Rocky Marciano

[Hawkins]

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?

What are you talking about? Which comment got deleted?

[metalinmybrain]

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.

I wouldn't necessarily put it that way "knocked out cold", just wanted to ****e up the conversation by throwing in a little harmless fire that's all. One thing is for sure, he was knocked down allot!!! Most of his loses ended by decision because of the knock downs he would suffer. Had allot of heart but not that great of a chin in terms of heavyweight! For as many fights as he had, light heavyweight was where it was at for Charles. He was really intimidated by Rocky Marciano, the guy was at the top of heavyweight division and a hard puncher who relentlessly never stop coming forward. Ezzard isn't the type of fighter who does well against pressure fighters, it is where he gets caught most of the time is in the inside.

I would say Charles is gifted, he is arguably the best light heavyweight and did beat Archie Moore twice. One thing that stood out about Charles though, Archie Moore had over one hundred more fights than Charles, was older and as well a natural light heavyweight. Moore dominated as a heavyweight in terms of coming up a weight class. He has been in their with the best of the best and given them his all. Archie Moore defeated adversity, had more heart than anyone in the history of boxing because it was something he loved to do. Charles moved up to the heavyweight division and literally got derailed, he should have stayed a light heavyweight, maybe then we wouldn't be looking at his record and thinking, damn 25 loses and only 90 fights? Age has nothing to do with it buddy, Archie Moore has proven that because not only is he older with more fights under his card, he fought on longer than Charles as a heavyweight and ducked no one!!!! To this day, I still think Floyd Patterson would have slept Charles real good!

[metalinmybrain]

What are you talking about? Which comment got deleted?

Sorry about that seriously I am, I was multi tasking and didn't take the time to over look the whole situation. I guess my comment didn't load right away, but it did end up showing up so I am really sorry and didn't mean to offend.

[Hawkins]

I wouldn't necessarily put it that way "knocked out cold", just wanted to ****e up the conversation by throwing in a little harmless fire that's all. One thing is for sure, he was knocked down allot!!! Most of his loses ended by decision because of the knock downs he would suffer. Had allot of heart but not that great of a chin in terms of heavyweight! For as many fights as he had, light heavyweight was where it was at for Charles. He was really intimidated by Rocky Marciano, the guy was at the top of heavyweight division and a hard puncher who relentlessly never stop coming forward. Ezzard isn't the type of fighter who does well against pressure fighters, it is where he gets caught most of the time is in the inside.

I would say Charles is gifted, he is arguably the best light heavyweight and did beat Archie Moore twice. One thing that stood out about Charles though, Archie Moore had over one hundred more fights than Charles, was older and as well a natural light heavyweight. Moore dominated as a heavyweight in terms of coming up a weight class. He has been in their with the best of the best and given them his all. Archie Moore defeated adversity, had more heart than anyone in the history of boxing because it was something he loved to do. Charles moved up to the heavyweight division and literally got derailed, he should have stayed a light heavyweight, maybe then we wouldn't be looking at his record and thinking, damn 25 loses and only 90 fights? Age has nothing to do with it buddy, Archie Moore has proven that because not only is he older with more fights under his card, he fought on longer than Charles as a heavyweight and ducked no one!!!! To this day, I still think Floyd Patterson would have slept Charles real good!

Before I go any further, I must ask...what does this line mean? I don't understand what that is implying.

"Most of his loses ended by decision because of the knock downs he would suffer"

One thing you have to realize is that 90% of Ezzard Charles 25 losses came when he was way past his peak. You make it sound as if he was getting blown out in his prime which is clearly not the case.

Anyways, let us proceed...

Archie moved up and dominated? Ezzard got derailed? Last time I checked Archie Moore never won the heavyweight championship and Ezzard Charles did. Defended it 8 times too. Face it, Archie was a great light heavy but an average heavyweight.

Anywho, the two fights Ezzard Charles had with Rocky Marciano were not some onesided affair like you are allegedly saying. The first one Ezzard lost by decision and it was a very close fight. The second Ezzard was ahead, not only that the fight was in danger of being stopped because of the horrendous cut Rocky had on the end of his nose. Ezzard ended up getting KO'd but c'mon you are totally belittling Ezzard's accomplishment as a heavyweight in order to build up Rocky Marciano.

I respect everyones opinion but you are totally distorting the facts in this case. Ezzard was TKO'd ONCE before his second fight with Rocky and that was in a span of 14-15 years and somewhere in the neighborhood of 70 fights so the assertion that he had an iffy chin is very questionable.

Another point, I don't see where you get that he was intimidated by Rocky. Because everything points to otherwise.

Lastly, age has nothing to do with it? I beg to differ. Archie Moore is an anomoly. He's the rare example of an athlete competing at a high level after his prime has long past. Archie did adapt his style to compensate, but come on, he's the exception not the rule.

One last thing, the few posts you have made in this Marciano thread have seemingly been at the expense of Ezzard Charles. To give you a picture of the overall caliber of fighter he was, look at this list of really good/great fighters he defeated throughout his career.

Charley Burley
Joey Maxim
Archie Moore
Lloyd Marshall
Jersey Joe Walcott
Lee Oma
Joey Maxim
Jimmy Bivins
Joe Louis (an older Joe Louis, but still one heck of an accomplishment for as you say a 'decent not great light heavyweight' and when he moved up to heavyweight he 'literally got derailed')

I don't know if it's me..but that's not the resume of a decent/not great light heavyweight or a heavyweight that got derailed.

[metalinmybrain]

lol I knew you would say that, thats adorable. Haha at me being a 'nutthugger' that talks garbage. I'm a fan but not biased.
Have you watched the fight and seen interviews or just looked at the records? That was one of Walcott's greatest fights up until the knockout. He was boxing beautifully and even surprised the crowd with a first round knockdown.
I took this thread as being a Marciano appreciation thread; similar to the Ali thread I was involved in. Now it doesn't seem that way.

I have to say that Marciano was a great fighter, he was relentless and never gave up had the heart of a champion. One thing that bothers me as well as others who know a thing or two. Rocky Marciano was a great untested heavyweight. He ran into a division that was nothing short of lackluster. Fought very old opposition and a hand full of club fighters. There was no doubting that Rocky had talent, may have not had the greatest of defense but his giant heart is what made up for it. As you get older your reflexes tend to evaporate and your more prone to injury without substantial rest periods in between, something that Larry Holmes did against Mike Tyson.

Walcott was on his decline far before facing Marciano and wasn't performing at an elite level like he had a decade before. Had we witnessed Marciano fight out of his peak maybe then you would have seen how much of a great talent Rocky really was. Fights with Floyd Patterson Sonny Liston and Muhammad Ali all would have played big roles for how great Marciano was, simply because they would have all been younger than him, not older. One thing Marciano most certainly did not face nor find in the 50's, was a young talent with threat. Too many blown up light heavyweights trying to make it big in the heavyweight division of the 50's not enough natural heavyweight talent with age to test Marciano. With all the suffering he did go through with cuts and knockdowns etc. against lighter opponents gave the impression that either his defense is on ghost shield or he can't take a hit like we thought? All I am saying is that a legit prime for prime great heavyweight put into the era of Rocky Marciano and we would have witnessed something for the ages, a real test for Rocky Marciano to determine how good he was.!!

Joe Walcott - Joe Louis 30's 40's champions, over the hill in the 50's. Walcott with 51 wins and 18 doesn't make him so great. Joe Louis was way past it and made his retirement final far before his fight with Marciano. He was forced to continue fighting for endorsements and audience choice, he didn't want to fight people!! Joe was screwed bad as he served his army with no questions asked only to get ****ed real hard in the end for doing the right thing. The people wanted to see Joe Louis go down against Rocky Marciano for the pleasure of knowing a white man knocked him out! Ezzard Charles was never a great heavyweight champion, his 25 loses give a perfect example of the slumps he generated through out his career. Archie Moore the man who contains the biggest heart out of all fighter including Marciano, was far past it and approaching an age old enough to have been Rocky's father! He managed to rock the "rock" with one punch that sent Rocky to the canvas for a two count, to the shock of everyone this was a sign that Rocky could be hurt, as old as Archie Moore was and as a natural light heavyweight he gave Rocky a great fight. Rocky made the smartest move in his career by retiring while he did. He would have entered into his slump just like every boxer goes through. I honestly don't think that the Floyd Patterson who knocked Archie Moore out in 5 rounds the very next year after Marciano faced Moore would have been stopped by Rocky Marciano and that would have been his first lose to his career.


p.s. I'm just a white guy who likes to tell the truth more than he likes to sugarcoat it! Lets get real here, I'm not saying Rocky Marciano wasn't a great boxer because he was and a real ****ing bull in the ring. I just know one thing is for sure Rocky Marciano was UN tested and there is no changing that fact if you look at the records!

[hemichromis]

to the untrained eye marcaino is a slugger who diod nopthing but go in there and punch widly till he won.

if however you watch closely you'll see his head was very illusive his style very deceptive and he was a smarter fighter than people give him credit for.

if a short stocky guy like marciano was in today's era fighting the way m,arcaino did he would certainly make waves even amongst the current bloated fighters.

all the best fighters were hideously unorthodox:

ali
jones jr
duran
marciano
leonard
tyson
foreman
frazier

the list goes on and on

[metalinmybrain]

Before I go any further, I must ask...what does this line mean? I don't understand what that is implying.

"Most of his loses ended by decision because of the knock downs he would suffer"

One thing you have to realize is that 90% of Ezzard Charles 25 losses came when he was way past his peak. You make it sound as if he was getting blown out in his prime which is clearly not the case.

Anyways, let us proceed...

Archie moved up and dominated? Ezzard got derailed? Last time I checked Archie Moore never won the heavyweight championship and Ezzard Charles did. Defended it 8 times too. Face it, Archie was a great light heavy but an average heavyweight.

Anywho, the two fights Ezzard Charles had with Rocky Marciano were not some onesided affair like you are allegedly saying. The first one Ezzard lost by decision and it was a very close fight. The second Ezzard was ahead, not only that the fight was in danger of being stopped because of the horrendous cut Rocky had on the end of his nose. Ezzard ended up getting KO'd but c'mon you are totally belittling Ezzard's accomplishment as a heavyweight in order to build up Rocky Marciano.

I respect everyones opinion but you are totally distorting the facts in this case. Ezzard was TKO'd ONCE before his second fight with Rocky and that was in a span of 14-15 years and somewhere in the neighborhood of 70 fights so the assertion that he had an iffy chin is very questionable.

Another point, I don't see where you get that he was intimidated by Rocky. Because everything points to otherwise.

Lastly, age has nothing to do with it? I beg to differ. Archie Moore is an anomoly. He's the rare example of an athlete competing at a high level after his prime has long past. Archie did adapt his style to compensate, but come on, he's the exception not the rule.

One last thing, the few posts you have made in this Marciano thread have seemingly been at the expense of Ezzard Charles. To give you a picture of the overall caliber of fighter he was, look at this list of really good/great fighters he defeated throughout his career.

Charley Burley
Joey Maxim
Archie Moore
Lloyd Marshall
Jersey Joe Walcott
Lee Oma
Joey Maxim
Jimmy Bivins
Joe Louis (an older Joe Louis, but still one heck of an accomplishment for as you say a 'decent not great light heavyweight' and when he moved up to heavyweight he 'literally got derailed')

I don't know if it's me..but that's not the resume of a decent/not great light heavyweight or a heavyweight that got derailed.

Face it pal, 25 loses isn't going to cut it! This obviously shows that he went through declines, huge ****ing slumps where he would win then all of the sudden lose. He wasn't great just ran into a slump of an era. Rocky Marciano fought in a very weak era, Charles beating a very aged Joe Louis for his title doesn't prove anything but that Charles can beat an aged Joe Louis. The 30's Louis would have sent Ezzard Charles ass right into the bum of the month club list of fighters Joe faced and defeated defending his title!

Who are you kidding pal? Jimmy Bivin with his 25 loses and less wins than Charles or Joey Maxim with his 29 loses and fixed win over Patterson. Wait maybe Lee Oma and his 28 loses and wait are you kidding me pal a middleweight named Charley Burley who might I add wasn't even decent please! Ezzard Charles isn't spectacular is you look at the records it will show that he was a fighter who could be beaten often.

Looking at the future great and decent heavyweights and you will notice that Ezzard Charles just has way too many loses on his card to even compare.

[Hawkins]

Face it pal, 25 loses isn't going to cut it! This obviously shows that he went through declines, huge ****ing slumps where he would win then all of the sudden lose. He wasn't great just ran into a slump of an era. Rocky Marciano fought in a very weak era, Charles beating a very aged Joe Louis for his title doesn't prove anything but that Charles can beat an aged Joe Louis. The 30's Louis would have sent Ezzard Charles ass right into the bum of the month club list of fighters Joe faced and defeated defending his title!

Who are you kidding pal? Jimmy Bivin with his 25 loses and less wins than Charles or Joey Maxim with his 29 loses and fixed win over Patterson. Wait maybe Lee Oma and his 28 loses and wait are you kidding me pal a middleweight named Charley Burley who might I add wasn't even decent please! Ezzard Charles isn't spectacular is you look at the records it will show that he was a fighter who could be beaten often.

Looking at the future great and decent heavyweights and you will notice that Ezzard Charles just has way too many loses on his card to even compare.

First off, Ezzard didn't beat Joe Louis for the heavyweight title. He beat Joe Walcott, but because Joe Louis had retired champion Ezzard was universally recognized as the champion after the fight.

It's clear you base way too much of your assesment of a fighter on W-L. I mean Ray Robinson lost 19 fights - does that him crap in your eyes too?

In an era when the best routinely fought the best its not unheard of to have a few losses. Do you even know who these guys are? Charley Burley not decent????? Are you joking???? On most other forums that would end the discussion.

Let me make one simple suggestion. Before you start making these outrageous statements against all time great fighters you should do a little research and find out exactly who they are.

[metalinmybrain]

First off, Ezzard didn't beat Joe Louis for the heavyweight title. He beat Joe Walcott, but because Joe Louis had retired champion Ezzard was universally recognized as the champion after the fight.

It's clear you base way too much of your assesment of a fighter on W-L. I mean Ray Robinson lost 19 fights - does that him crap in your eyes too?

In an era when the best routinely fought the best its not unheard of to have a few losses. Do you even know who these guys are? Charley Burley not decent????? Are you joking???? On most other forums that would end the discussion.

Let me make one simple suggestion. Before you start making these outrageous statements against all time great fighters you should do a little research and find out exactly who they are.

Are you ****ing kidding me pal? Ray Robinson is a god next to Charles or even Marciano for that matter, you can't compare the two you idiot, how many more fights has Robinson been in? **** your lost pal, 202 fights with 19 loses is nothing to be ashamed of but everything to be proud of! For every 100 fights Robinson lost 10 of them, give me a break ******* face it Ezzard Charles wasn't that great and it is why he ranks so low in the all time greats. For as many fights he had he shouldn't have lost 25 times if he was great!

[Hawkins]

Are you ****ing kidding me pal? Ray Robinson is a god next to Charles or even Marciano for that matter, you can't compare the two you idiot, how many more fights has Robinson been in? **** your lost pal, 202 fights with 19 loses is nothing to be ashamed of but everything to be proud of! For every 100 fights Robinson lost 10 of them, give me a break ******* face it Ezzard Charles wasn't that great and it is why he ranks so low in the all time greats. For as many fights he had he shouldn't have lost 25 times if he was great!

I'm lost?

I'm not the one who spent an entire post running down all-time great fighters because they had a few losses on their record. Seriously, before you start saying things like that you need to look into a fighters history a little more if not you're the one who is going to look foolish.

Nice name calling, real mature display there buddy. How old are you? 10? Maybe when you do a little more research and grow up abit we can have a discussion like normal boxing fans.