Ending The Moore and Walcott myth once and for all

[SABBATH]

walcott looked pretty damm chizzled and in excellent shape in his mid 30s, i didnt notice any decrease in his reflexes eitehr

Looking damn chisled and in excellent shape is in now way an indication that a fighter is in his prime. If that were the case I would say Bernard Hokins would have to be in his prime. It's boxing not a bodybuilding contest.

Reflexes are gauged by the time it takes to recieve an optical stimulis (see a punch coming) process the information in the brain (identify then decide what to do) then to react (counterpunch, duck, block etc...). In boxing you cannot gauge reflexes by film. Reflexes are measured in hundredths of a second.

[tommyhearns804]

Archie Moore was 42 or older.Moore lied about his age.Number 2 no fighter was ever in his prime into there 40's again if Ali was past his prime at 30 then Moore and Walcott was past their primes.Moore also had way over 200 fights in his career.The wear and tear on his body was really high so even in his 30's he wouldnt of been as fresh as a fighter who had lets say 40 fights by the time they were 30.
Walcott beat Charles and your point is?Charles was at the tell end of his career as well.Not to mention Charles like Moore was both naturally middleweights.Both Of them spent at least 7 years weighing between 155 and 160.So Walcott beating a man who was naturally 30 pounds smaller than him proves what?
As i said even if Moore was 25 when he fought Marciano it wouldnt mean anything.Moore was knocked out in his 20's by guys his own weight class which again was middleweight alot easier than Marciano knocked him out.Both Walcott and Charles were knocked out several times before they fought Marciano alot quicker than Marciano could do.
Were Walcott,Charles, or Moore 230 pound heavyweights?So at best you could say Marciano was good at knocking out guys who were either past their primes or 30 pounds smaller than he was.Which still doesnt make him the greatest heavyweight or all time or at heavyweight period.

[RockyMarcianofan00]

Archie Moore was 42 or older.Moore lied about his age.Number 2 no fighter was ever in his prime into there 40's again if Ali was past his prime at 30 then Moore and Walcott was past their primes.Moore also had way over 200 fights in his career.The wear and tear on his body was really high so even in his 30's he wouldnt of been as fresh as a fighter who had lets say 40 fights by the time they were 30.
Walcott beat Charles and your point is?Charles was at the tell end of his career as well.Not to mention Charles like Moore was both naturally middleweights.Both Of them spent at least 7 years weighing between 155 and 160.So Walcott beating a man who was naturally 30 pounds smaller than him proves what?
As i said even if Moore was 25 when he fought Marciano it wouldnt mean anything.Moore was knocked out in his 20's by guys his own weight class which again was middleweight alot easier than Marciano knocked him out.Both Walcott and Charles were knocked out several times before they fought Marciano alot quicker than Marciano could do.
Were Walcott,Charles, or Moore 230 pound heavyweights?So at best you could say Marciano was good at knocking out guys who were either past their primes or 30 pounds smaller than he was.Which still doesnt make him the greatest heavyweight or all time or at heavyweight period.

Well then lets think about this one then
your defense is that Marciano couldn't be an all time great because guys lighter then him knocked out his opponents faster. Well then lets look at some facts off the top of my head. Towards the end of Marciano's career he stopped training as hard as he had previously. As he put it "the smell of the gym just wasn't as appealing as it was before. When this happens you know its time to retire" (or something like that). So yes if Marciano was well condtioned but not well trained then he's going to struggle alittle more against Archie Moore.
Continuing with this its widely known that Marciano's boxing skill was sub-par so a very popular method against Marciano was to try and box him and keep him away. If he can't get inside on you that obscures him. I think a Journeyman who had over 200 fights prime or not would have some idea of how to keep somebody away from him. Even so This would catch up with him.
as for the whole KO thing, yes it took Marciano 9 rounds to KO Moore. Lets review Moore's other KO's
Moore was KO'd three other times
Jimmy Bivins KO'd him in 6 - I'd like to point out that moore was outweighed by about 20 pounds for this bout so natrually he's going to have a disadvantage. This is also if i'm not mistaken right around the time Moore went up in weight so of course he's going to need time to adjust

His next KO loss came courtesy of Ezzard Charles. Ezzard Charles was also probably one of the greatest LHW's of all time. Charles KO Moore 8- thats not so far off Rocky's KO (9). According to what i read Moore almost had Charles KO'd when Charles landed a spectacular combination that floored Moore. So thats not so bad. They were about the same weight and it took a near prime Charles about as long as a declining Marciano to KO him.

Next KO loss was via Leonard Marrow KO1. In my reading i do remember reading somewhere that Archie was having some sort of problem before the fight but i can't find that piece at the moment. Anyway The guy was the LHW champ of California so you do have to assume he has some sort of skill, Most of all though anybody can land a lucky shot and KO somebody or wobble them and set them up for a KO. The great thing about boxing is one punch can change the whole fight. its Plausible for A featherweight to KO a Heavyweight. All somebody has to do is land a good punch cleanly in the Right place and your out.

Examples: Chuck Wepner- Sonny Liston TKO'd Chuck Wepner in 10 rounds. And yet Ali was able to KO Liston in one prior to this fight. Five years Later it took Ali 15 rounds to TKO Wepner. It shows you that anything can happen

Another one of my favorites is the fact that Joe Frazier beat Muhammad Ali, George Foreman beat Joe Frazier. Technically this means that Foreman should beat Ali, yet Ali KO'd Foreman for the first time in George's Career. The night before had you placed a bet on that out come i garuntee they would have laughed at you.

The fact is Just because it takes longer for one fighter to KO another fighter doesn't mean that that fighter isn't as good. The reason Wepner was able to go the 15 rounds with Ali was because he took it seriously enough to train harder then he did for any time before. Does that make Liston better then Ali, no but with what your saying it does.

[butterfly1964]

Well then lets think about this one then
your defense is that Marciano couldn't be an all time great because guys lighter then him knocked out his opponents faster. Well then lets look at some facts off the top of my head. Towards the end of Marciano's career he stopped training as hard as he had previously. As he put it "the smell of the gym just wasn't as appealing as it was before. When this happens you know its time to retire" (or something like that). So yes if Marciano was well condtioned but not well trained then he's going to struggle alittle more against Archie Moore.
Continuing with this its widely known that Marciano's boxing skill was sub-par so a very popular method against Marciano was to try and box him and keep him away. If he can't get inside on you that obscures him. I think a Journeyman who had over 200 fights prime or not would have some idea of how to keep somebody away from him. Even so This would catch up with him.
as for the whole KO thing, yes it took Marciano 9 rounds to KO Moore. Lets review Moore's other KO's
Moore was KO'd three other times
Jimmy Bivins KO'd him in 6 - I'd like to point out that moore was outweighed by about 20 pounds for this bout so natrually he's going to have a disadvantage. This is also if i'm not mistaken right around the time Moore went up in weight so of course he's going to need time to adjust

His next KO loss came courtesy of Ezzard Charles. Ezzard Charles was also probably one of the greatest LHW's of all time. Charles KO Moore 8- thats not so far off Rocky's KO (9). According to what i read Moore almost had Charles KO'd when Charles landed a spectacular combination that floored Moore. So thats not so bad. They were about the same weight and it took a near prime Charles about as long as a declining Marciano to KO him.

Next KO loss was via Leonard Marrow KO1. In my reading i do remember reading somewhere that Archie was having some sort of problem before the fight but i can't find that piece at the moment. Anyway The guy was the LHW champ of California so you do have to assume he has some sort of skill, Most of all though anybody can land a lucky shot and KO somebody or wobble them and set them up for a KO. The great thing about boxing is one punch can change the whole fight. its Plausible for A featherweight to KO a Heavyweight. All somebody has to do is land a good punch cleanly in the Right place and your out.

Examples: Chuck Wepner- Sonny Liston TKO'd Chuck Wepner in 10 rounds. And yet Ali was able to KO Liston in one prior to this fight. Five years Later it took Ali 15 rounds to TKO Wepner. It shows you that anything can happen

Another one of my favorites is the fact that Joe Frazier beat Muhammad Ali, George Foreman beat Joe Frazier. Technically this means that Foreman should beat Ali, yet Ali KO'd Foreman for the first time in George's Career. The night before had you placed a bet on that out come i garuntee they would have laughed at you.

The fact is Just because it takes longer for one fighter to KO another fighter doesn't mean that that fighter isn't as good. The reason Wepner was able to go the 15 rounds with Ali was because he took it seriously enough to train harder then he did for any time before. Does that make Liston better then Ali, no but with what your saying it does.

well said, rocky'fan00, well said.

[RockyMarcianofan00]

well said, rocky'fan00, well said.

I try
I had to really think to put that together

[tommyhearns804]

This forums racism is getting highly annoying but anyway read this again.




22.10.03 - By Robert Bennett - I gave great respect for the achievements of Rocky Marciano. A champion can do no more then defeat the fighters placed in front of him, and make sure those fighters are the best available. Rocky Marciano did that, and regardless of the relative strength or weakness of a division in any era, a man that can do that is worthy of praise. How much praise is due however, is the question I pose.

Marciano is often ranked inside the top ten heavyweights of all time by various fans and writers, but one must wonder on what basis he is ranked. A record of 49-0 is impressive indeed but his record was only allowed to run to such extents because he was shut out of the title picture for so long. I rather imagine many a fighter in history would have also taken his record into the forties and fifties without loss if he wasn't fighting the cream of the division.

His first victory over a legitimate contender did not come until his 25th fight against Carmine Vingo. By the time he reached 40-0, Marciano had only four legitimate contenders on his resume, and one of those was the sad swansong of the great Joe Louis. Another was Roland LaStarza, who is famous for losing the barest of decisions to Marciano in a fight many observers felt he should have won. The other two fighters were Vingo of course, and Rex Layne, neither of which rate barely a mention in historical circles.

In stark comparison, Evander Holyfield was thrust into the top of the sport by his twelth fight, and remained undefeated until his 29th fight. The staggering difference is that by the time of his first defeat, Holyfield had faced and defeated at least fifteen contenders who were as good or better then the four Marciano had defeated by forty fights, and yet Holyfield himself struggles for recognition inside the top ten because unlike Marciano, he does not have the benefit of an undefeated record aiding his abilities in the eyes of many observers. As for Marciano's magical '0', that only remained because of the relatively short period of time that Marciano spent fighting at the top of the division. Count them eight fights, a heavyweight title eliminator and seven title fights. There are literally dozens of heavyweights who have remained active at the top for longer than that.

Whether intentional or not, Marciano was protected in much the same way that a Joe Mesi now is. Whether Mesi is a genuine talent is yet to be proven, but it is amazing that Marciano's record does not draw as much criticism as todays protected prospects. It is taboo, almost blasphemous to criticise the quality and depth of the names on Rocky's winlist, because of the mythical status that has been heaped upon his 'world record' 49-0.

Seven successful title fights is commendable, but when broken down not as impressive as many of his contemporaries. His two biggest name victims during his title reign were two victories each over Ezzard Charles and Jersey Joe Walcott. Charles was done as a top level fighter, as evidenced by the two decisions he dropped in the year before his first Marciano fight, and a little after a year after the second fight, had dropped a further four fights. As for Walcott, 23 years and 70 fights after his pro debut, many would have you believe that he remained a force to be reckoned with. No one is denying that Walcott was cagey and skillful, even in his advanced age, but putting him on a pedestal to lift the significance of Rocky's wins over him is a joke. No champion in history enjoyed the sort of longetivity attributed to Walcott, and Marciano was in danger of being defeated by both Walcott and Charles at some stage.

The trouble Marciano had with fighters like Walcott, Charles and LaStarza leads me to believe that a fighter like Roy Jones Jr would have taken him to school, as would the defensive marvel James Toney. Larry Holmes would have cut him up with his piston jab and stopped him. And due to both size and skill, Foreman, Lewis, Bowe and Vitali Klitschko would have decimated him. And to those that have fantasised about it, Marciano would have been no match for Muhammad Ali. Rocky struggled against far lesser fighters than Ali, and would not have been able to deal with the combination of speed, skill, power and smarts that felled more great heavyweights than any fighter before or after him.

Rocky Marciano, skilled and powerful, but vastly overrated in a historical sense.


Maybe you racist rejects can grasp that.

[butterfly1964]

This forums racism is getting highly annoying but anyway read this again.




22.10.03 - By Robert Bennett - I gave great respect for the achievements of Rocky Marciano. A champion can do no more then defeat the fighters placed in front of him, and make sure those fighters are the best available. Rocky Marciano did that, and regardless of the relative strength or weakness of a division in any era, a man that can do that is worthy of praise. How much praise is due however, is the question I pose.

Marciano is often ranked inside the top ten heavyweights of all time by various fans and writers, but one must wonder on what basis he is ranked. A record of 49-0 is impressive indeed but his record was only allowed to run to such extents because he was shut out of the title picture for so long. I rather imagine many a fighter in history would have also taken his record into the forties and fifties without loss if he wasn't fighting the cream of the division.

His first victory over a legitimate contender did not come until his 25th fight against Carmine Vingo. By the time he reached 40-0, Marciano had only four legitimate contenders on his resume, and one of those was the sad swansong of the great Joe Louis. Another was Roland LaStarza, who is famous for losing the barest of decisions to Marciano in a fight many observers felt he should have won. The other two fighters were Vingo of course, and Rex Layne, neither of which rate barely a mention in historical circles.

In stark comparison, Evander Holyfield was thrust into the top of the sport by his twelth fight, and remained undefeated until his 29th fight. The staggering difference is that by the time of his first defeat, Holyfield had faced and defeated at least fifteen contenders who were as good or better then the four Marciano had defeated by forty fights, and yet Holyfield himself struggles for recognition inside the top ten because unlike Marciano, he does not have the benefit of an undefeated record aiding his abilities in the eyes of many observers. As for Marciano's magical '0', that only remained because of the relatively short period of time that Marciano spent fighting at the top of the division. Count them eight fights, a heavyweight title eliminator and seven title fights. There are literally dozens of heavyweights who have remained active at the top for longer than that.

Whether intentional or not, Marciano was protected in much the same way that a Joe Mesi now is. Whether Mesi is a genuine talent is yet to be proven, but it is amazing that Marciano's record does not draw as much criticism as todays protected prospects. It is taboo, almost blasphemous to criticise the quality and depth of the names on Rocky's winlist, because of the mythical status that has been heaped upon his 'world record' 49-0.

Seven successful title fights is commendable, but when broken down not as impressive as many of his contemporaries. His two biggest name victims during his title reign were two victories each over Ezzard Charles and Jersey Joe Walcott. Charles was done as a top level fighter, as evidenced by the two decisions he dropped in the year before his first Marciano fight, and a little after a year after the second fight, had dropped a further four fights. As for Walcott, 23 years and 70 fights after his pro debut, many would have you believe that he remained a force to be reckoned with. No one is denying that Walcott was cagey and skillful, even in his advanced age, but putting him on a pedestal to lift the significance of Rocky's wins over him is a joke. No champion in history enjoyed the sort of longetivity attributed to Walcott, and Marciano was in danger of being defeated by both Walcott and Charles at some stage.

The trouble Marciano had with fighters like Walcott, Charles and LaStarza leads me to believe that a fighter like Roy Jones Jr would have taken him to school, as would the defensive marvel James Toney. Larry Holmes would have cut him up with his piston jab and stopped him. And due to both size and skill, Foreman, Lewis, Bowe and Vitali Klitschko would have decimated him. And to those that have fantasised about it, Marciano would have been no match for Muhammad Ali. Rocky struggled against far lesser fighters than Ali, and would not have been able to deal with the combination of speed, skill, power and smarts that felled more great heavyweights than any fighter before or after him.

Rocky Marciano, skilled and powerful, but vastly overrated in a historical sense.


Maybe you racist rejects can grasp that.

rocky was overrated, but still a good fighter.

[K-DOGG]

This forums racism is getting highly annoying but anyway read this again.




22.10.03 - By Robert Bennett - I gave great respect for the achievements of Rocky Marciano. A champion can do no more then defeat the fighters placed in front of him, and make sure those fighters are the best available. Rocky Marciano did that, and regardless of the relative strength or weakness of a division in any era, a man that can do that is worthy of praise. How much praise is due however, is the question I pose.

Marciano is often ranked inside the top ten heavyweights of all time by various fans and writers, but one must wonder on what basis he is ranked. A record of 49-0 is impressive indeed but his record was only allowed to run to such extents because he was shut out of the title picture for so long. I rather imagine many a fighter in history would have also taken his record into the forties and fifties without loss if he wasn't fighting the cream of the division.

His first victory over a legitimate contender did not come until his 25th fight against Carmine Vingo. By the time he reached 40-0, Marciano had only four legitimate contenders on his resume, and one of those was the sad swansong of the great Joe Louis. Another was Roland LaStarza, who is famous for losing the barest of decisions to Marciano in a fight many observers felt he should have won. The other two fighters were Vingo of course, and Rex Layne, neither of which rate barely a mention in historical circles.

In stark comparison, Evander Holyfield was thrust into the top of the sport by his twelth fight, and remained undefeated until his 29th fight. The staggering difference is that by the time of his first defeat, Holyfield had faced and defeated at least fifteen contenders who were as good or better then the four Marciano had defeated by forty fights, and yet Holyfield himself struggles for recognition inside the top ten because unlike Marciano, he does not have the benefit of an undefeated record aiding his abilities in the eyes of many observers. As for Marciano's magical '0', that only remained because of the relatively short period of time that Marciano spent fighting at the top of the division. Count them eight fights, a heavyweight title eliminator and seven title fights. There are literally dozens of heavyweights who have remained active at the top for longer than that.

Whether intentional or not, Marciano was protected in much the same way that a Joe Mesi now is. Whether Mesi is a genuine talent is yet to be proven, but it is amazing that Marciano's record does not draw as much criticism as todays protected prospects. It is taboo, almost blasphemous to criticise the quality and depth of the names on Rocky's winlist, because of the mythical status that has been heaped upon his 'world record' 49-0.

Seven successful title fights is commendable, but when broken down not as impressive as many of his contemporaries. His two biggest name victims during his title reign were two victories each over Ezzard Charles and Jersey Joe Walcott. Charles was done as a top level fighter, as evidenced by the two decisions he dropped in the year before his first Marciano fight, and a little after a year after the second fight, had dropped a further four fights. As for Walcott, 23 years and 70 fights after his pro debut, many would have you believe that he remained a force to be reckoned with. No one is denying that Walcott was cagey and skillful, even in his advanced age, but putting him on a pedestal to lift the significance of Rocky's wins over him is a joke. No champion in history enjoyed the sort of longetivity attributed to Walcott, and Marciano was in danger of being defeated by both Walcott and Charles at some stage.

The trouble Marciano had with fighters like Walcott, Charles and LaStarza leads me to believe that a fighter like Roy Jones Jr would have taken him to school, as would the defensive marvel James Toney. Larry Holmes would have cut him up with his piston jab and stopped him. And due to both size and skill, Foreman, Lewis, Bowe and Vitali Klitschko would have decimated him. And to those that have fantasised about it, Marciano would have been no match for Muhammad Ali. Rocky struggled against far lesser fighters than Ali, and would not have been able to deal with the combination of speed, skill, power and smarts that felled more great heavyweights than any fighter before or after him.

Rocky Marciano, skilled and powerful, but vastly overrated in a historical sense.


Maybe you racist rejects can grasp that.

Dude, you need more bran in your diet or something. So much angst.

Incidently, what 15 fighters did Holyfield fight at heavyweight who were vastly superior to the 4 fighters you give Rocky credit for beating?

[RockyMarcianofan00]

i respond to this thusly

I submit to you that there are probably only 2 fighters that would have been able to go 49-0 in Rocky's shoes. Granted many prime fighters would have been able to beat Rocky's competition. Duh, Joe Frazier, Mike Tyson,George Foreman, probably Evander Holyfeild, Ali, and holmes. These are all guys that prime could have went 49-0. Then again lets back track, Muahmmad Ali had an amateur record of 100-1 i believe, and many of these other fighters had well over 10 amateur fights maybe into the 20's 30's etc. These amateur fights allowed them to shape there styles into the styles of great champions. Rocky Marciano had 12 amateur fights.

rocky went 8-4 in his amateur career and only about a year or two after starting boxing he was already professional. I tell you now i'm pretty confident had those fighters had 12 amateur fights and were thrown in the ring with the same competition they would not have gone 49-0.

I remember hearing Butterfly say that Ali fought like marciano in the beginning and yet over the 101 amateur fights he shaped it into dancing and speed. Had Ali only had 12 fights i'm sure he would not have made it as far as he did. So before you start critisising Marciano look at what he over came.

Also i'd like to point out that He trained harder then anyother fighter ever and worked hard to get to the top.