Rocky Marciano vs Ed Dunkhorst [Archive]

burt bienstock

02-28-2010, 06:12 PM

Fitzimmons kod Ed Dunkhorst in the scond round with a powerful blow to 300 pound tDunkhorst.s midsection,in 1900...Letting all the air out...I suspect Marciano,shorter than Ruby Robert would have kod Dunkhorst also...Class triumps most of the time...

he grant

02-28-2010, 06:35 PM

Boilermaker

02-28-2010, 07:00 PM

It sure does , however the debate has not been Rocky v.s. men taller or heavier as it would include 99% of the heavyweights since 1960. It is Rocky v.s. much larger top ranked heavyweight contenders ...

Rocky vs Ned O Baldwin????

Or perhaps a more serious question, Rocky vs Jess Willard and Primo Carnera?

Russell

02-28-2010, 07:28 PM

I am still on a learning curve.

You're doing well. :good:happy

he grant

02-28-2010, 07:35 PM

Willard match up would be heavily influenced by the ref, the distance and the ring size ... I would like Rocky by decision ... too busy for him ...

Rocky would destroy Carnera in about three rounds if the ref did not let Primo hold him non-stop ...

Unforgiven

03-02-2010, 08:36 AM

Rocky would destroy Carnera in about three rounds if the ref did not let Primo hold him non-stop ...

..... and yet you'd favour Bruno over Marciano.

Sure, Bruno had a bigger punch than Primo, but he was equally flakey.
Bruno and Carnera are on the same level, both manufactured fighters who had the physiques to attract the crowds and shrewd managers to build up their records.

Seldon, of course, lies a notch below both. :D

Unforgiven

03-03-2010, 04:44 AM

Dunkhorst was just a fat man.
I dont think that represents a "physical advantage".

janitor

03-03-2010, 05:05 AM

Dunkhorst was just a fat man.
I dont think that represents a "physical advantage".

Oh Dunkhorst was big.

There are pictures of him sparring with Jim Jeffries before he became obese and Jeffriesw looks small next to him.

It puts it into perspective what Fitzsimmons was up against.

mcvey

03-03-2010, 05:51 AM

Could Marciano overcome the overwhelming physical disadvantage?

To paraphrase Dirty Harry.

" Well, do you feel lucky , Dunk ? "

Boxed Ears

03-03-2010, 06:16 AM

I must admit, as far as troll threads go, this one is very classy, subtle and beautifully understated. :good:happy

ChrisPontius

03-03-2010, 06:44 AM

Oh Dunkhorst was big.

There are pictures of him sparring with Jim Jeffries before he became obese and Jeffriesw looks small next to him.

It puts it into perspective what Fitzsimmons was up against.

Show me.

OLD FOGEY

03-03-2010, 11:38 AM

Show me.

Janitor has a good point. Dunkhurst was not just fat. He was about 6' 4", I think.

Therefore he was indeed big and fat.

I think a serious point here would be that the fighters under 200 lbs were on the whole much better than the fighters over 200 lbs prior to the 1960's, and so the ATG's generally had their toughest fights against these smaller men. Beating Willard or Carnera was probably not as praiseworthy as beating Schmeling or Charles.

mr. magoo

03-03-2010, 12:40 PM

I think a serious point here would be that the fighters under 200 lbs were on the whole much better than the fighters over 200 lbs prior to the 1960's, and so the ATG's generally had their toughest fights against these smaller men. Beating Willard or Carnera was probably not as praiseworthy as beating Schmeling or Charles.

I think you hit the nail on the head.. I speculate that in earlier periods of the game, bigger men were less apt to developing their speed and skill set, due to the fact that they felt like they didn't have to. Being over 6'3", and wieghing over 200 lbs was a rare advantage.. Therefore, the smaller, quicker technicians ultimately became better fighters.. As time went on however, being big became only one part of the equation. Larger men were more and more common, and only the more agile, durable and skilled ones prevailed.

mcvey

03-03-2010, 01:00 PM

I think you hit the nail on the head.. I speculate that in earlier periods of the game, bigger men were less apt to developing their speed and skill set, due to the fact that they felt like they didn't have to. Being over 6'3", and wieghing over 200 lbs was a rare advantage.. Therefore, the smaller, quicker technicians ultimately became better fighters.. As time went on however, being big became only one part of the equation. Larger men were more and more common, and only the more agile, durable and skilled ones prevailed.

Over the years co ordination among men ,once considered giants has improved out of all recognition,your points are well taken.

guilalah

03-03-2010, 02:26 PM

Marciano knocks Dunkhorst 30 feet into the air:happy; Ed comes down and crushes The Rock.:shock:

I just don't see how Rocky is going to pull this one out.:|

TheGreatA

03-03-2010, 02:34 PM

Marciano would have stood no chance against Charley Powell.

[Only registered and activated users can see links]

[Only registered and activated users can see links]

6'4, 225 pounds. Marciano said Powell could be the man to beat him and ducked him.

mr. magoo

03-03-2010, 02:58 PM

6'4, 225 pounds. Marciano said Powell could be the man to beat him and ducked him.

That seems a bit strange to me, given the time frames consisting of when Marciano retired and Powell's standing at that point.. When Rocky fought his last match against Archie Moore in September of 1955, Charlie Powell's record was 12-2-1, and had just been recently stopped by Charlie Norkus and Johnny Summerlin.. He also had virtually no wins of note... Frankly, I'm wondering how in the hell Rocky even knew who he was, outside of having a football career.

TheGreatA

03-03-2010, 03:15 PM

That seems a bit strange to me, given the time frames consisting of when Marciano retired and Powell's standing at that point.. When Rocky fought his last match against Archie Moore in September of 1955, Charlie Powell's record was 12-2-1, and had just been recently stopped by Charlie Norkus and Johnny Summerlin.. He also had virtually no wins of note... Frankly, I'm wondering how in the hell Rocky even knew who he was, outside of having a football career.

Marciano did say that Powell would go onto become the next champion after viewing one of his early fights but of course Rocky didn't duck him, Powell was a big guy and an athlete but he wasn't a successful pro. :good

janitor

03-03-2010, 05:00 PM

Show me.

The pictures are in the Pollack book but I cannot find them online.

I could scan them I guess.

he grant

03-03-2010, 05:08 PM

..... and yet you'd favour Bruno over Marciano.

Sure, Bruno had a bigger punch than Primo, but he was equally flakey.
Bruno and Carnera are on the same level, both manufactured fighters who had the physiques to attract the crowds and shrewd managers to build up their records.

Seldon, of course, lies a notch below both. :D

How do you draw comparable match ups between Carnera and Bruno for Rocky ? I keep saying it's not just size but style, skills and size and too many here just pass the buck by focusing on size.

Primo had zero power . How was he going to keep Rocky off him ? Bruno had crushing power and the ability o deliver it behind a very good jab and a huge reach ...

janitor

03-03-2010, 05:12 PM

Marciano did say that Powell would go onto become the next champion after viewing one of his early fights but of course Rocky didn't duck him, Powell was a big guy and an athlete but he wasn't a successful pro. :good

It just goes to show that the challenger that a champion ducks, or has his eye over hios shoulder looking at, is often the last person you would ever expect.

janitor

03-03-2010, 05:13 PM

How do you draw comparable match ups between Carnera and Bruno for Rocky ? I keep saying it's not just size but style, skills and size and too many here just pass the buck by focusing on size.

Primo had zero power . How was he going to keep Rocky off him ? Bruno had crushing power and the ability o deliver it behind a very good jab and a huge reach ...

I suffered too many childhood disapointments at Bruno's hands to pick him over Willard or Carnera.

OLD FOGEY

03-03-2010, 10:01 PM

Marciano did say that Powell would go onto become the next champion after viewing one of his early fights but of course Rocky didn't duck him, Powell was a big guy and an athlete but he wasn't a successful pro. :good

I guessed you were kidding. Shows that people then and now are perhaps overly impressed with size.

Powell never got even into a contender status until a 1959 comeback, but even then he was never a serious top man.

He was the most physically impressive heavy of his era, though, and a top athlete in another sport.

ChrisPontius

03-04-2010, 06:18 AM

The pictures are in the Pollack book but I cannot find them online.

I could scan them I guess.

That would be much appreciated.

ChrisPontius

03-04-2010, 06:20 AM

Janitor has a good point. Dunkhurst was not just fat. He was about 6' 4", I think.

Therefore he was indeed big and fat.

I think a serious point here would be that the fighters under 200 lbs were on the whole much better than the fighters over 200 lbs prior to the 1960's, and so the ATG's generally had their toughest fights against these smaller men. Beating Willard or Carnera was probably not as praiseworthy as beating Schmeling or Charles.

:D

Jokes aside, i agree. Guys like Jeffries, Johnson and Louis were an exception and even them stood only a bit over 200lbs in their primes. I guess nutrition and longer fights are the main factors leading to the increase in size.