot bigger on average due to improved nutrition. This resulted in a much larger talent pool over 200lb and as a consequence, the cruiserweight division was created to make things fair again as sub 200lb fighters were rarely competitive at top level again.

[C. M. Clay II]

What is here desperate when I´m getting angry when people talk who had probably never a barbell in their hand? This pic is some months after his retirement old, not "some years" like you wrote. Did you know in what weight Marciano came in for the sparring with Ali for the computer- fight for example?

He was about 240lbs. in the comp fight, but you could see he was out of shape. Do you know what weight Tyson was at in the beginning of training camp? About 250lbs.

Tyson was bigger, period.:good

[janitor]

There is some truth in this, but you do realise that from roughly the 50's/60's, new generations grew a lot bigger on average due to improved nutrition. This resulted in a much larger talent pool over 200lb and as a consequence, the cruiserweight division was created to make things fair again as sub 200lb fighters were rarely competitive at top level again.

There are a number of factors at work here-

1. An increase in the average size of the population.

2. A general reduction in the talent pool from which champions are drawn.

3. Changes in training regimes due to changing rule set.

Between these factors you get what you get.

[JIm Broughton]

It's time for a reality check here. Rocky never faced an opponent like Tyson. In his prime Mike was a vicious punching elusive fighter with blazing hand speed. His combinations were light years faster than Rocky's and his chin was every bit as good. Mike took shots from very big HW's like Lewis and Douglas and other good punchers like Holyfield. Mike was never dropped by one shot early in a fight but rather fell after taking dozens of hard flush shots over the course of a fight. Big tall rangy fighters gave Mike the hardest fights. Men who could fight from the outside behind a jab. A fighter of Rocky's size and style would be fodder for Tyson. Too small and too slow. And let's face it, if Walcott and Moore could drop Rocky, then Mike could too. Marciano fought in an era that was perfect for a fighter of his ilk. In Mike he would he would be facing a modern athlete,big and fast. This fight would not go more than 4 rounds. Mike would jump on the much slower Marciano and land fast hard punches on his smaller foe. Rocky was never hit by the hard fast combos that Mike threw and Mikes upper body and head movement would enable him to avoid pnches from his short armed opponent. This is'nt a rap on Rocky but we have to put aside nostalgia and make logical assesments.

[Dempsey1238]

Tyson may look great takeing out the Journymen of his era. But when he fought real tought guys, most often than not Tyson struggle to win, or he lose. If say Bone Crusher Smith can go 12 rounds with Tyson, than I give the Rock a great shot at it.

[My dinner with Conteh]

Tyson may look great takeing out the Journymen of his era. But when he fought real tought guys, most often than not Tyson struggle to win, or he lose. If say Bone Crusher Smith can go 12 rounds with Tyson, than I give the Rock a great shot at it.


Smith held for 12 rounds, Marciano would come straight at him. :huh

[C. M. Clay II]

Smith held for 12 rounds, Marciano would come straight at him. :huh

And then get layed out.

[Dempsey1238]

No one lay Marciano out.

[janitor]

Smith held for 12 rounds, Marciano would come straight at him. :huh

Rudock mixed it with Tyson for the duration of the bout so you cannot say that it is impossible.

Since Marciano was never knocked out or even seriously hurt we honestly don't know what it would take to put him away. Might take a neutron bomb.

[OLD FOGEY]

It's time for a reality check here. Rocky never faced an opponent like Tyson. In his prime Mike was a vicious punching elusive fighter with blazing hand speed. His combinations were light years faster than Rocky's and his chin was every bit as good. Mike took shots from very big HW's like Lewis and Douglas and other good punchers like Holyfield. Mike was never dropped by one shot early in a fight but rather fell after taking dozens of hard flush shots over the course of a fight. Big tall rangy fighters gave Mike the hardest fights. Men who could fight from the outside behind a jab. A fighter of Rocky's size and style would be fodder for Tyson. Too small and too slow. And let's face it, if Walcott and Moore could drop Rocky, then Mike could too. Marciano fought in an era that was perfect for a fighter of his ilk. In Mike he would he would be facing a modern athlete,big and fast. This fight would not go more than 4 rounds. Mike would jump on the much slower Marciano and land fast hard punches on his smaller foe. Rocky was never hit by the hard fast combos that Mike threw and Mikes upper body and head movement would enable him to avoid pnches from his short armed opponent. This is'nt a rap on Rocky but we have to put aside nostalgia and make logical assesments.

The three Tyson opponents named, Lewis, Douglas, and Holyfield, all stopped Tyson. Interesting.

[mr. magoo]

Tyson may look great takeing out the Journymen of his era. But when he fought real tought guys, most often than not Tyson struggle to win, or he lose. If say Bone Crusher Smith can go 12 rounds with Tyson, than I give the Rock a great shot at it.

Rock didn't always look impressive at beating his opponents either.

Tyson may have struggled with Smith, Tucker and a few others, but these were very big and strong heavyweights in the primes of their careers. Rocky fought men who were former middle/lightheavys, and was taken the distance, floored and cut. Sure, Walcott and Charles had greater legacies than Smith and Tucker, but then they weren't exactly in their primes or fighting a guy who fit the dimensions of a modern era.

I have been posting on boxing chat forums for a long time now, and this argument keeps coming up, and will forever. The facts, stats, and results of these two fighter's careers will always emerge in these debates. All we can do is take what info we have, and make the best of our judgemnets, but frankly, I think that Marciano fans take the debate a little beyond the reach of stats and circumstances.

[My dinner with Conteh]

Rudock mixed it with Tyson for the duration of the bout so you cannot say that it is impossible.

Since Marciano was never knocked out or even seriously hurt we honestly don't know what it would take to put him away. Might take a neutron bomb.


I was referring to the example of comparing this with the Smith fight. Marciano didn't fight in the days of 220+ heavies and, although he may not have been knocked out, he would have found it a tad harder than the Don Cockell's of the world.

[My dinner with Conteh]

And then get layed out.


Well he'd be damged somewhat. That's quite likely- I see a busted eye or two culminating in a 6th round stoppage.

[mr. magoo]

The three Tyson opponents named, Lewis, Douglas, and Holyfield, all stopped Tyson. Interesting.

Could Marciano have beaten Lewis, Douglas and Holyfield?

[My dinner with Conteh]

The three Tyson opponents named, Lewis, Douglas, and Holyfield, all stopped Tyson. Interesting.


None were 5 ft 10 and 185 pounds.

[Dempsey1238]

Tyson got beating up by a fomer crusier weight.

[janitor]

I was referring to the example of comparing this with the Smith fight. Marciano didn't fight in the days of 220+ heavies and, although he may not have been knocked out, he would have found it a tad harder than the Don Cockell's of the world.

Well I could argue that guys like Walcott hit harder than Evander Holyfield and had better punch delivery with it.

We can find a zone where their chins were stretched to the same extent and not all of it favours Tyson.

[My dinner with Conteh]

Tyson got beating up by a fomer crusier weight.


...who was 30 pounds heavier by that time. After his punishing Roids Schedule. :yep

[My dinner with Conteh]

Well I could argue that guys like Walcott hit harder than Evander Holyfield and had better punch delivery with it.

We can find a zone where their chins were stretched to the same extent and not all of it favours Tyson.


Well you could argue but what's certain is that Tyson fought and beat much bigger men. He wouldn't lose to a 5ft 10, 185 pound fighter, no doubt in my mind whatsoever.

[janitor]

...who was 30 pounds heavier by that time. After his punishing Roids Schedule. :yep

Nobody would compare Holyfields power to that of Marciano and probably not to Walcott or Moore either. Roids notwithstanding.

[Dempsey1238]

Well its only fair to give Rocky the shot I suppose.

[janitor]

[quote=My dinner with Conteh]Well you could argue but what's certain is that Tyson fought and beat much bigger men.

But Marciano fought and beat better men who were better boxers and perhaps better punchers.

Bigger is not always better.


He wouldn't lose to a 5ft 10, 185 pound fighter, no doubt in my mind whatsoever.


If you go into any boxing match at world level without doubt in your mind then you are extremely unwise.

[My dinner with Conteh]

Nobody would compare Holyfields power to that of Marciano and probably not to Walcott or Moore either. Roids notwithstanding.



If either of these fought Tyson I'm pretty sure they'd be advised to be on some extra poundage. And Tyson's chin was very stellar early on in fights, of course Rocky would be dangerous late, but probably be mashed beforehand. Tyson would have been undefeated if he'd retired after his 6th defence too y'know.

[My dinner with Conteh]

[quote]Bigger is not always better.


If skills are equal and speed is they usually are. By the way, are you a small fella yourself? You seem obsessed with never accepting that a good big 'un beats a good little 'un (far more often than not).

[KTFO]

So please enlighten me what Marciano will do to win this fight.



Nothing. He couldn't. Plain and simple.

[janitor]

If either of these fought Tyson I'm pretty sure they'd be advised to be on some extra poundage. And Tyson's chin was very stellar early on in fights, of course Rocky would be dangerous late, but probably be mashed beforehand. Tyson would have been undefeated if he'd retired after his 6th defence too y'know.

I find it hard to believe that I have spent so much time arguing about a match up that I have not even made a pick on.

My criticism of those who pick an easy win for Tyson is that they are asuming an early blowout of a fighter who was never knocked out or even put in serious trouble.

You simply cannot make that kind of asumption even if the fighter in question was a middleweight. You need to look at a scenario B, C and D.

[OLD FOGEY]

Could Marciano have beaten Lewis, Douglas and Holyfield?

He would not have done worse in four fights than losing all four.

Seriously, without modern "supplements", Holyfield would probably have been in the 180's or 190's and I think Marciano certainly might have beaten him.

[janitor]

If skills are equal and speed is they usually are. By the way, are you a small fella yourself? You seem obsessed with never accepting that a good big 'un beats a good little 'un (far more often than not).

Sadly I am verticaly challenged if built.

The good big un beating a good little un is OK as a guideline but you should not use it to conclude a fantasy fight without indepth analysis.

It has been proved wrong on enough ocasions to prove the rule.

[My dinner with Conteh]

I find it hard to believe that I have spent so much time arguing about a match up that I have not even made a pick on.

My criticism of those who pick an easy win for Tyson is that they are asuming an early blowout of a fighter who was never knocked out or even put in serious trouble.

You simply cannot make that kind of asumption even if the fighter in question was a middleweight. You need to look at a scenario B, C and D.



So, if a fighter was never knocked out I can't ever summise that he would never be even if he fought one of the best hitters of all-time who just happened to be very quick and 30 pounds heavier. So, in a nushell what you're saying is because Marciano never lost we can't pick against him, unless it's on points.

[My dinner with Conteh]

Sadly I am verticaly challenged if built.


I knew it. I used to have a skinny little mate who was obsessed with believing that Bruce Lee was the hardest man ever- as though it was something he could achieve or aspire to. Maybe it is, but still...



The good big un beating a good little un is OK as a guideline but you should not use it to conclude a fantasy fight without indepth analysis.

It has been proved wrong on enough ocasions to prove the rule.


Of course, you're right. But still, it's been proved true on far more ocassions though. Put it this way, I'd rather fight a 155Ib version of me than the 215Ib version any day. :good

[janitor]

So, if a fighter was never knocked out I can't ever summise that he would never be even if he fought one of the best hitters of all-time who just happened to be very quick and 30 pounds heavier. So, in a nushell what you're saying is because Marciano never lost we can't pick against him, unless it's on points.

No I am saying that you cannot asume that he will be knocked out, especialy not in under 3 rounds or some similar distence.

You have to look at possible scenarios where he gets blown out early, lasts to the middle rounds and even goes to the score cards.

You also have to ask how Tyson will respond in each scenario.

[McGrain]

Put it this way, I'd rather fight a 155Ib version of me than the 215Ib version any day. :good

:lol:


THAT depends.

[janitor]

Of course, you're right. But still, it's been proved true on far more ocassions though. Put it this way, I'd rather fight a 155Ib version of me than the 215Ib version any day. :good

Yes but ocasionaly you get some little f***er like Mickey Walker who has not read the book.

[OLD FOGEY]

[quote=janitor]


If skills are equal and speed is they usually are. By the way, are you a small fella yourself? You seem obsessed with never accepting that a good big 'un beats a good little 'un (far more often than not).

What historical examples would you give? Real world matchups. What big man beat Dempsey? Marciano? Louis? Tunney? Sullivan?

[Irish Steel]

I think tyson would probably try to KO marciano in the first few rounds. Because of his hand speed, and great combinations, he would also be ahead of marciano. But Rocky's chin is granite. And he is practiacally impervious to pain. Tyson would then start to wear out and panic. Marciano threw every punch with incredible power, so i see some popped blood vessels in tysons arms. THen tyson starts to throw less, and marciano throws more. I just cant see this going the distance. Ko8-9 for marciano.Dont forget the computer fight lol.

[ironchamp]

"Practically Impervious to Pain" is total nonsense. Nobody is impervious to pain some can take it better than others. In fact Tyson has a better punch resistance than Marciano.
These are the posters whom I was addressing in the original post. The ones that bought the Marciano legend not realizing that Marciano has no real tools to neutralize Tyson. He doesnt employ lateral movement, he's not a clincher, he's not a boxer. He's a come forward fighter facing another come forward fighter who outweighs him by 30 lbs and physically and technically out matches him.

You say that Marciano threw everything with incredible power, Tyson was known for making every punch count. "Bad Intentions" was the word they used to describe it.


I cant see this going the distance too Irish, But I also dont see it going 8 rounds. In fact, I dont see it going 4 rounds. Tyson stops Marciano in less than 4 rounds.

Irish,

You seem to concede that Tyson takes the first couple of rounds. What adjustments is Marciano going to make that will of a sudden turn things around.

[Drew101]

Tyson would smoke him out because of the weight difference 185, to 225 different era . Tyson would just be too strong .

Yeah, but at his best, Tyson didn't weight that much more than 215. Marciano weighing 195 wasn't out of the question...and, even if he came in at 190, that's not that much of a difference. The key factor isn't size...it's whether Marciano can deal with Tyson's speed advantage for the first six or sevn rounds, and do enough damage in the interim to slow down Tyson for a later-rounds surge.

Marciano wasn't unskilled, and, he proved that he could deal with a speed disadvanatge in fights with Charles and Lastarza, but, it's pretty much a given that he'd be shipping some heavy punishment in the early portion of the fight. So, it comes down to who refs the fight. If we assume a modern referee, then it's likely that Tyson scores a stoppage. It we assume a 50's ref, then Marciano may well make it into the later rounds- more out of sheer stubborness than anything else.

If he does, and the fight's scheduled for fifteen, then I could see him winning the fight in the championship rounds. But, those are a lot of "ifs", so it's understandable while people think Tyson wins outright.

[Bummy Davis]

It's time for a reality check here. Rocky never faced an opponent like Tyson. In his prime Mike was a vicious punching elusive fighter with blazing hand speed. His combinations were light years faster than Rocky's and his chin was every bit as good. Mike took shots from very big HW's like Lewis and Douglas and other good punchers like Holyfield. Mike was never dropped by one shot early in a fight but rather fell after taking dozens of hard flush shots over the course of a fight. Big tall rangy fighters gave Mike the hardest fights. Men who could fight from the outside behind a jab. A fighter of Rocky's size and style would be fodder for Tyson. Too small and too slow. And let's face it, if Walcott and Moore could drop Rocky, then Mike could too. Marciano fought in an era that was perfect for a fighter of his ilk. In Mike he would he would be facing a modern athlete,big and fast. This fight would not go more than 4 rounds. Mike would jump on the much slower Marciano and land fast hard punches on his smaller foe. Rocky was never hit by the hard fast combos that Mike threw and Mikes upper body and head movement would enable him to avoid pnches from his short armed opponent. This is'nt a rap on Rocky but we have to put aside nostalgia and make logical assesments.


Tyson never faced a fighter that could fight at the pace Rocky could and could hit with 2 hands for 15 rds either and Rocky had heart and condition + Super WILL, they were the same height and Tyson feeling Rockys power early would also be a deterent to just wade in, Rocky would be there with both guns loaded

[josak]

Tyson never faced a fighter that could fight at the pace Rocky could and could hit with 2 hands for 15 rds either and Rocky had heart and condition +
But lets face it: Rocky's old-school, come-forward style is tailor made for Tyson. Sure he'd let his hands go, and also leave himself open for counter-punch after counter-punch. You can't slug and go to toe-toe with a prime Tyson and win.

[Drew101]

But lets face it: Rocky's old-school, come-forward style is tailor made for Tyson. Sure he'd let his hands go, and also leave himself open for counter-punch after counter-punch. You can't slug and go to toe-toe with a prime Tyson and win.

I dunno. Marciano wasn't completely without defensive ability, and could counter-punch if so inclined. Plus, if he got in close, he could smother some of Tyson's punching power. If he goes balls-out, Marciano eats more incoming than he might be able to handle, but, if he utilises an intelligent game plan, he'd have a shot of making it to the later rounds...when he would have the best shot of turning the fight in his favor.

[janitor]

"Practically Impervious to Pain" is total nonsense. Nobody is impervious to pain some can take it better than others. In fact Tyson has a better punch resistance than Marciano.
These are the posters whom I was addressing in the original post. The ones that bought the Marciano legend not realizing that Marciano has no real tools to neutralize Tyson. He doesnt employ lateral movement, he's not a clincher, he's not a boxer. He's a come forward fighter facing another come forward fighter who outweighs him by 30 lbs and physically and technically out matches him.

You say that Marciano threw everything with incredible power, Tyson was known for making every punch count. "Bad Intentions" was the word they used to describe it.


I cant see this going the distance too Irish, But I also dont see it going 8 rounds. In fact, I dont see it going 4 rounds. Tyson stops Marciano in less than 4 rounds.

Irish,

You seem to concede that Tyson takes the first couple of rounds. What adjustments is Marciano going to make that will of a sudden turn things around.

What you don't seem to get your head around here is that if it goues past four rounds (admitedly this is a big if) then the fight will go more and more towards Marciano with every round that passes.

As Tysons workrate falls off Marcianos will pick up and he will almost seem to come on stronger and the fight progresses. Tyson would go from controling the fight, to being on even terms to being outworked. If both men are standing in the last round he might find himself facing a barage of 120 punches in that round alone.

Some people have argued that Marciano is virtualy unbeatable over 15 rounds and there is a grain of truth to this.

[Senya13]

Even if it goes past 4 rounds, Marciano will be beaten much-much worse than he ever had been in any of his fights, so that's a VERY BIG if that he'd be able to increase his workrate or have any workrate at all, rather than just clinch at every opportunity trying to survive.

[Luigi1985]

Even if it goes past 4 rounds, Marciano will be beaten much-much worse than he ever had been in any of his fights, so that's a VERY BIG if that he'd be able to increase his workrate or have any workrate at all, rather than just clinch at every opportunity trying to survive.


You´re right, but it would be also the other way. Tyson never faced an opponent like Marciano, who had the similar pysical stature, who threw every single punch with devasting power, who trew so many punches per round, etc., in fantasy matchups there are always big "if´s"...

[Senya13]

I repeat, that Marciano didn't throw that many punches consistently in his bouts. In many bouts his workrate was only decent, but nothing exceptional. When an opponent is standing in front of him and throwing little punches that may hurt him, Marciano increased his workrate, such as him battering Archie Moore who was just defending himself and not throwing back. Those are more like an exception than a tendency in Marciano's bouts.

[Luigi1985]

I repeat, that Marciano didn't throw that many punches consistently in his bouts. In many bouts his workrate was only decent, but nothing exceptional. When an opponent is standing in front of him and throwing little punches that may hurt him, Marciano increased his workrate, such as him battering Archie Moore who was just defending himself and not throwing back. Those are more like an exception than a tendency in Marciano's bouts.


Marciano threw always power-punches, therefore he threw a lot...

[ChrisPontius]

Some punchstats, posted by Herny Hascup some time ago:


So I watched the 1st Walcott bout and I counted 19 clinches in the 1st round,
17 in the 2nd and 10 in the 3rd. After that it was a lot less, BUT there
were still plenty of clinches.

Also, it was stated that Rocky never stopped punching, well I counted just
the punches he threw, not the punches he landed, as he did miss a lot, and
found out this:

Round 1 - 28 punches
Round 2 - 34 punches
Round 3 - 35 punches
Round 4 - 40 punches
Round 5 was not filmed
Round 6 - 45 punches
Round 7 - 25 punches
Round 8 - 23 punches
Round 9 - 36 punches
Round 10 - 43 punches
Round 11 - 36 punches
Round 12 - 28 punches

Total – 11 Rounds – 373 Punches – Average 33.9 Punches Per Round

I didn't include Round #13, BUT Rocky threw 6 punches in that round,
including the last two, a Great Right Cross, and a Left Hook.

I could be off by a few, but this is pretty close.



Marciano against Lastarza, here's just the pnches that Rocky threw during the bout.

Round 1 - 27 punches
Round 2 - 32 punches
Round 3 - 34 punches
Round 4 - 37 punches
Round 5 - 44 punches
Round 6 - 37 punches
Round 7 - 65 punches
Round 8 - 56 punches
Round 9 - 75 punches
Round 10 - 45 punches
Round 11 - 31 punches

Rocky threw approx. 452 punches in the 1st 10 rounds. In round #7,
Rocky was warned for the 5th time, for either hitting low, butting or
hitting on the break.

After the 1st 6 rounds, Judge: Barnes had it 5-1 Lastarza, Judge:
Susskind had it 4-2 for Lastarza and Ref: Goldstein had it 3-3 even.
The 6th round was taken away from Rocky because of low blows.

The score at the time of the stoppage was Referee: Ruby Goldstein 7-3 |
Judge: Arthur Susskind 6-4 | Judge: Harold Barnes 5-5 all for Rocky.

Also the Announcer kept saying that Lastarza lost 3 pounds the day before
the bout and that might have made him weaker.

I only did a few rounds in the 1st Charles bout:
Round 1 - 24 punches
Round 4 - 28 punches
Round 6 - 85 punches
Round 10 - 65 punches
Round 15 - 86 punches

[Senya13]

Average number of punches thrown by modern heavyweights, according to compubox varied accross the years from 46 to 49, with 19-20 of those being jabs.

[fists of fury]

Some punchstats, posted by Herny Hascup some time ago:


So I watched the 1st Walcott bout and I counted 19 clinches in the 1st round,
17 in the 2nd and 10 in the 3rd. After that it was a lot less, BUT there
were still plenty of clinches.

Also, it was stated that Rocky never stopped punching, well I counted just
the punches he threw, not the punches he landed, as he did miss a lot, and
found out this:

Round 1 - 28 punches
Round 2 - 34 punches
Round 3 - 35 punches
Round 4 - 40 punches
Round 5 was not filmed
Round 6 - 45 punches
Round 7 - 25 punches
Round 8 - 23 punches
Round 9 - 36 punches
Round 10 - 43 punches
Round 11 - 36 punches
Round 12 - 28 punches

Total – 11 Rounds – 373 Punches – Average 33.9 Punches Per Round

I didn't include Round #13, BUT Rocky threw 6 punches in that round,
including the last two, a Great Right Cross, and a Left Hook.

I could be off by a few, but this is pretty close.



Marciano against Lastarza, here's just the pnches that Rocky threw during the bout.

Round 1 - 27 punches
Round 2 - 32 punches
Round 3 - 34 punches
Round 4 - 37 punches
Round 5 - 44 punches
Round 6 - 37 punches
Round 7 - 65 punches
Round 8 - 56 punches
Round 9 - 75 punches
Round 10 - 45 punches
Round 11 - 31 punches

Rocky threw approx. 452 punches in the 1st 10 rounds. In round #7,
Rocky was warned for the 5th time, for either hitting low, butting or
hitting on the break.

After the 1st 6 rounds, Judge: Barnes had it 5-1 Lastarza, Judge:
Susskind had it 4-2 for Lastarza and Ref: Goldstein had it 3-3 even.
The 6th round was taken away from Rocky because of low blows.

The score at the time of the stoppage was Referee: Ruby Goldstein 7-3 |
Judge: Arthur Susskind 6-4 | Judge: Harold Barnes 5-5 all for Rocky.

Also the Announcer kept saying that Lastarza lost 3 pounds the day before
the bout and that might have made him weaker.

I only did a few rounds in the 1st Charles bout:
Round 1 - 24 punches
Round 4 - 28 punches
Round 6 - 85 punches
Round 10 - 65 punches
Round 15 - 86 punches

Thanks Chris. I have been meaning to do somethig like that myself, but I've been to lazy. :D
This will provide some interesting insights for sure.

Incidently, some of the 5th was filmed, because I have it at home. It's only about 30 seconds of round 5, but I just thought I'd mention it.

[fists of fury]

Do you see a difference in the punchstats in the first Charles fight compared to the first Walcott fight? He threw a lot more punches in the Charles fight, which validates the story that Goldman started to turn Rocky into more of a volume puncher around this time in his career.

[Bummy Davis]

Even if it goes past 4 rounds, Marciano will be beaten much-much worse than he ever had been in any of his fights, so that's a VERY BIG if that he'd be able to increase his workrate or have any workrate at all, rather than just clinch at every opportunity trying to survive.

And how will Tyson stand up to getting hit by a Suzie Q and a few of Rocky hooks and rocky would be inside on Tyson chest and IF tyson committed to throw he would leave himself open to being hit

[My dinner with Conteh]

What you don't seem to get your head around here is that if it goues past four rounds (admitedly this is a big if) then the fight will go more and more towards Marciano with every round that passes.

As Tysons workrate falls off Marcianos will pick up and he will almost seem to come on stronger and the fight progresses. Tyson would go from controling the fight, to being on even terms to being outworked. If both men are standing in the last round he might find himself facing a barage of 120 punches in that round alone.

Some people have argued that Marciano is virtualy unbeatable over 15 rounds and there is a grain of truth to this.


This is a fair post.

[Senya13]

Tyson was hit by harder punches than Marciano's hooks, and he was never knocked out by single punches, he'll do perfectly well there.
While Marciano never experienced being hit by what Tyson has in his offensive arsenal.

[Luigi1985]

Why was Tyson hit by harder shots for sure (beside Lewis perhaps)? Only because he fought some fat guys, who weighed more than Marciano, doesn´t automatically mean, that they hit harder, Senya. You totally overact with the weight- thing...

[Senya13]

The thing about Marciano, his punches hurt, but that's it. He was not a knockout artist, except for a couple of occasions. Now there are tens of modern heavyweights who's punches hurt just as bad or worse when they hit you. That's the reason there have been so many upsets in the last 25-30 years, if it's a heavyweight fight a knockout can happen any second, coz a lot of them hit like a truck.

[Luigi1985]

The thing about Marciano, his punches hurt, but that's it. He was not a knockout artist, except for a couple of occasions. Now there are tens of modern heavyweights who's punches hurt just as bad or worse when they hit you. That's the reason there have been so many upsets in the last 25-30 years, if it's a heavyweight fight a knockout can happen any second, coz a lot of them hit like a truck.

When Marciano wasn´t a KO- artist, than I really don´t know. He KO´d so many classy opponents with good chins, wherefrom Tyson can only dream... it would be good when here more posters would have also some boxing- practice- knowledge, it´s really getting ridiculous here...

[My dinner with Conteh]

It gets ridiculous when some of you seem to think that added weight is never a factor. :huh

[Luigi1985]

It gets ridiculous when some of you seem to think that added weight is never a factor. :huh


Who said that weight doesn´t play a factor? But first of all, at HW´s, it´s mostly only fat, so that isn´t really a big advantage. Secondly, a 230 lbs- man doesn´t automatically hits harder than a 200 lbs- man...

[Senya13]

When Marciano wasn´t a KO- artist, than I really don´t know.
He was a volume puncher, not a KO-artist. Kind of like a heavyweight Nigel Benn. A KO-artist is someone like Julian Jackson or Gerald McClellan or David Tua or Earnie Shavers.

[Dempsey1238]

Tell that to Joe Louis, Joe Walcott, Harry Kid Matthews and Rex Layne. Marciano took them out with one or 2 punchings. It was pretty common in the eary years, for the Rock to ko a guy with one punch.

[Luigi1985]

He was a volume puncher, not a KO-artist. Kind of like a heavyweight Nigel Benn. A KO-artist is someone like Julian Jackson or Gerald McClellan or David Tua or Earnie Shavers.




:lol:

Now you´re really getting silly. Shavers? Tua? Sure, they KO´d a lot of bums, washed up contenders and so, but never any great/ very good fighters. There is no discussion neccesary if both could hit, but they were only contenders who KO´d some medciocre fighters...

If I would went pro now with my age, I could also build up a let´s say 25-0-0- record with 24 KO´s with the right opponents (bums or journeymen who get KO´d almost everytime), but that doesn´t mean that I´m a great puncher, compared with ATG´s who fought only the best...

[Senya13]

Tell that to Joe Louis, Joe Walcott, Harry Kid Matthews and Rex Layne. Marciano took them out with one or 2 punchings. It was pretty common in the eary years, for the Rock to ko a guy with one punch.
A couple of exceptions don't make a difference. Stopping an opponent after you have worn him down gradually, doesn't represent one-punch power.

[My dinner with Conteh]

:lol:

Now you´re really getting silly. Shavers? Tua? Sure, they KO´d a lot of bums, washed up contenders and so, but never any great/ very good fighters. There is no discussion neccesary if both could hit, but they were only contenders who KO´d some medciocre fighters...


...as opposed to washed-up light heavyweights?

[janitor]

He was a volume puncher, not a KO-artist. Kind of like a heavyweight Nigel Benn. A KO-artist is someone like Julian Jackson or Gerald McClellan or David Tua or Earnie Shavers.

No it is sombody like Joe Louis or Jack Dempsey or Mike Tyson.

[janitor]

A couple of exceptions don't make a difference. Stopping an opponent after you have worn him down gradually, doesn't represent one-punch power.

Marciano dose have the highest knockout percentage of any lineal heavyweight champion.

He was a knockout king if not a precision finisher.

[janitor]

...as opposed to washed-up light heavyweights?

You must recognise that there is a big qualatative gulf between the people Marciano was knocing out and those that Shavers or Tua were knocking out.

[Drew101]

...as opposed to washed-up light heavyweights?

Marciano did kayo some legitimate heavyweights, though, and it's fair to say that he'd have the capability of kayoing Tyson if he landed right...or, often enough in the later rounds. It's just a matter of whether he'd be able to make it through to the later rounds.

[ChrisPontius]

Thanks Chris. I have been meaning to do somethig like that myself, but I've been to lazy. :D
This will provide some interesting insights for sure.

Incidently, some of the 5th was filmed, because I have it at home. It's only about 30 seconds of round 5, but I just thought I'd mention it.

Marciano seemed to have two styles: the one-punch knockout artist that fought and knocked out Louis (2 punches), Layne (1 punch) and Walcott (2 punches although 1 was enough), who threw about 35-45 punches a round.

Then there was the wear-you-down Marciano of the Charles, Cockel and Moore fights, who threw 60++ punches and even more than that when he had you in trouble.

[My dinner with Conteh]

You must recognise that there is a big qualatative gulf between the people Marciano was knocing out and those that Shavers or Tua were knocking out.


I'd still bet a 16th ranked heavyweight of the 1990s can take a better punch than a light-heavyweight from the 1940s.

[My dinner with Conteh]

Marciano did kayo some legitimate heavyweights, though, and it's fair to say that he'd have the capability of kayoing Tyson if he landed right...or, often enough in the later rounds. It's just a matter of whether he'd be able to make it through to the later rounds.


I totally agree. But i'm in the 'I don't think it'd go past six camp'.

[janitor]

I'd still bet a 16th ranked heavyweight of the 1990s can take a better punch than a light-heavyweight from the 1940s.

Then you would be somewhat misguided.

Even if the big skins that Tua knocked out could take a better punch than sombody like Moore or Walcott (which I doubt), they would certainly be a lot easier to hit cleanly and often.

[janitor]

Marciano seemed to have two styles: the one-punch knockout artist that fought and knocked out Louis (2 punches), Layne (1 punch) and Walcott (2 punches although 1 was enough), who threw about 35-45 punches a round.

Then there was the wear-you-down Marciano of the Charles, Cockel and Moore fights, who threw 60++ punches and even more than that when he had you in trouble.

This is my observation also.

[OLD FOGEY]

The thing about Marciano, his punches hurt, but that's it. He was not a knockout artist, except for a couple of occasions. Now there are tens of modern heavyweights who's punches hurt just as bad or worse when they hit you. That's the reason there have been so many upsets in the last 25-30 years, if it's a heavyweight fight a knockout can happen any second, coz a lot of them hit like a truck.

Actually, one could make a good case that Marciano is pound for pound the greatest knockout artist in the history of the sport. He scored 43 knockouts in 49 fights, the second highest percentage (behind Zarate) in the Hall-of-Fame. He has the top knockout percentage of any heavyweight champion, despite being a relatively small heavyweight who gave up an average of 7.5 lbs to all his opponents in which a weight is listed and 9 lbs to his rated opponents. He fought 5 men who weighed over 210 lbs (each of whom outweighed him by over 25 lbs and 15% of his body weight) and knocked all five out, three in the first round. He fought 11 men who weighed over 200 lbs and knocked all of them out. Uniquely among big punchers, his power did not fail him against better opposition. In 16 fights against men rated at one time or another by Ring Magazine, he scored 14 knockouts and knocked all of them out in the initial bout or a return. He scored 26 knockouts by the 3rd round or earlier and 33 knockouts by the 6th round or earlier.
In comparision, Sonny Liston also scored 33 knockouts by the sixth round or earlier. Earnie Shavers scored 6 knockouts in 17 bouts against rated opponents.
Let's look at his last 14 fights.
1. Layne--dropped for count in 6 early in round after one minute rest period by one right hand.
2. Beshore--dropped for count in 4th.
3. Louis--knocked through ropes in 8th. Did not look like he could have beaten count. Referee stopped fight without count so corner could administer to Louis. Only second time Louis knocked out and Marciano showed more power than any of Louis' other opponents, as Louis himself stated.
4. Savold--fights defensively and makes Marciano miss a lot, but is battered into bloody hulk and sent to hospital by body punches. Retires after 6th round. Perhaps Marciano's poorest showing.
5. Buonavino--Dropped in 2nd for count.
6. Reynolds--Dropped in 3rd for count.
7. Matthews--Dropped in 2nd by double left hooks for count. Only time Matthews was ever counted out in over 100 fights.
8. Walcott--Dropped for count by right in 13th shortly after one-minute rest.
9. Walcott--Dropped for count in 1st by right uppercut.
10. LaStarza--the elusive LaStarza gets to the 11th before being knocked out of the ring. Referee stops bout. I guess this could be put down as a less impressive performance, but LaStarza had never been stopped.
11. Charles--goes 15, fighting defensively in latter rounds.
12. Charles--dropped for count in 8th. Probably one of less impressive knockouts, but still put former champion down for count for only second time in his career.
13. Cockell--battered through fight, put down in 8th and twice in 9th before ref stops bout with Cockell floundering. Again lesser performance, but dominates #2 contender and British Empire champion.
14. Moore--dropped 5 times and knocked out in 9th. The 32 year old Marciano is showing signs of going back but still decisively defeats Moore who was on a tremendous winning streak.

Totals. 14 straight victories, 13 stoppages, 9 countouts. Lennox Lewis had 8 countouts in his career.

[Senya13]

What does that list have to do with being a KO artist? Someone who doesn't need to wear an opponent down by volumes of punches before finishing them with one or two punches?

[OLD FOGEY]

What does that list have to do with being a KO artist? Someone who doesn't need to wear an opponent down by volumes of punches before finishing them with one or two punches?

How worn down was Walcott in the second fight or Matthews? Even Layne and Walcott in the first fight were taken out by single punches.

Marciano scored, as I pointed out, 26 knockouts within the first three rounds. How can you really argue he was wearing people down? This is nonsense. Where you are going wrong is that someone like Shavers only scores early knockouts for the most part. If the fight drags on, his power begins to wane. Marciano could knock a man out early, knock a man out in the middle rounds, and knock a man out late. If a man was elusive, he was able to the pressure on until he could slow the man down enough with body work to get over a clean shot to the jaw. How can that be interpreted as not having a punch? And I would also point out that men like Marciano or Louis or Moore, because they carried their power well into the later rounds, could pace a fight. All were dangerous from first bell to last.

And if having a greater knockout percentage against general opposition and rated fighters does not prove one a "knockout artist", what does?

[Luigi1985]

Actually, one could make a good case that Marciano is pound for pound the greatest knockout artist in the history of the sport. He scored 43 knockouts in 49 fights, the second highest percentage (behind Zarate) in the Hall-of-Fame. He has the top knockout percentage of any heavyweight champion, despite being a relatively small heavyweight who gave up an average of 7.5 lbs to all his opponents in which a weight is listed and 9 lbs to his rated opponents. He fought 5 men who weighed over 210 lbs (each of whom outweighed him by over 25 lbs and 15% of his body weight) and knocked all five out, three in the first round. He fought 11 men who weighed over 200 lbs and knocked all of them out. Uniquely among big punchers, his power did not fail him against better opposition. In 16 fights against men rated at one time or another by Ring Magazine, he scored 14 knockouts and knocked all of them out in the initial bout or a return. He scored 26 knockouts by the 3rd round or earlier and 33 knockouts by the 6th round or earlier.
In comparision, Sonny Liston also scored 33 knockouts by the sixth round or earlier. Earnie Shavers scored 6 knockouts in 17 bouts against rated opponents.
Let's look at his last 14 fights.
1. Layne--dropped for count in 6 early in round after one minute rest period by one right hand.
2. Beshore--dropped for count in 4th.
3. Louis--knocked through ropes in 8th. Did not look like he could have beaten count. Referee stopped fight without count so corner could administer to Louis. Only second time Louis knocked out and Marciano showed more power than any of Louis' other opponents, as Louis himself stated.
4. Savold--fights defensively and makes Marciano miss a lot, but is battered into bloody hulk and sent to hospital by body punches. Retires after 6th round. Perhaps Marciano's poorest showing.
5. Buonavino--Dropped in 2nd for count.
6. Reynolds--Dropped in 3rd for count.
7. Matthews--Dropped in 2nd by double left hooks for count. Only time Matthews was ever counted out in over 100 fights.
8. Walcott--Dropped for count by right in 13th shortly after one-minute rest.
9. Walcott--Dropped for count in 1st by right uppercut.
10. LaStarza--the elusive LaStarza gets to the 11th before being knocked out of the ring. Referee stops bout. I guess this could be put down as a less impressive performance, but LaStarza had never been stopped.
11. Charles--goes 15, fighting defensively in latter rounds.
12. Charles--dropped for count in 8th. Probably one of less impressive knockouts, but still put former champion down for count for only second time in his career.
13. Cockell--battered through fight, put down in 8th and twice in 9th before ref stops bout with Cockell floundering. Again lesser performance, but dominates #2 contenter and British Empire champion.
14. Moore--dropped 5 times and knocked out in 9th. The 32 year old Marciano is showing signs of going back but still decisively defeats Moore who was on a tremendous winning streak.

Totals. 14 straight victories, 13 stoppages, 9 countouts. Lennox Lewis had 8 countouts in his career.


Great arguments and facts you´re coming with, OLD FOGEY! Really hard to counter here now...

[Senya13]

Did I say anything about 1st Walcott fight? 2nd Walcott fight was clearly a mistake on Walcott's part, not a "taken out".
Aggressive volume punches do score plenty of knockouts in the first several rounds, I gave Nigel Benn as an example. Or take Joe Frazier. But that's not because they have some superior punching power. Or take Vitali Klitschko, as a different example, plenty of knockouts in the first several rounds and overall a very impressive KO record, but only a fool would call him a KO artist.
I didn't claim Marciano didn't have a punch, I claimed that he didn't have a one-punch KO power for most part (with few bouts as exceptions).
Having great KO percentage in that heavyweight division means little to me, as it was very weak and filled with blown up light-heavyweights, or old fighters.

[OLD FOGEY]

Did I say anything about 1st Walcott fight? 2nd Walcott fight was clearly a mistake on Walcott's part, not a "taken out".
Aggressive volume punches do score plenty of knockouts in the first several rounds, I gave Nigel Benn as an example. Or take Joe Frazier. But that's not because they have some superior punching power. Or take Vitali Klitschko, as a different example, plenty of knockouts in the first several rounds and overall a very impressive KO record, but only a fool would call him a KO artist.
I didn't claim Marciano didn't have a punch, I claimed that he didn't have a one-punch KO power for most part (with few bouts as exceptions).
Having great KO percentage in that heavyweight division means little to me, as it was very weak and filled with blown up light-heavyweights, or old fighters.

Well, how many one-punch knockouts did Liston score? Or Dempsey? Obviously some, but unless you provide some sort of comparision with other fighters, your criticism of Marciano as a puncher is floating argument without any grounding in reality. I know of no fighter who scored nothing but one-punch knockouts and even a majority of one-punch knockouts.

We are back, I see, to the lightheavyweights. What proof can you give that lightheavies or ex-lightheavies were easier to knock out than the 210 plus types. Was this true for Dempsey? Marciano? Louis? Thompson?

Personally, I think there is something to big men being able to punch, on average, harder than smaller men. I see no historical evidence that big men can take a punch better. Can you produce some?

Walcott in the second fight lost track of the count after he took a punch. How can you be certain the punch had nothing to do with that?

[Senya13]

Did I call Liston or Dempsey KO-artists? Did I claim somewhere that Marciano wasn't a puncher? Did I claim that nobody who doesn't score only one-punch knockouts, deserves to be called a KO artist?
Light-heavies were harder to catch, often, but as for chin, in modern epoch there are few light-heavyweights who came to be successful at heavyweights, this is more than enough proof of that. Plus, there's a tendency in general accross the rest of the weight divisions that fighters who looked to have a great chin at lower weight, when they moved to heavier divisions they became more vulnerable.
Walcott looked perfectly well during the count and after the count was over, it was clear that he wasn't hurt much by a punch, it surprised him more than it hurt him and he could have easily continued had he not lost attention about the count.

[My dinner with Conteh]

Then you would be somewhat misguided.



No one on here is more misguided than you. You've got small man syndrome (in more ways than one). Moore for a start was sparked by Patterson, who being 'little' himself yo-yo'd his way through the heavyweight division. Then again, maybe you're right and a 5ft 10 185 Ib guy will rule the heavyweight division once again.

[Drew101]

No one on here is more misguided than you. You've got small man syndrome (in more ways than one). Moore for a start was sparked by Patterson, who being 'little' himself yo-yo'd his way through the heavyweight division. Then again, maybe you're right and a 5ft 10 185 Ib guy will rule the heavyweight division once again.

Well, if RJJ can wobble Ruiz with one punch, then it's not necessarily out of the question that Marciano-who generated a hell of a lot of power for someone his size, could hurt a heavyweight if he catches them right. And, while Tyson possessed a good defense at his best, he was still far from unhittable, even at his best.

[My dinner with Conteh]

Well, if RJJ can wobble Ruiz with one punch, then it's not necessarily out of the question that Marciano-who generated a hell of a lot of power for someone his size, could hurt a heavyweight if he catches them right. And, while Tyson possessed a good defense at his best, he was still far from unhittable, even at his best.


I don't remember Jones 'ruling' the heavyweight division for a start. Jones was successful against the much bigger man but he picked his mark, Ruiz being one of the worst champs of recent times. Also, Jones, if we're honest, is one of the most skilled fighters of all-time. The more skilled and elusive you are the more chance you've got against the bigger talents (I'm talking talents here not fat, soft lemons). Jones himself admitted that a fight with Lewis was never seriously on the cards. He was too big, too skilled, too hard a hitter. Something Ruiz wasn't.

[Drew101]

I don't remember Jones 'ruling' the heavyweight division for a start. Jones was successful against the much bigger man but he picked his mark, Ruiz being one of the worst champs of recent times. Also, Jones, if we're honest, is one of the most skilled fighters of all-time. The more skilled and elusive you are the more chance you've got against the bigger talents (I'm talking talents here not fat, soft lemons). Jones himself admitted that a fight with Lewis was never seriously on the cards. He was too big, too skilled, too hard a hitter. Something Ruiz wasn't.

The point I was making was that 25 lbs, while a definite size advantage, isn't that big, and that Marciano was a big enough puncher to take out a fighter of Tyson's size. Nothing more.

For the record, I pick would pick Lewis to beat Marciano, based on style, as well as size.

[janitor]

[quote=My dinner with Conteh]No one on here is more misguided than you. You've got small man syndrome (in more ways than one).

The personal element is not usefull here.

You value size in a heavyweight to the extent that you place more emphasis on it than substence or acomplishment.

Moore for a start was sparked by Patterson, who being 'little' himself yo-yo'd his way through the heavyweight division.

Patterson was a great fighter. Perhaps more like Tyson than any other heavyweight in history ironicaly.


Then again, maybe you're right and a 5ft 10 185 Ib guy will rule the heavyweight division once again.


Tyson himself is 5' 10'' incidentaly.

There will not be another 185 lb heavyweight champion because the rules do not alow it but cruiserweights and even light heavyweights will step up to rule the division as they have in every decade of the 20th century.

[RoccoMarciano]

Luigi, bad argument using Lacy-Calzaghe, because Tyson was 4x as quick as Marciano.

I don't know where you get that from. Rocky threw many very short, and very FAST punches. Where is your proof Tyson threw anything that was 4x faster... If Rocky was that slow, I doubt his punches would have had the power they so obviously had - in fact it would be very nearly impossible :)

[C. M. Clay II]

I don't know where you get that from. Rocky threw many very short, and very FAST punches. Where is your proof Tyson threw anything that was 4x faster... If Rocky was that slow, I doubt his punches would have had the power they so obviously had - in fact it would be very nearly impossible :)

At times Marciano had above-average speed, but nothing, absolutely nothing Marciano threw would be considered "very fast".

[RoccoMarciano]

At times Marciano had above-average speed, but nothing, absolutely nothing Marciano threw would be considered "very fast".

A don't know, some of those little taps he threw didn't look like much until one noticed the head of his victim snapping back at lightning speed. You have to have a pretty fast punch to hit as hard as Rocky.

[janitor]

A don't know, some of those little taps he threw didn't look like much until one noticed the head of his victim snapping back at lightning speed. You have to have a pretty fast punch to hit as hard as Rocky.

Wasn't so much his handspeed as his abnormaly short reach combined with the fact that many of his punches were prety compact anyway.

More than one oponent said that his punches were imposible to time and track because his arms were like propelors.

[mr. magoo]

I think Rocky was a tremendous fighter with a lot of tools and a variety to his arsenal. He was tough from both a physical and mental standpoint, and could hit harder than most heavyweights, especially for a man his size. Rocky could beat you in a variety of ways. He could knock you out early, He could pound you to submission, or he could take you to the scorecards and come out on top. Additionally, he was exciting to watch, which is probably the most important trait a fighter could have, because let's face it, these guys make their money fighting for the fans. As a fight fan, I enjoy watching old films of the Rock. He truley was one of history's best.

As for how he'd do against champions of previous or future eras? I don't know. I don't think it's important really. The point is that the man rose to greatness when it was his time to do so. The same way that Dempsey, Jeffries, Johnson, Louis or Ali did. It doesn't matter to me how he'd do against Mike Tyson or anyone else.

History has already been written, and the Rock's name cemented in it's pages. People will be praising the man long after we're all dead.

[Bummy Davis]

I think Rocky was a tremendous fighter with a lot of tools and a variety to his arsenal. He was tough from both a physical and mental standpoint, and could hit harder than most heavyweights, especially for a man his size. Rocky could beat you in a variety of ways. He could knock you out early, He could pound you to submission, or he could take you to the scorecards and come out on top. Additionally, he was exciting to watch, which is probably the most important trait a fighter could have, because let's face it, these guys make their money fighting for the fans. As a fight fan, I enjoy watching old films of the Rock. He truley was one of history's best.

As for how he'd do against champions of previous or future eras? I don't know. I don't think it's important really. The point is that the man rose to greatness when it was his time to do so. The same way that Dempsey, Jeffries, Johnson, Louis or Ali did. It doesn't matter to me how he'd do against Mike Tyson or anyone else.

History has already been written, and the Rock's name cemented in it's pages. People will be praising the man long after we're all dead.


WELL SAID:good

[RoccoMarciano]

WELL SAID:good

I agree 100% :good

[dmille]

Shouldn't the titles of Spinks, Holy, Moorer, Jones and Toney put to rest this myth that bigger is always better?

[box03]

Most taller fighter meaning fighters over 6'3 very rarely have the ability to possess the skill of there smaller counter part, most tall fighters seem to look awkward and lack balance in the ring. Fighters like Louis and Ali are the definition of boxing everything they did in the ring was very smooth and almost perfect, they dont make them like that anymore.

[OLD FOGEY]

Did I say anything about 1st Walcott fight? 2nd Walcott fight was clearly a mistake on Walcott's part, not a "taken out".
Aggressive volume punches do score plenty of knockouts in the first several rounds, I gave Nigel Benn as an example. Or take Joe Frazier. But that's not because they have some superior punching power. Or take Vitali Klitschko, as a different example, plenty of knockouts in the first several rounds and overall a very impressive KO record, but only a fool would call him a KO artist.
I didn't claim Marciano didn't have a punch, I claimed that he didn't have a one-punch KO power for most part (with few bouts as exceptions).
Having great KO percentage in that heavyweight division means little to me, as it was very weak and filled with blown up light-heavyweights, or old fighters.

I must comment on the weak division argument. Why wasn't anyone else able to exploit this alleged weakness? Marciano stands all by himself from his era going undefeated with an 88% knockout rate. Give me one other heavyweight of his time who comes anywhere close to going undefeated or running up this kind of knockout percentage.

I think the "weak era" argument boils down to the last line of attack on a champion one wishes to put down. The Louis era has a young champion fighting young challengers. Critics charge it is a weak era.
The Marciano era has several aging challengers who still dominate their opposition, so that causes the era to be called weak. Did it become weak because Moore was able to beat Johnson, Valdes, Baker, and Henry?
The seventies, on the other hand, is "strong" although an aging and fading Ali regains the title at the same age as Charles when he failed against Marciano and then holds on while obviously going back during the rest of the decade. The supposedly outstanding challengers, mostly erratic or aging themselves, can not defeat him. The also supposedly powerful nineties see a 45 year old ex-champion regain the title and hold it several years. Why does this not prove this era weak?

[fists of fury]

Actually, one could make a good case that Marciano is pound for pound the greatest knockout artist in the history of the sport. He scored 43 knockouts in 49 fights, the second highest percentage (behind Zarate) in the Hall-of-Fame. He has the top knockout percentage of any heavyweight champion, despite being a relatively small heavyweight who gave up an average of 7.5 lbs to all his opponents in which a weight is listed and 9 lbs to his rated opponents. He fought 5 men who weighed over 210 lbs (each of whom outweighed him by over 25 lbs and 15% of his body weight) and knocked all five out, three in the first round. He fought 11 men who weighed over 200 lbs and knocked all of them out. Uniquely among big punchers, his power did not fail him against better opposition. In 16 fights against men rated at one time or another by Ring Magazine, he scored 14 knockouts and knocked all of them out in the initial bout or a return. He scored 26 knockouts by the 3rd round or earlier and 33 knockouts by the 6th round or earlier.
In comparision, Sonny Liston also scored 33 knockouts by the sixth round or earlier. Earnie Shavers scored 6 knockouts in 17 bouts against rated opponents.
Let's look at his last 14 fights.
1. Layne--dropped for count in 6 early in round after one minute rest period by one right hand.
2. Beshore--dropped for count in 4th.
3. Louis--knocked through ropes in 8th. Did not look like he could have beaten count. Referee stopped fight without count so corner could administer to Louis. Only second time Louis knocked out and Marciano showed more power than any of Louis' other opponents, as Louis himself stated.
4. Savold--fights defensively and makes Marciano miss a lot, but is battered into bloody hulk and sent to hospital by body punches. Retires after 6th round. Perhaps Marciano's poorest showing.
5. Buonavino--Dropped in 2nd for count.
6. Reynolds--Dropped in 3rd for count.
7. Matthews--Dropped in 2nd by double left hooks for count. Only time Matthews was ever counted out in over 100 fights.
8. Walcott--Dropped for count by right in 13th shortly after one-minute rest.
9. Walcott--Dropped for count in 1st by right uppercut.
10. LaStarza--the elusive LaStarza gets to the 11th before being knocked out of the ring. Referee stops bout. I guess this could be put down as a less impressive performance, but LaStarza had never been stopped.
11. Charles--goes 15, fighting defensively in latter rounds.
12. Charles--dropped for count in 8th. Probably one of less impressive knockouts, but still put former champion down for count for only second time in his career.
13. Cockell--battered through fight, put down in 8th and twice in 9th before ref stops bout with Cockell floundering. Again lesser performance, but dominates #2 contender and British Empire champion.
14. Moore--dropped 5 times and knocked out in 9th. The 32 year old Marciano is showing signs of going back but still decisively defeats Moore who was on a tremendous winning streak.

Totals. 14 straight victories, 13 stoppages, 9 countouts. Lennox Lewis had 8 countouts in his career.

Lovely post Old Fogey.

How anyone could dispute that Marciano was not a puncher or knockout artist baffles me. It's entirely preposterous.

About all these so-called light heavyweights he faced - what did Marciano weigh again? 185 or thereabouts?
Moore weighed 188, Maricano the same in ther title bout. Charles was around 182, Walcott around 190-195. Lastarza, Cockell, they were both a little bigger (or at least heavier) than Marciano. In fact, most his opponents were.

That's the equivalent of Wladimir Klitschko facing an opponent of the same or bigger size in most his fights, and still ending up with an 88% knockout ratio at the end of his career.

Marciano could knock you flat with either hand, or take you out with volume. Either way, only 5 different men lasted to the final bell in 49 fights.

[Senya13]

Marciano stands all by himself from his era going undefeated with an 88% knockout rate. Give me one other heavyweight of his time who comes anywhere close to going undefeated or running up this kind of knockout percentage.
Marciano won and held the championship for 3 years, and, excepting the 1st LaStarza fight, fought at top level only 4 years. Do I need to give a list of names of champions with similar achievements at some point of their career (4 or more years at top level, 3 years of championship, undefeated)?

The Louis era has a young champion fightening young challengers. Critics charge it is a weak era.
I think it is Liebling in 'Sweet Science' who said something about the irony of the situation of Louis winning the championship from againg veterans and then him having to defend it against young fighters while he himself turned into aged veteran. But unlike late 1930's in 1940's young talented contenders were lacking.

The seventies, on the other hand, is "strong"
Are you trying to persuade me that the so-called "Golden age of heavyweights" was not that strong afterall? You don't have to, because that's exactly what I have been saying ever since I've been on this forum. The 1970's heavyweights are vastly overrated.

[ripcity]

Tyson is biger, stronger and faster. The best style for beating Tyson was jab and grab, every now and than throw a stright right or left depnding on the stance taken. That's not how Marciano fought.
You can talk about hart all you want. Marciano will be there for Tyson to hit.
I can see Marciano's hart allowing him yo last a few rounds but I don't see it lasting more than six rounds.

[My dinner with Conteh]

[quote]Tyson himself is 5' 10'' incidentaly.

There will not be another 185 lb heavyweight champion because the rules do not alow it but cruiserweights and even light heavyweights will step up to rule the division as they have in every decade of the 20th century.



I know Tyson height, it's the weight difference that's the factor. Your second sentence is the most boring and predictable in this thread and one that I knew you'd write (you have before). So, are you saying if there's a guy weighing 185 pounds and at his absolute peak, was box-office gold and wanted to compete at heavyweight, yet didn't want to add extra as it may affect his speed, the boxing organisations wouldn't bend the rules for such a contest?

[My dinner with Conteh]

[quote]Patterson was a great fighter. Perhaps more like Tyson than any other heavyweight in history ironicaly.



I don't see many similarities. Patterson's reign was long because his team deliberately avoided the best fighter in the division for three years. A much more powerful and stronger man, who annihilated him when they met.

[Bummy Davis]

I must comment on the weak division argument. Why wasn't anyone else able to exploit this alleged weakness? Marciano stands all by himself from his era going undefeated with an 88% knockout rate. Give me one other heavyweight of his time who comes anywhere close to going undefeated or running up this kind of knockout percentage.

I think the "weak era" argument boils down to the last line of attack on a champion one wishes to put down. The Louis era has a young champion fightening young challengers. Critics charge it is a weak era.
The Marciano era has several aging challengers who still dominate their opposition, so that causes the era to be called weak. Did it become weak because Moore was able to beat Johnson, Valdes, Baker, and Henry?
The seventies, on the other hand, is "strong" although an aging and fading Ali regains the title at the same age as Charles when he failed against Marciano and then holds on while obviously going back during the rest of the decade. The supposedly outstanding challengers, mostly erratic or aging themselves, can not defeat him. The also supposedly powerful nineties see a 45 year old ex-champion regain the title and hold it several years. Why does this not prove this era weak?


Good point I think a lot of people that post here and most Marciano detractors and critics do not use the same measuring stick for other eras, they are looking real hard to find something wrong. Marciano always found a way to win and defended against the dominant and top contenders 6 times. and got out when he still had a few good fights left but did not have it in him (love for the sport) to give us his best anymore so he retired while on top with no real challenges left.........quite a legasy

[Bummy Davis]

You must recognise that there is a big qualatative gulf between the people Marciano was knocing out and those that Shavers or Tua were knocking out.


:good Shavers would only have a rare punchers chance at most but he lost to light heavy Stan Johnson and could not stop Vincente Rondon who(Bob Foster took out in 2) Charles, Walcott, Moore would stop Shavers and outclass him

[mr. magoo]

OLD FOGEY] He has the top knockout percentage of any heavyweight champion.


Actually,

George Foreman and Vitali Klitschko both have a higher win/knockout ratio, although this was a good post.

[Luigi1985]

Actually,

George Foreman and Vitali Klitschko both have a higher win/knockout ratio, although this was a good post.


I think he meant the KO-% from all fights,


Marciano: 49 fights, 43 KO´s
Vitaly: 37 fights, 34 KO´s
Foreman: 81 fights, 68 KO´s


But I think Vitaly has a bit higher KO%, but I´m too lazy to calculate now... :lol:

[OLD FOGEY]

Actually,

George Foreman and Vitali Klitschko both have a higher win/knockout ratio, although this was a good post.

I do it ko''s per fight. Marciano is ahead of Foreman. I forgot about Vitali. I should have said in the 20th century.

[OLD FOGEY]

Marciano won and held the championship for 3 years, and, excepting the 1st LaStarza fight, fought at top level only 4 years. Do I need to give a list of names of champions with similar achievements at some point of their career (4 or more years at top level, 3 years of championship, undefeated)?


I think it is Liebling in 'Sweet Science' who said something about the irony of the situation of Louis winning the championship from againg veterans and then him having to defend it against young fighters while he himself turned into aged veteran. But unlike late 1930's in 1940's young talented contenders were lacking.


Are you trying to persuade me that the so-called "Golden age of heavyweights" was not that strong afterall? You don't have to, because that's exactly what I have been saying ever since I've been on this forum. The 1970's heavyweights are vastly overrated.

The number of champions who won all their fights to any point and ran up an 88% knockout ratio for any period at all would be short.
Jeffries--he did go undefeated in his prime, but had two draws and his KO percentage is far below Marciano's even though he was a 220 lb man fighting men smaller on the whole than Marciano fought.
Johnson--Lost several times
Dempsey--Lost several times. Even taking only peak of career, comes no where near matching Marciano
Louis--Is close if you take 1934 to 1942 period of his prime--56-1 with 48 knockouts, but still has loss to Schmeling and slightly lower ko %. I rate Louis ahead of Marciano.
Foreman--Taking first career, would have slightly higher ko percentage, but lost to Ali and Young.
That leaves Ali and Holmes. Ali was just as successful in his own way before his suspension, but lost at 29. I rate Ali above Marciano.
Holmes-Went undefeated for greater period of time before eventually losing. Food for debate certainly, but Marciano's supporters can point out that when he retired there was no doubt he had proven his superiority to every opponent, giving the ones who troubled him rematches and then decisively defeating them. Holmes did not do this with Norton and Witherspoon.
Tyson--You could argue is as dominant as Marciano until he gets knocked out by Douglas. That is a big fly in the ointment, though.
Holyfield--Loses twice to Bowe and to Moorer.
Lewis--dominance broken by ko defeats to McCall and Rahman, which didn't happen to Marciano.

Seriously, of all champions, how many proved they were better than everyone they fought, even up to Marciano's age at retirement. It would be a pretty short list. Only Foreman and Vitaly Klitschko reached the same ko level and both had two defeats as relatively young men.