Marciano one mans opinion

[RockyMarcianofan00]

Sorry the 'marciano dropped ali' is a total myth. Ali beat Frazier twice, without a doubt. Beat him in manila, not only did he outpoint him (clearly IMO) in the 2nd fight he should of knocked him down int he 2nd round, the ref ****ed it up. There is not one historian on the planet i have come acreoss, or read opinions from that thinks marciano would beat Ali in a trilogy. Marciano wasn't great defensively, didn't move aswell as Frazier, and didn't have the handspeed or accuracy to neutralise Ali on the inside when he would OCASSIONALLY get on the inside. Any person that thinks clearly should conclude Ali would outpoint rocky or stop him on cuts at 2/3 times if not 3/3 times. Marciano barely beat Walcott, hes not going to beat Ali 2/3. Marciano was a great fighter and definately a top 10 if not 5, but probably the most overrated fighter ever. He fought nobody at the peak of their powers. Marciano although usually extremely effective with it, had a very simplistic style and Ali would find too many ways to adapt and neutralise him. The words of a wise historian 'Ali would be too fast and fancy for the rock', simplistic arguement but true.

not really, its cause he was blinded for a few rounds, if it wasn't for those 4 rounds ( i believe it was) then he would have been ahead on pts and would have Ko'd him much earlier so

[SuzieQ49]

heckler u dont give marciano enough credit.


walcott and moore were certainly at there best when they fought rocky, charles fought the finest fight of his career in 1st marciano fight and though he was past it, he was still a great fighter who was extremely dangerous. all 3 were great fighters when they fought marciano


roland lastarza was at his peak, so was layne. louis was far gone, but still a formidable fighter.



i think frazier matches up better vs ali than marciano. but marciano was defintley the better inside fighter than frazier.

[Kid Achilles]

Very true!

And a great article by tommyhearns

But he didn't write that article at all. Robert Bennett did.

[Heckler]

There is always a convenient exscuse. Marciano was loosing on points because Walcott was able to easily outbox him due to the large disparity in SKILL. I give Marciano his due credit, but im going to BLINDLY buy into his fight record. He was undefeated because his opposition was weak, simple. Archie Moore was what 42? and a Light Heavyweight. Archie was at his best in the forties, not in HIS forties. He was a great fighter - and i am not denying this, but often overrated as a result of a couple of numbers that sit beside his name. People never research the circumstances behind these numbers. The only good figher he fought at their peak was Walcott, Ezzard was not at his peak but still put up a brilliant performance. Apart from Walcott, ezzard, and Moore... whom are RARELY in any historians top 10, who did he beat? Roland La Starza one might say.... La Starza was a solid boxer, but nothing spectacular.

Put Joe Frazier, George Foreman, Muhammad Ali, Larry Holmes, Sonny Liston, Joe Louis, maybe even Jack Dempsey and Mike Tyson against Rockys competition... and its quite likely they would be undefeated also.

[SuzieQ49]

There is always a convenient exscuse. Marciano was loosing on points because Walcott was able to easily outbox him due to the large disparity in SKILL

woa woa woa. "easily outbox"?

the fight was close, alot closer than the myth many people buy into.


i had the fight scored 7 rounds to 5 walcott after 12 rounds, as do most people. thats a close fight!


also u forget to mention marciano lost 3 rounds due to blindess! if u take away those 3 rounds he lost BECAUSE HE COULDNT SEE guess what the scores are?


i know a guy who thinks rocky would have knocked walcott out in the 6th or 7th round if he didnt get blinded, because he felt rocky was really starting to get to walcott before he was blinded which shifted the momentum back in walcotts favor.

Archie Moore was what 42? and a Light Heavyweight. Archie was at his best in the forties, not in HIS forties.

archie was 38



archie was a better fighter in early 1950s than in the 1940s



besides archie moore had a long 12 year heavyweight career. archie when he fought marciano was in his heavyweight prime.


i rate moore in my top 35 heavyweights of all time. he deserves it!



lastarza was certainly a very good fighter, a master counterpuncher with great skill. I rate lastarza in my top 20 best heavyweights never to win a title.


joe louis was well past his prime, but he was still a formidable fighter when he fought rocky.

i think even a 1950s joe louis beats zora folley


it took great fighters like rocky and ezzard to beat a 1950s joe louis


rex layne in his short prime was a good heavyweight and dangerous top contender. he beat jersey joe walcott BEFORE walcott won the title and knocked out bob satterfield. layne was 34-1 (27) highly touted # 1 contender from utah. he was being touted as the next heavyweight champion.

layne was never the same fighter after suffering brutal back to back KO losses to marciano and charles.


here is a response from a joe C who saw rex layne fight live

"Throw out the record book on Layne, he was a rugged brawler with a quick, very heavy right. As he got shopworn and discouraged, more and more, he got outworked and beaten down.

But, when he first raged out of Utah -- full of piss and vinegar -- he'd have been a handful for anybody. He could crack with that right."




u say who did he beat?


yet charles, walcott, moore were all still great fighters when they fought rocky. thats 3 great fighters rocky beat.

add good fighters and dangerous top contenders joe louis, roland lastarza, rex layne, harry kid mathews



i mean what makes holmes compettion so much better? what makes listons so much better? what makes lennox lewis's so much better?



rocky lacks quantity. he did not beat a wide range of good depth which is why i take off points. but he did beat great list of quality.


rocky could have and probably should have fought a bob baker, nino valdes, earl walls, bob satterfield, clarence henry, hurricane jackson, but fact is he didnt need to fight these guys.

[Marvelous63]

heckler u dont give marciano enough credit.


walcott and moore were certainly at there best when they fought rocky, charles fought the finest fight of his career in 1st marciano fight and though he was past it, he was still a great fighter who was extremely dangerous. all 3 were great fighters when they fought marciano


roland lastarza was at his peak, so was layne. louis was far gone, but still a formidable fighter.



i think frazier matches up better vs ali than marciano. but marciano was defintley the better inside fighter than frazier.

Ali is a bad matchup for Rocky. Ali's sharp, stinging punches would open up some bad cuts or some serious swelling on rocky. IMO, the fight gets stopped in somewhere around the 10th. with Ali winning about 8 of the rounds

[dwidsid3d]

Rocky Marciano would lose against George Foreman. Too big and powerful with a style that was made for swarmers such as Marciano.
Foreman by brutal tko.

In a fight versus Lennox Lewis, I believe Marciano could win. Lewis would be alot bigger and would make it difficult for Marciano with his reach and power. How ever, Marciano would never give up and Lewis would tire after 7-8 rounds. Considering Lewis´ weak chin, Marciano would only need one solid shot. A tired, worn down Lewis would not be able to keep Marciano off him for long, and sooner or later the "Susie Q" would reach its target.
Marciano by ko.

Roy Jones Jr would present a bigger problem for Marciano than would Lewis in my opinion. His speed and incredible boxing ability would make it very difficult for Marciano to catch him. But the key would be Marcianos stamina and heart. He would keep on coming. Even though Jones would control the fight and be way ahead on the score cards, Marciano would more likely than not get to him in the later rounds.
Marciano by late ko.

Muhammad Ali would most likely defeat Marciano by decision (or possibly by cut - Marciano cut easily and Ali had a ripping jab). How ever, he would have to struggle for his victory. This would be no walk in the park for Ali. Marciano would put pressure on him and make him fight. This is something Ali always hated, and he was in great disadvantage against a good swarmer. Still, Ali had lots of stamina and a solid chin. He fought some of the hardest punchers the ring has ever seen, and was never knocked out. This gives him the edge.
Ali by UD.

Larry Holmes would struggle even more than would Ali, but I also see him surviving to win by decision. He had an iron chin and was very skillful with an incredible jab. A late knockout by Marciano would not surprise me very much, but 2 out of 3 times, Holmes makes it to the final bell and takes home a comfortable win.
Holmes by UD.

A Marciano-Toney fight would be an all out war. Marciano would make this a slugfest, and no way in hell would Toney survive trading bombs with Marciano. His power, chin, heart and stamina makes it impossible for Toney to defeat him.
Marciano by ko.

V. Klitschko is a big man, but I see Marciano using his lesser height to his advantage, moving in under Klitschkos reach and pounding his body with ripping shots. Then he would follow up with some crushing blows to the head, and Vitali sucks canvas.
Marciano by early ko.

YOUR JUST A ****** RACIST