Rocky Marciano

[hhascup]

Well for the record I wasn't assuming anything I just asked to clarify. I kind of figured you were responding the original question, just wanted to make sure. On a sidenote, I have always been of a mind that Rocky is equally overrated as much as he is underrated.

I agree!

He is over rated because of his undefeated record.

He is under rated because of the opponents he fought.

Of all the boxers we rate, Rocky is actually one of the hardest because of this.

[Hawkins]

I agree!

He is over rated because of his undefeated record.

He is under rated because of the opponents he fought.

Of all the boxers we rate, Rocky is actually one of the hardest because of this.

I agree, people focus way too much on his record and ignore the fact that he took on, and defeated, every notable contender of his era. You're 100% correct it makes him very hard to rate accurately.

Curiously, how do you go about rating fighters? Do you compare then in a versus way or do you evaluate them based on what they did on their respective eras?

[hhascup]

I agree, people focus way too much on his record and ignore the fact that he took on, and defeated, every notable contender of his era. You're 100% correct it makes him very hard to rate accurately.

Curiously, how do you go about rating fighters? Do you compare then in a versus way or do you evaluate them based on what they did on their respective eras?

Actually a little of both. I like to look at who each boxer beat and then compare the opponents they beat with the opponents of the other boxers.

For example:

Because some Heavyweight Champions beat the same opponent more then once, try matching Ali's Top Opponents that he beat against any other Heavyweight Champion.


Here's all the Boxers that Ali BEAT that were rated #3 or above at one time or another:

.......Opponent.....Rating...Record at the time they fought Ali:



1. George Foreman (CH) 40-0-0 vs.
2. Joe Frazier (CH) 30-1-0 vs.
3. Joe Frazier (CH) 32-2-0 vs.
4. Sonny Liston (CH) 35-1-0 vs.
5. Sonny Liston (CH) 35-2-0 vs.
6. Ken Norton (1) 30-1-0 vs.
7. Ken Norton (1) 37-3-0 vs.
8. Floyd Patterson (CH) 43-4-0 vs.
9. Floyd Patterson (CH) 55-7-1 vs.
10. Jerry Quarry (1) 37-4-4 vs.
11. Jerry Quarry (1) 43-5-4 vs.
12. Oscar Bonavena (2) 46-6-1 vs.
13..Jimmy Ellis (2) 30-6-0 vs.
14. Zora Folley (1) 74-7-4 vs.
15. Ernie Terrell (1) 38-4-0 vs.
16. George Chuvalo (3) 34-11-2 vs.
17. George Chuvalo (3) 66-17-2 vs.
18. Ron Lyle (3) 30-2-1 vs.
19. Earnie Shavers (3) 54-5-1 vs.
20. Joe Bugner (3) 43-4-1 vs.
21. Joe Bugner (3) 51-6-1 vs.
22. Bob Foster (CH) 49-5-0 vs.
23. Mac Foster (1) 28-1-0 vs.
24. Karl Mildenberger (1) 49-2-3 vs.
25. Archie Moore (LH-CH) - (1) 184-22-11 vs.
26. Jimmy Young (1) 17-4-2 vs.
27. Cleveland Williams (3) 65-5-1 vs.
28. Doug Jones (2) 21-3-1 vs.
29. Henry Cooper (2) 27-8-1 vs.
30. Henry Cooper (2) 33-11-1 vs.
31. Leon Spinks (CH) 7-0-1 vs.


Try matching these against any other heavyweight opponents that they beat and you will see that Ali is in a Class by himself.


You can do this with any boxer and match them up. It might not tell you who would win, BUT it will most likely tell you who fought and beat the better competition.



This is not the only thing I go by. I also have tons of other STATS, BUT I also look at tons of tapes and I listen to fellow historians and experts as well.

I also try to take into consideration that if an oldtimer fought today, he would be bigger and better. In every sport, the athletics get a little faster, bigger and stronger, and boxing is no different.


I also know that styles make fights and nobody is unbeatable. How many people ever heard of Henry Brimm or Jose Basora, as they both fought draws with Sugar Ray Robinson when Sugar was in his prime. Ralph Tiger Jones after losing 5 straight bouts, won just about every round against Robinson. Several months later Jones was shutout by Bobo Olson, then Robinson stopped Olson twice, this all happened less then a year and a half.

[Hawkins]

Actually a little of both. I like to look at who each boxer beat and then compare the opponents they beat with the opponents of the other boxers.

For example:

Because some Heavyweight Champions beat the same opponent more then once, try matching Ali's Top Opponents that he beat against any other Heavyweight Champion.


Here's all the Boxers that Ali BEAT that were rated #3 or above at one time or another:

.......Opponent.....Rating...Record at the time they fought Ali:



1. George Foreman (CH) 40-0-0 vs.
2. Joe Frazier (CH) 30-1-0 vs.
3. Joe Frazier (CH) 32-2-0 vs.
4. Sonny Liston (CH) 35-1-0 vs.
5. Sonny Liston (CH) 35-2-0 vs.
6. Ken Norton (1) 30-1-0 vs.
7. Ken Norton (1) 37-3-0 vs.
8. Floyd Patterson (CH) 43-4-0 vs.
9. Floyd Patterson (CH) 55-7-1 vs.
10. Jerry Quarry (1) 37-4-4 vs.
11. Jerry Quarry (1) 43-5-4 vs.
12. Oscar Bonavena (2) 46-6-1 vs.
13..Jimmy Ellis (2) 30-6-0 vs.
14. Zora Folley (1) 74-7-4 vs.
15. Ernie Terrell (1) 38-4-0 vs.
16. George Chuvalo (3) 34-11-2 vs.
17. George Chuvalo (3) 66-17-2 vs.
18. Ron Lyle (3) 30-2-1 vs.
19. Earnie Shavers (3) 54-5-1 vs.
20. Joe Bugner (3) 43-4-1 vs.
21. Joe Bugner (3) 51-6-1 vs.
22. Bob Foster (CH) 49-5-0 vs.
23. Mac Foster (1) 28-1-0 vs.
24. Karl Mildenberger (1) 49-2-3 vs.
25. Archie Moore (LH-CH) - (1) 184-22-11 vs.
26. Jimmy Young (1) 17-4-2 vs.
27. Cleveland Williams (3) 65-5-1 vs.
28. Doug Jones (2) 21-3-1 vs.
29. Henry Cooper (2) 27-8-1 vs.
30. Henry Cooper (2) 33-11-1 vs.
31. Leon Spinks (CH) 7-0-1 vs.


Try matching these against any other heavyweight opponents that they beat and you will see that Ali is in a Class by himself.


You can do this with any boxer and match them up. It might not tell you who would win, BUT it will most likely tell you who fought and beat the better competition.



This is not the only thing I go by. I also have tons of other STATS, BUT I also look at tons of tapes and I listen to fellow historians and experts as well.

I also try to take into consideration that if an oldtimer fought today, he would be bigger and better. In every sport, the athletics get a little faster, bigger and stronger, and boxing is no different.

So you put two fighters side by side and see how they compare against similar competition or their opposition as a whole?

I take a similar approach, nowhere as indepth as you. However I try to look at a fighters opposition and gauge his skill level against a similar opponent I'm putting him head to head with. I also try and compare opposition and see how each did against certain fighters.

Finally I match them up, based on skills, in a head-to-head 'bout' and try to imagine the outcome based on all I know about both guys and how they perform against certain types of opposition.

[micky_knox]

Rocky was awesome

that should be in no doubt to anybody

[hhascup]

So you put two fighters side by side and see how they compare against similar competition or their opposition as a whole?

I take a similar approach, nowhere as indepth as you. However I try to look at a fighters opposition and gauge his skill level against a similar opponent I'm putting him head to head with. I also try and compare opposition and see how each did against certain fighters.

Finally I match them up, based on skills, in a head-to-head 'bout' and try to imagine the outcome based on all I know about both guys and how they perform against certain types of opposition.

Yes, I also take that into consideration. There is so much that you can put into it and it never ends.

Thanks, Henry

[metalinmybrain]

The second fight Charles almost got a stoppage so he couldn't have been doing that badly at the time. Yes he was old but so was Marciano. It was Rocky's 4th to last and 3rd to last fights of his career. If they were both in their primes Rocky would have killed Charles. Bottom line is Rocky Marciano was a better fighter than Ezzard Charles ever was.

That is where you are out of place and most certainly wrong! Ezzard Charles was a light heavyweight who fought his best in that division. He was also known for getting knocked out cold, with over 20 loses. He started fighting long before Marciano even touched a pair of gloves and has obviously been in twice as much wars as Marciano even seen! If you compare ones record you would realize that for a light heavyweight Charles did it pretty good as a heavyweight. He not only took Marciano the distance but proved that even a decent not great light heavyweight in Ezzard Charles can hang with the leader of the heavyweight division of the 50's, when in fact Charles era was in the late 40's. Hell even an old Jersey Joe Walcott knocked a younger fresher Ezzard Charles out faster than Rocky did in their rematch.

Rocky Marciano is a better fighter than Charles because Charles is a boxer. Had Charles been a natural heavyweight I think he would have taken the 50's by storm, too bad the only competition even if elderly were light heavyweights that Rocky Marciano seemed to have fed on most of his lackluster career!

[Hawkins]

That is where you are out of place and most certainly wrong! Ezzard Charles was a light heavyweight who fought his best in that division. He was also known for getting knocked out cold, with over 20 loses. He started fighting long before Marciano even touched a pair of gloves and has obviously been in twice as much wars as Marciano even seen! If you compare ones record you would realize that for a light heavyweight Charles did it pretty good as a heavyweight. He not only took Marciano the distance but proved that even a decent not great light heavyweight in Ezzard Charles can hang with the leader of the heavyweight division of the 50's, when in fact Charles era was in the late 40's. Hell even an old Jersey Joe Walcott knocked a younger fresher Ezzard Charles out faster than Rocky did in their rematch.

Rocky Marciano is a better fighter than Charles because Charles is a boxer. Had Charles been a natural heavyweight I think he would have taken the 50's by storm, too bad the only competition even if elderly were light heavyweights that Rocky Marciano seemed to have fed on most of his lackluster career!

Known for getting knocked out cold? Ummm...I'm not sure where you are getting your facts. But between 1940 until the second Marciano fight Ezzard was TKO'd one time. His other KO losses came after he was 33, a veteran of over 90 fights and clearly on the downside of his career.

Also, alot of people would take major issue with you allowing Ezzard Charles being a 'decent' not great LH. Many people, myself included, have him as the #1 LH in history. Having a tough fight with Ezzard Charles isn't a knock on Rocky, rather a testament to the caliber of fighter the Cincinnati Cobra was.

[metalinmybrain]

The second fight Charles almost got a stoppage so he couldn't have been doing that badly at the time. Yes he was old but so was Marciano. It was Rocky's 4th to last and 3rd to last fights of his career. If they were both in their primes Rocky would have killed Charles. Bottom line is Rocky Marciano was a better fighter than Ezzard Charles ever was.

Everyone I am new to this site but I do know allot about boxing and it's history. Just wanted to say hello!

[metalinmybrain]

No wonder there are far better boxing forum sites, you cowards can't take competition so you delete it's comments right?! Cowards that is all you folks are "cowards". I know I know........the truth does hurt, Tyson would murder Marciano where he stands literally stands!!!!

I can't believe that you wouldn't welcome an honest opinion, how is this site still running?