Discussion:
Could Ali have beaten Marciano ?
(too old to reply)
Mike
2003-07-27 02:25:35 UTC
Permalink
I've often wondered what mind have been if the Rock had been a little
younger, and lasted a little longer in terms of his fight career.

Imagine a fight between Marciano and Ali. Lots of people always assume
that Rocky would have taken Ali because Rocky never lost.

But then again, Rocky never had to face an Ali.

What if these two fighters could have fought each other while they
were both in their primes ?

How do you see it going ?
Brian Davis
2003-07-27 03:08:34 UTC
Permalink
In their primes, Ali would have Boxed Marciano's ears off.
Post by Mike
I've often wondered what mind have been if the Rock had been a little
younger, and lasted a little longer in terms of his fight career.
Brian Davis
Riverdale, IL

PETE ROSE BELONGS IN THE HALL OF FAME!
BoxMuham
2003-07-27 03:24:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by Brian Davis
In their primes, Ali would have Boxed Marciano's ears off.
Years after Ali's prime was over, Joe Louis said he thought that
Marciano would be too much for Ali.
It's hard to pick anyone against Muhammad Ali, but Marciano was one of
the few who'd have a chance against The Greatest.
You may disagree with me and Joe Louis. That's the way it goes.

BoxMuhammad
joe
2003-07-27 06:37:28 UTC
Permalink
mmmmm

any confirmation on this story?
In 1969, a 46 year old Marciano, who hadn't had a pro fight in 14 years,
spent a day sparring w/Ali and beat the shit out of him. Even Ali
loyalist Ferdie Pacheco couldn't believe how one-sided it was. A few
days later Lou Duva asked Ali if the Rock could still punch. "Are you
kidding?" he replied and lifted his shirt to reveal deep bruises on both
his sides.
Larry Lee
2003-07-27 07:31:41 UTC
Permalink
I remember someone posting something like this a long time ago, maybe a year
or two. It was some movie they were filming... some guy wanted to create
some documentary or something or plug the moves into a computer to figure
out who won or something like that... anyway, Marciano apparently agreed
then spent some days running on the beach and getting in shape. I think the
fighting was only supposed to be semi-real. During the taped rounds, Ali
kept pissing off Marciano somehow, who backed Ali into a corner and hit him
hard in the body. Ali doubled over in agony, Marciano started cursing and
asking to make the fight real right then and there. Forgot how it ended,
and where the footage is, or if it's even real.
Post by joe
mmmmm
any confirmation on this story?
In 1969, a 46 year old Marciano, who hadn't had a pro fight in 14 years,
spent a day sparring w/Ali and beat the shit out of him. Even Ali
loyalist Ferdie Pacheco couldn't believe how one-sided it was. A few
days later Lou Duva asked Ali if the Rock could still punch. "Are you
kidding?" he replied and lifted his shirt to reveal deep bruises on both
his sides.
Larry Lee
2003-07-27 07:36:12 UTC
Permalink
Here's the post, I just found it.

Following is an interesting account of the events surrounding the taping
of the Marciano vs. Ali closed-circuit TV "Superfight."

In 1969, Murry Woroner, a Miami promoter, approached Rocky and
Muhammad Ali with a proposition. He wanted to film a fight between
them, using a computer to decide the final outcome.

Ali had been stripped of his title and banned from boxing when he refused
to be drafted into the army in 1967. Marciano was 46 years old and sixty
pounds over his fighting weight. Each man had his motivations for agreeing
to the deal. Ali needed the money. Rocky had money, but he deeply missed
his glory days in the ring.

Before he could climb into a ring again, even for a simulated fight, Rocky
had
to get into some semblance of what he had been. He began running again,
working out in the gym, eating right; in truth, he trained as hard or harder
than any
fighter preparing for a real fight. The result was a loss of almost fifty
pounds. To
cover his balding head, he was fitted with a wig.

In "Marciano, Biography of a First Son", Everett Skehan said, "When Rocky
went
to the dingy gym on the North Side of Miami Beach he was thinking tough,
expecting
things to go smoothly but prepared for anything. He had been briefed, knew
that the
punches were to be pulled, and that it would not be a real fight. But Rocky
wouldn't
go into the ring that way. Even at forty-six, he had to feel that if
something went
wrong, if suddenly the punches became real, he would be ready to win."

Ali didn't train seriously for the filming, and actually looked less in
shape than the
much older Marciano.

The filming took place in a small gym on the North Side of Miami Beach. Only
about
20 people were allowed inside the gym during the filming, which was kept as
secret as
possible. Behind the fighters was a black backdrop and no crowd of cheering
spectators.

Though punches to the head were to be pulled, both men agreed body shots
were not a
problem. They filmed one minute rounds. Angelo Dundee was on hand as Ali's
trainer,
but Rocky had to use Mel Ziegler to play the role of Charlie Goldman, his
real trainer.
Charlie had passed away the year before. Ferdie Pacheco was the ring doctor.

Seventy one-minute segments were filmed, then spliced into three minute
rounds, including
seven possible endings. All the information about the two men, their fights
and results, was
fed into the computer. Supposedly, the computer would decide the winner
completely on
the basis of the data concerning the two men and their boxing careers. Ali
would tell
different versions of how the outcome was decided; he would say he choose
the ending,
he would say it was a biased decision made by a computer in Mississippi,
etc.

During the filming, Rocky and Ali became friends, spending hours in
conversation. Ali
would later write that he became closer to Rocky than any other white
fighter he ever knew.

Said Dundee of the affair: "Muhammad acquired a lot of respect for Rocky. He
said Rocky
was a lot harder to hit with a jab than he looked."

Stories came out of the sessions. Several claimed Rocky really hurt Ali with
body shots, so
that Muhammad climbed out of the ring and demanded extra money to continue.
He was
payed additional money. (Woroner himself said Ali took such a battering that
he refused to
continue until he was guaranteed an additional two thousand dollars.)

I've talked to the son of one observer who says Rocky doubled Ali up with a
body shot
after Ali kept jabbing the wig off Rocky's head. Dundee admitted to the wig
episode, but
never told of the hard body shot that it led to. Ferdie Pacheco, however,
the ring doctor
in the film, claims Ali was dropped by a real body shot. The undeniable fact
is, Rocky
entered the ring ready to make a real fight of it if need be. Even Dundee
said he had to
be calmed down after the wig incident.

Here's the wig story as I've heard it from two sources:

Ali was dancing around jabbing and threw a high jab which just clipped
Rocky's wig
and knocked it off his head. The filming was stopped while the wig was
refitted, amid
bemused smiles from several of the observers. Marciano was embarrassed and
angry.
He said, "He did that on purpose to make me look stupid. He doesn't have any
respect
for me at all." Rocky was assured it was an accident and the filming
resumed. However,
Ali again jabbed high and sent the wig flying. Rocky was really mad this
time, and
snarled, "You better not do that again!"

They began once more and immediatly Ali flicked the wig off Rocky's head.
Without
hesitation, Marciano dug a vicious body shot into Ali's mid-section,
doubling him over.
Pacheco said Muhammad actually dropped to the floor and was completely
helpless.
Quickly Rocky was separated from Ali and Dundee related how they had to take
a
break until Rocky's temper cooled off.

Marciano offered to turn it into a real fight then and there if Ali was
game. Only when
Ali apologized did the Rock get over his anger. Observers at the filming
have said Ali's
attitude was different from that point on, as it was obvious Marciano had
come to fight
if need be rather than be disrespected.
Alan Fisher
2003-07-27 09:06:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by Larry Lee
Here's the post, I just found it.
Following is an interesting account of the events surrounding the taping
of the Marciano vs. Ali closed-circuit TV "Superfight."
In 1969, Murry Woroner, a Miami promoter, approached Rocky and
Muhammad Ali with a proposition. He wanted to film a fight between
them, using a computer to decide the final outcome.
<snip>
Just to say I do remember seeing clips of this 'computer fight' - though I
was a child at the time and my memories aren't clear. I'd have been ten
years old-ish, probably less : I was 8 in 1969, but we wouldn't necessarily
have seen the thing when it was 'new'.

All I recall are a few grainy black-and-white clips (tho that may have been
the TV we had back then), and my Dad tutting about how clumsy the
'experiment' was.

At the time I was aware of Ali but had never heard of Marciano, so I was
dismayed at the idea of this superbeing losing, even in theory. So I asked
my Dad who would really have won, and his reply was along the lines of "You
can never tell until they actually climb into the ring, son"..........

AF
Stephen Wilkinson
2003-07-27 12:24:53 UTC
Permalink
Let's just face it.
We'll never know 'cos it's in the past and can never happen Of course this
wont stop the world and his wife posting their two penneth on the subject.
Stanley Hammond
2003-07-28 07:25:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mike
I've often wondered what mind have been if the Rock had been a little
younger, and lasted a little longer in terms of his fight career.
Imagine a fight between Marciano and Ali. Lots of people always assume
that Rocky would have taken Ali because Rocky never lost.
But then again, Rocky never had to face an Ali.
What if these two fighters could have fought each other while they
were both in their primes ?
How do you see it going ?
Marciano would take a while to catch Ali, but once he did, he would
murder the loudmouth! Take Joe Frazier, give him the stamina to be
fresh all 15 rounds, juice up his right hand (quite a bit), increase
Joe's overall punching power and remove his susceptability to facial
swelling, and you'll have Marciano. Imagine Ali taking on a Joe
Frazier who never tired, whose face never swelled up, and who had
wrecking balls at the end of BOTH arms!

As an aside, a balding, faded, 45-year-old Marciano doubled Ali over
with a single shot to the midsection in what was supposed to be a mock
sparring session. Prime Rocky would prove to be too much for Ali...
and that's an understatement!
Mike
2003-07-28 18:47:05 UTC
Permalink
I also heard that Mariciano would retreat to the woods to train for
like 5 months for a fight. Is that true ?
Post by Stanley Hammond
Post by Mike
I've often wondered what mind have been if the Rock had been a little
younger, and lasted a little longer in terms of his fight career.
Imagine a fight between Marciano and Ali. Lots of people always assume
that Rocky would have taken Ali because Rocky never lost.
But then again, Rocky never had to face an Ali.
What if these two fighters could have fought each other while they
were both in their primes ?
How do you see it going ?
Marciano would take a while to catch Ali, but once he did, he would
murder the loudmouth! Take Joe Frazier, give him the stamina to be
fresh all 15 rounds, juice up his right hand (quite a bit), increase
Joe's overall punching power and remove his susceptability to facial
swelling, and you'll have Marciano. Imagine Ali taking on a Joe
Frazier who never tired, whose face never swelled up, and who had
wrecking balls at the end of BOTH arms!
As an aside, a balding, faded, 45-year-old Marciano doubled Ali over
with a single shot to the midsection in what was supposed to be a mock
sparring session. Prime Rocky would prove to be too much for Ali...
and that's an understatement!
Mike
2003-07-28 18:46:06 UTC
Permalink
What was Mariciano's heaviest weight ? He wasn't quite 200 pounds, was he ?
Post by Mike
I've often wondered what mind have been if the Rock had been a little
younger, and lasted a little longer in terms of his fight career.
Imagine a fight between Marciano and Ali. Lots of people always assume
that Rocky would have taken Ali because Rocky never lost.
But then again, Rocky never had to face an Ali.
What if these two fighters could have fought each other while they
were both in their primes ?
How do you see it going ?
Kip King
2003-07-29 03:37:06 UTC
Permalink
In 1969, a 46 year old Marciano, who hadn't had a pro fight in 14 years,
spent a day sparring w/Ali and beat the shit out of him. Even Ali
loyalist Ferdie Pacheco couldn't believe how one-sided it was. A few
days later Lou Duva asked Ali if the Rock could still punch. "Are you
kidding?" he replied and lifted his shirt to reveal deep bruises on both
his sides.
Ali was famous for always letting people pound on him in sparring. He
worked on defense in sparring.
SuperCalo
2003-07-29 04:21:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by Kip King
In 1969, a 46 year old Marciano, who hadn't had a pro fight in 14 years,
spent a day sparring w/Ali and beat the shit out of him. Even Ali
loyalist Ferdie Pacheco couldn't believe how one-sided it was. A few
days later Lou Duva asked Ali if the Rock could still punch. "Are you
kidding?" he replied and lifted his shirt to reveal deep bruises on both
his sides.
Ali was famous for always letting people pound on him in sparring.
which is why he is now a retard
GreenDistantStar
2003-07-29 05:32:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by SuperCalo
which is why he is now a retard
What's your excuse?
SuperCalo
2003-07-29 05:57:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by GreenDistantStar
Post by SuperCalo
which is why he is now a retard
What's your excuse?
are you still bitter about losing the rugby my friend?
GreenDistantStar
2003-07-29 06:26:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by SuperCalo
are you still bitter about losing the rugby my friend?
Dance for me, puppet-boy.

And you do.
SuperCalo
2003-07-29 20:11:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by GreenDistantStar
Post by SuperCalo
are you still bitter about losing the rugby my friend?
Dance for me, puppet-boy.
And you do.
batman, you are the best baby
Ashland Wentworth Sturges
2003-07-29 20:18:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by SuperCalo
Post by GreenDistantStar
Dance for me, puppet-boy.
And you do.
batman, you are the best baby
Actually our friend is Fred Schneider from "The B-52'S"...he specialises
in a fighting form known as "The Fop's Fury".Limpest wrists to sashay
across a keyboard.
Dennis
2003-07-29 19:38:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by SuperCalo
which is why he is now a retard
He has parkinsons but he is not retarded. He's still very intelligent.
Kip King
2003-08-01 04:48:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by SuperCalo
Post by Kip King
In 1969, a 46 year old Marciano, who hadn't had a pro fight in 14 years,
spent a day sparring w/Ali and beat the shit out of him. Even Ali
loyalist Ferdie Pacheco couldn't believe how one-sided it was. A few
days later Lou Duva asked Ali if the Rock could still punch. "Are you
kidding?" he replied and lifted his shirt to reveal deep bruises on both
his sides.
Ali was famous for always letting people pound on him in sparring.
which is why he is now a retard
He's not. He has Parkinsons disease which his doctors say he would
have got even if he never boxed. Howard Cosell had the same thing the
last few years of his life and Michael J. Fox has it now.
the Nay Sayer
2003-07-29 20:28:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mike
I've often wondered what mind have been if the Rock had been a little
younger, and lasted a little longer in terms of his fight career.
Imagine a fight between Marciano and Ali. Lots of people always assume
that Rocky would have taken Ali because Rocky never lost.
But then again, Rocky never had to face an Ali.
What if these two fighters could have fought each other while they
were both in their primes ?
How do you see it going ?
If a *thiry-nine* year old Jersey Joe Walcott can give an in his prime
Rocky Marciano a beating for thirteen rounds only to loose getting
caught by a haymaker then there in NO sound logical reason to think
that the best HW in history, with one of the best chins ever, AND
considering ALI's hand and foot speed, would lose to the Rock. Sorry,
but it's target practice for Ali who dances circles around Marciano
for fifteen rounds...


the Nay Sayer
The Lord Memnoch
2003-07-29 23:48:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by the Nay Sayer
If a *thiry-nine* year old Jersey Joe Walcott can give an in his prime
Rocky Marciano a beating for thirteen rounds only to loose getting
caught by a haymaker then there in NO sound logical reason to think
that the best HW in history, with one of the best chins ever, AND
considering ALI's hand and foot speed, would lose to the Rock. Sorry,
but it's target practice for Ali who dances circles around Marciano
for fifteen rounds...
I agree, but I hold everyone to the same standard so you will get my favorite
line. I agree, but your logic is flawed. Case in point.

"If Bert Cooper could do that to Evander Holyfield, imagine what a faster, more
powerful Mike Tyson would do to him."
Evander kicked the shit out of Tyson.

"Duran beat Leonard and Leonard beat Hearns by slugging it out. Duran is a
better slugger than Tommy so he will make mince meat out of him."
Tommy handed the legend his first clean knockout.

The list goes on and on, but if you are going to judge by worse performances,
then we can have Willy Pep, beating Mike Tyson. There are so many things to
consider when basing who you think will win.

Age and conditioning is a major factor.

Level of recent competition.

Styles.

Mental makeup after a lose.

Bad habits, such as Duran following a huge win with an eating and partying
binge.

On paper, Lennox Lewis vs Hasim Rahman was a mismatch. Lennox did everything
better, but though I thought Lennox was the favorite, I am the only person that
I know that gave Rahman a chance due to the following factors.

The conditions surrounding the fight dictated that you get acclimated to the
height of where they were fighting. You need three weeks to learn how to
breathe in the mountains. Rahman got there a week early. Lewis got there with
two weeks notice after filming "Oceans Eleven" I still thought that Lewis was
going to win, but I told my friend, "Say what you might, but if this fight
lasts longer than five rounds, Rahman has a real chance of winning."

I was wrong and right, but I was wrong for the right reasons. Lewis did not
take the fight seriously.

To be objective, we need to take into consideration what would happen between
two fighters if they fought a best of ten series. Anyone can win on a one on
one confrontation at any given moment...

But, I will say, Ali would have whipped the hell out of Marciano, heh heh.
Isaiah
2003-07-30 08:23:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by The Lord Memnoch
Post by the Nay Sayer
If a *thiry-nine* year old Jersey Joe Walcott can give an in his prime
Rocky Marciano a beating for thirteen rounds only to loose getting
caught by a haymaker then there in NO sound logical reason to think
that the best HW in history, with one of the best chins ever, AND
considering ALI's hand and foot speed, would lose to the Rock. Sorry,
but it's target practice for Ali who dances circles around Marciano
for fifteen rounds...
I agree, but I hold everyone to the same standard so you will get my favorite
line. I agree, but your logic is flawed. Case in point.
"If Bert Cooper could do that to Evander Holyfield, imagine what a faster, more
powerful Mike Tyson would do to him."
Evander kicked the shit out of Tyson.
"Duran beat Leonard and Leonard beat Hearns by slugging it out. Duran is a
better slugger than Tommy so he will make mince meat out of him."
Tommy handed the legend his first clean knockout.
The list goes on and on, but if you are going to judge by worse performances,
then we can have Willy Pep, beating Mike Tyson.
<snip>


A lot of these dolts probably *do* think that Pep would've beaten
Tyson. After all, "size means dick," according to one of the head
dolts. Also, remember that Pep fought back in the '40s. Bob Compton's
uncle had some tough hiking trips at around that time and therefore
Willie Pep must have been tougher than anyone alive today. Combine
that with Tyson's known tendency to lose to anyone who remembered to
fight back against him, and you have a shutout victory for the Will o'
the Wisp.



-Isaiah
Robert Phillips
2003-07-30 10:55:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by Isaiah
A lot of these dolts probably *do* think that Pep would've beaten
Tyson. After all, "size means dick," according to one of the head
dolts. Also, remember that Pep fought back in the '40s. Bob Compton's
uncle had some tough hiking trips at around that time and therefore
Willie Pep must have been tougher than anyone alive today. Combine
that with Tyson's known tendency to lose to anyone who remembered to
fight back against him, and you have a shutout victory for the Will o'
the Wisp.
-Isaiah
LMAO! Thanks for the chuckles...


Pie
Mike Haught
2003-07-30 16:02:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by Isaiah
A lot of these dolts probably *do* think that Pep would've beaten
Tyson. After all, "size means dick," according to one of the head
dolts. Also, remember that Pep fought back in the '40s. Bob Compton's
uncle had some tough hiking trips at around that time and therefore
Willie Pep must have been tougher than anyone alive today. Combine
that with Tyson's known tendency to lose to anyone who remembered to
fight back against him, and you have a shutout victory for the Will o'
the Wisp.
A definition that may be helpful you discussing this subject, Isaiah. ;-)

con·text
1. The part of a text or statement that surrounds a particular word or passage
and determines its meaning
2. The set of facts or circumstances that surround a situation or event; "the
historical context"

-mwh
Dennis
2003-07-30 19:07:33 UTC
Permalink
Since the question is "could" Ali beat Marciano? Definitely. He could
beat anyone but then again Marciano probably could too that's why
they're great.
Isaiah
2003-08-03 05:57:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mike Haught
Post by Isaiah
A lot of these dolts probably *do* think that Pep would've beaten
Tyson. After all, "size means dick," according to one of the head
dolts. Also, remember that Pep fought back in the '40s. Bob Compton's
uncle had some tough hiking trips at around that time and therefore
Willie Pep must have been tougher than anyone alive today. Combine
that with Tyson's known tendency to lose to anyone who remembered to
fight back against him, and you have a shutout victory for the Will o'
the Wisp.
A definition that may be helpful you discussing this subject, Isaiah. ;-)
con·text
1. The part of a text or statement that surrounds a particular word or passage
and determines its meaning
2. The set of facts or circumstances that surround a situation or event; "the
historical context"
Your input is always welcome as you are a true gentleman, but I think
you're underestimating me. First, the item I had in quotation marks
was an actual quote by an actual poster. It sounds as foolish to my
ears as saying that speed or power is unimportant. Second, there
actually was a poster who tried to use information from his
grandfather's camping journal as evidence that fighters from that era
were superior to fighters of today. Third, there is a decent poster
who has tried repeatedly to pass off the line about Tyson losing to
everyone who "fought back."


My conclusion was absurd but it came not from parodies of arguments,
but from following those arguments to their logical conclusion. It
should be noted that in two of those cases, the posters reinforced
their argument under challenge.



-Isaiah
Mike Haught
2003-08-03 13:17:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by Isaiah
Post by Mike Haught
Post by Isaiah
A lot of these dolts probably *do* think that Pep would've beaten
Tyson. After all, "size means dick," according to one of the head
dolts. Also, remember that Pep fought back in the '40s. Bob Compton's
uncle had some tough hiking trips at around that time and therefore
Willie Pep must have been tougher than anyone alive today. Combine
that with Tyson's known tendency to lose to anyone who remembered to
fight back against him, and you have a shutout victory for the Will o'
the Wisp.
A definition that may be helpful you discussing this subject, Isaiah. ;-)
con·text
1. The part of a text or statement that surrounds a particular word or passage
and determines its meaning
2. The set of facts or circumstances that surround a situation or event; "the
historical context"
Your input is always welcome as you are a true gentleman, but I think
you're underestimating me.
Well, thank you sir.
Post by Isaiah
First, the item I had in quotation marks
was an actual quote by an actual poster. It sounds as foolish to my
ears as saying that speed or power is unimportant.
That quoted comment is related to how a smaller fighter can take away the
advantages of a larger fighter, sometimes making the superior size a
disadvantage. It takes a skillfull fighter to do this, which we have less of
today. In that regard, I agree with Ivan.
Post by Isaiah
Second, there
actually was a poster who tried to use information from his
grandfather's camping journal as evidence that fighters from that era
were superior to fighters of today.
Bob was making a point that folks of previous generations had much tougher
lives. They just did what they had to do without complaint or bragging. You
didn't see many fat slobs populating pre-1950. Those guys likely were in better
condition before they began their boxing training than a lot of pro fighters
today. My grandfather recalled times his father coming home from work in timber
camps and literally crawling up the hill to their house. My dad remembered
several times my grandfather suffered heart attacks (doctor was telling him he
had acute indigestion) and finished the 16 hour shift when they worked the oil
fields. I watched my dad -- with a double hernia -- walk a 80' attenna tower up
(hand over hand) when my brother and I were not strong enough to pull it up from
the roof with ropes. My dad then picked the tower up and set it in its base.

Can I even dream about working as hard as my dad, grandfather and
great-grandfather worked? Not a chance. I grew up too soft by their standards
and did not have my mind toughened enough from my youth to allow my body to
toughen as did they. I agree with Bob that when the general pool of men are
tougher to start, they have a better chance to translate that toughness into the
ring at a level we do not see today.

Third, there is a decent poster
Post by Isaiah
who has tried repeatedly to pass off the line about Tyson losing to
everyone who "fought back."
Well, I have posted my disagreement with him on this point. I am guessing that
he lost a lot of money on the Tyson/Douglas fight and has yet to forgive Tyson.
;-)
Post by Isaiah
My conclusion was absurd but it came not from parodies of arguments,
but from following those arguments to their logical conclusion. It
should be noted that in two of those cases, the posters reinforced
their argument under challenge.
I guess my point is that I feel the first two points you made were taken out of
context from the quoted person's intent. Maybe I misinterpreted. In which
case, I'd disagree with your first two points.

-mwh
the Nay Sayer
2003-07-30 15:28:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by The Lord Memnoch
Post by the Nay Sayer
If a *thiry-nine* year old Jersey Joe Walcott can give an in his prime
Rocky Marciano a beating for thirteen rounds only to loose getting
caught by a haymaker then there in NO sound logical reason to think
that the best HW in history, with one of the best chins ever, AND
considering ALI's hand and foot speed, would lose to the Rock. Sorry,
but it's target practice for Ali who dances circles around Marciano
for fifteen rounds...
I agree, but I hold everyone to the same standard so you will get my favorite
line. I agree, but your logic is flawed. Case in point.
"If Bert Cooper could do that to Evander Holyfield, imagine what a faster, more
powerful Mike Tyson would do to him."
Evander kicked the shit out of Tyson.
This is a bad example. Holyfield got up and subsequenlty kicked the
shit out of Cooper....
Post by The Lord Memnoch
"Duran beat Leonard and Leonard beat Hearns by slugging it out. Duran is a
better slugger than Tommy so he will make mince meat out of him."
Tommy handed the legend his first clean knockout.
This is a good example. A good example of how styles make fights.
However, I don't base my assertion that Ali would have beaten Marciano
soley on the observation of what happened in the first Walcott fight.
But it is a contributing factor and begs the question; How does a
so-called great HW champion let a 39 year ole man last 12.5 rounds?
Post by The Lord Memnoch
The list goes on and on, but if you are going to judge by worse performances,
then we can have Willy Pep, beating Mike Tyson. There are so many things to
consider when basing who you think will win.
Pep over Tyson? You're reaching....
Post by The Lord Memnoch
Age and conditioning is a major factor.
I'd give Marciano a slight edge in conditioning over Ali. Skin of
teeth slight..
Post by The Lord Memnoch
Level of recent competition.>
Here Ali has a HUGE edge over the Rock. Compared to Ali's, Marciano's
list of opponents looks like the membership of the Civil War Veterans
society...
Post by The Lord Memnoch
Styles.
Swarmers have been known to give boxers problems...
Post by The Lord Memnoch
Mental makeup after a loss.
This is the big question concerning the Rock....
Post by The Lord Memnoch
Bad habits, such as Duran following a huge win with an eating and partying
binge.
<Snippage>
Post by The Lord Memnoch
To be objective, we need to take into consideration what would happen between
two fighters if they fought a best of ten series. Anyone can win on a one on
one confrontation at any given moment...
But, I will say, Ali would have whipped the hell out of Marciano, heh heh.
Yep...


the Nay Sayer
Dennis
2003-07-30 18:47:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by the Nay Sayer
If a *thiry-nine* year old Jersey Joe Walcott can give an in his prime
Rocky Marciano a beating for thirteen rounds only to loose getting
caught by a haymaker then there in NO sound logical reason to think
that the best HW in history, with one of the best chins ever, AND
considering ALI's hand and foot speed, would lose to the Rock. Sorry,
but it's target practice for Ali who dances circles around Marciano
for fifteen rounds...
Walcott was 37 not 39 and he didn;t give him a beating for 13 rounds. He
was knocked out in the 13th and it wasn't a haymaker, the punch was
about a foot long perfectly timed right cross which to me demonstrates
the speed and power the guy had. Walcott's age aside he was the
heavyweight champ when there was only one and was a match for any
heavyweight that ever lived.
Dennis
2003-07-30 20:21:33 UTC
Permalink
That punch, the short chopping right hand was
the "weapon of choice," not an accidental or
lucky wallop that put Walcott in dreamland and
draped on the ropes. Rocky Maricano called his
right shot "Susie Cue (sp)." That punch and his
left hook caused quite a few opponents to fall
short of finishing the scheduled rounds.
DCI
All true but to listen to alot of people on the internet you'd think he
was always being beaten up until he landed a big wild lucky punch. And
the amazing thing is he did it 46 times in 49 fights.
d***@cheetah.net
2003-07-31 03:33:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dennis
That punch, the short chopping right hand was
the "weapon of choice," not an accidental or
lucky wallop that put Walcott in dreamland and
draped on the ropes. Rocky Maricano called his
right shot "Susie Cue (sp)." That punch and his
left hook caused quite a few opponents to fall
short of finishing the scheduled rounds.
DCI
All true but to listen to alot of people on the internet you'd think he
was always being beaten up until he landed a big wild lucky punch. And
the amazing thing is he did it 46 times in 49 fights.
One of the stories that floated around for years was
told by Archie Moore. After he fought Marciano, he
said the worst thing of the fight was his flash knockdown
of Marciano in the 2nd round. He claimed that it made
Marciano more focussed as he began the siege that finally
ended with Moore being knock down and then knocked out.

Moore was one to create a lot of boxing lore in his time.
However, reviewing the old films of the fight, it seems
that Moore may have been off a bit. Marciano always
fought with intensity from the 1st bell until the last,
or as one must observe, the 10-count.

DCI
BoxMuham
2003-08-01 09:09:28 UTC
Permalink
From: Dennis
All true but to listen to alot of people on the internet you'd think he
was always being beaten up until he landed a big wild lucky punch. And
the amazing thing is he did it 46 times in 49 fights.
Nah, it's not "alot of people." Only the few who don't know jack
about Marciano's career.
Marciano is one of the most respected fighters ever, for good
reason.

BoxM
NICHOLAS D.
2003-08-01 19:58:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by BoxMuham
From: Dennis
All true but to listen to alot of people on the internet you'd think he
was always being beaten up until he landed a big wild lucky punch. And
the amazing thing is he did it 46 times in 49 fights.
Nah, it's not "alot of people." Only the few who don't know jack
about Marciano's career.
Well, since I know jack, I'll point out that Marciano scored 43 KOs, not
46 (assuming that's what Dennis meant).
Pie
I agree with your correction however that lead me to wonder something else.
Of the 6 that weren't ko'd, how many were at least knocked down in their
fight with Rocky?

-Nick
Gaz
2003-07-30 23:57:18 UTC
Permalink
Surely the thread title is worded the wrong way round? I mean I repect
other peoples opinion that MAYBE Marciano on a good day may have
beaten Ali on a bad one, but the burden of proof is on the Rocky fans
IMO. The title makes it sound like the man who beat Liston, Foreman,
Frazier etc in title fights and held the title over 3 decades would go
into the fight an underdog against a man who was champ for 3 years (in
a poor era), who had a total of 6 title fights and whose title fights
were against opponents including (2) LightHeavyweights (one of them
twice), an old man and a guy he'd already beaten.

Gaz
Gaz
2003-07-31 11:46:40 UTC
Permalink
Let's look closer at your statement. Then go back to the order of the
question. Liston Ali fought twice, once was a suspect fight because of the
punch that ko'd Liston barely grazed him. Foul play was suggested. Look up
"Phantom punch." Forman had the most padded career until he fought Frazier
or Ali. Frazier beat Ali first and questionably lost the second fight, third
was Ali because Frazier's coach Futch wouldn't let him answer the last round
in a close fight. With the lack of mentioning Ali, Frazier, or Forman
fighting each other their careers would look less significant today. They
promoted each others career to another level that made each one look like a
top ten HW fighter of all time but erase any two of the three names from
history and the one left seems average at best.
Next Ali didn't even hold the title in three different decades let alone
hold it for three decades. Joe Louis nearly did that, NOT Ali. In
criticizing Rocky for holding the belt only three years look at what # match
each fighter was offered the HW title shot. This is just roll playing. For
instance Ali had his title shot early on in his career at his 20th fight.
Marciano Didn't get a title shot until his 43rd fight. If the situation was
reversed Ali would have lost that 43rd fight as he did to Norton in '73 and
would not get another title shot until Foreman his 47th fight. If Marciano
had the opportunity at his 20th fight for the HW title imagine he'd have 29
title wins. In fact nobody left boxing from Rocky's 20-43rd fight, all the
names were the same so this would be more truthful to his success. They even
tried bringing in an old warrior Joe Louis to try and beat Rocky. The man
was that good.
-Nick
Nick, I'll do you the same honour you did me ;O), so in order we have,

You hav n't addressed the first Liston fight, the second was 'suspect'
because Liston knew the same thing was going to happped again and took
the money and ran. Foreman had already beaten Frazier and Norton
before Ali beat him, to say Ali's reign os champ would be 'average at
best' as you say if you took out Foreman and Frazier is nonsense,
lessened yes. but average. But the fact remains we can't erase those
fights from history, they happened and they ar part of the Ali's
career.

I'll hold my hands up to the three decades thing , It was late and I
was wrong :O)

Now with the Frazier fights you are really stretching it! Granted Ali
lost the first, coming back after a long lay off (in what would have
been his peak years BTW) The second was not 'questionable' Ali won a
close but clear decision as for the third, Futch pulled Frazier out,
have you known Futch to pull fighters out needlessly very often?
Frazier was behind on points and about to get knocked out, no
controvery there.

Your last paragraph. You seriously think Rocky would have won the
title in his 20th fight? No me either, and then retained it until his
49th? That not role play thats Twilight Zone.

You saved the best for last though, they brought a totally shot Louis
back to give Marciano a win over a big name opponent, not because they
thought he could win.

I feel sorry for Marciano in that he didn't have the opponents around
to bring out the best in him, but thats the way it was. To denegrate
Ali's achievements with 'role play','what if XXXXX fighter had n't
existed' and questioning legit wins against Frazier just smacks of
desperatation.

BTW I'd go as far as to say Ali's first reign ALONE was better that
Marcianos ONLY reign.

Gaz
Gaz
2003-08-01 01:36:04 UTC
Permalink
,
Thanks you seem like a respectable person for keeping things tame, I'll
comment below.
I hope so, 'cos we disagree doesn't mean we have to get nasty?
http://sports.espn.go.com/classic/biography/s/Frazier_Joe.html
A biog of Joe Frazier is hardly likely to be the best source for an
unbiased account? Ask some of the old timers around here, all 3 Ali-
Frazier fights ended in the right result
Nope disagree.
-Nick :o)
Then on all rest I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree :O)
(just please try and get a video of Ali KO3 Cleveland Williams and
then tell me Rocky wouldv'e won)
Gaz ;O)
NICHOLAS D.
2003-08-01 14:09:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by Gaz
,
Thanks you seem like a respectable person for keeping things tame, I'll
comment below.
I hope so, 'cos we disagree doesn't mean we have to get nasty?
http://sports.espn.go.com/classic/biography/s/Frazier_Joe.html
A biog of Joe Frazier is hardly likely to be the best source for an
unbiased account? Ask some of the old timers around here, all 3 Ali-
Frazier fights ended in the right result
Last night I went out with a few friends and one of the friends father. He
was a boxer himself a long long time ago from the Bronx. Asking him the
question about who really won the Ali Frazier 3 fights he replied, Frazier,
Frazier, Ali. He also made a comment that later on Ali once said he felt
Frazier really won the fights.
Post by Gaz
Nope disagree.
-Nick :o)
Then on all rest I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree :O)
(just please try and get a video of Ali KO3 Cleveland Williams and
then tell me Rocky wouldv'e won)
Gaz ;O)
I always can agree to disagree. It is a good way to leave things off. Ali
had trouble with swarmers and there is no way he would beat the most
relentless swarmer in history of boxing. Imagine Frazier x 2.

-Nick
BoxMuham
2003-08-01 18:37:56 UTC
Permalink
From: "NICHOLAS D."
Asking him the
question about who really won the Ali Frazier 3 fights he replied, Frazier,
Frazier, Ali.
Ali won the rematch convincingly. And of course, he stopped Frazier
in the rubber match.
Frazier did beat Ali when both were undefeated, but some of that was
due to the fact that Ali was just coming off of 3 1/2 years out of the ring,
and had only two warm up bouts to prepare for Smokin' Joe.
I don't want to take anything away from Frazier. He was a *great*
fighter. Ali clearly got the better of him, and overall, Ali was the greater
fighter. More tools, more skills... Hey, he's Ali.

In terms of Marciano vs. Ali, while The Rock would have some advantages
over Smokin' Joe, I still see Ali beating Marciano convincingly.
At his best, Ali beats just about everyone convincingly.

BoxMuhammad
NICHOLAS D.
2003-08-01 20:12:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by BoxMuham
From: "NICHOLAS D."
Asking him the
question about who really won the Ali Frazier 3 fights he replied, Frazier,
Frazier, Ali.
Ali won the rematch convincingly. And of course, he stopped Frazier
in the rubber match.
Frazier did beat Ali when both were undefeated, but some of that was
due to the fact that Ali was just coming off of 3 1/2 years out of the ring,
and had only two warm up bouts to prepare for Smokin' Joe.
I don't want to take anything away from Frazier. He was a *great*
fighter. Ali clearly got the better of him, and overall, Ali was the greater
fighter. More tools, more skills... Hey, he's Ali.
In terms of Marciano vs. Ali, while The Rock would have some advantages
over Smokin' Joe, I still see Ali beating Marciano convincingly.
At his best, Ali beats just about everyone convincingly.
BoxMuhammad
See my other post on Louis's response to who is better.

-Nick :o)
BoxMuham
2003-08-02 05:09:14 UTC
Permalink
From: "NICHOLAS D."
See my other post on Louis's response to who is better.
I've mentioned that quote from Louis' autobiography a couple of times
in this thread. I don't agree with him, but I don't dismiss Marciano's chances
against Ali. Marciano was one of the greatest fighters who ever lived. Other
than George Foreman, who would be too much for almost everyone but Ali and
perhaps Holmes, Marciano would have a good shot at beating any of the great
heavyweights.

BoxMuhammad
Loki
2003-07-31 22:44:52 UTC
Permalink
On Thu, 31 Jul 2003 04:30:52 GMT, "NICHOLAS D."
Post by Gaz
Surely the thread title is worded the wrong way round? I mean I repect
other peoples opinion that MAYBE Marciano on a good day may have
beaten Ali on a bad one, but the burden of proof is on the Rocky fans
IMO. The title makes it sound like the man who beat Liston, Foreman,
Frazier etc in title fights and held the title over 3 decades would go
into the fight an underdog against a man who was champ for 3 years (in
a poor era), who had a total of 6 title fights and whose title fights
were against opponents including (2) LightHeavyweights (one of them
twice), an old man and a guy he'd already beaten.
Gaz
Let's look closer at your statement. Then go back to the order of the
question. Liston Ali fought twice, once was a suspect fight because of the
punch that ko'd Liston barely grazed him. Foul play was suggested. Look up
"Phantom punch." Forman had the most padded career until he fought Frazier
or Ali. Frazier beat Ali first and questionably lost the second fight, third
was Ali because Frazier's coach Futch wouldn't let him answer the last round
in a close fight. With the lack of mentioning Ali, Frazier, or Forman
fighting each other their careers would look less significant today. They
promoted each others career to another level that made each one look like a
top ten HW fighter of all time but erase any two of the three names from
history and the one left seems average at best.
Next Ali didn't even hold the title in three different decades let alone
hold it for three decades. Joe Louis nearly did that, NOT Ali. In
criticizing Rocky for holding the belt only three years look at what # match
each fighter was offered the HW title shot. This is just roll playing. For
instance Ali had his title shot early on in his career at his 20th fight.
Marciano Didn't get a title shot until his 43rd fight.
Not sure what your point is. Ali's 20 fight was against Sonny Liston.
Marciano's was against Ted Lowrey, who already had 48 losses on his
record. Ali's 27th was against Cleveland Williams and Marciano's was
against Eldridge Eaton who was 14-17-3. Ali's 30th was against Jerry
Quarry. Marciano's 30th was a rematch with Ted Lowrey who had managed
three victories out of the 11 bouts he fought between his first and
second shot at Marciano.

Do you not think that if Ali had fought more Eaton's and Lowrey's that
he would have been able to remain undefeated, and really untested for
a much longer time?

And do you think that if Marciano had been fighting championship
caliber fighters from his 20th fight on that he would have had as
impressive a record?


Loki
the Nay Sayer
2003-07-31 20:07:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dennis
Post by the Nay Sayer
If a *thiry-nine* year old Jersey Joe Walcott can give an in his prime
Rocky Marciano a beating for thirteen rounds only to loose getting
caught by a haymaker then there in NO sound logical reason to think
that the best HW in history, with one of the best chins ever, AND
considering ALI's hand and foot speed, would lose to the Rock. Sorry,
but it's target practice for Ali who dances circles around Marciano
for fifteen rounds...
Walcott was 37 not 39
According to Boxrec.com Walcott was born Jan 31 1914. The first
Marciano fight took place Setp 23 1952. That makes Walcott four
months and one week short of his 39th birthday.....
Post by Dennis
and he didn;t give him a beating for 13 rounds. He
was knocked out in the 13th and it wasn't a haymaker, the punch was
about a foot long perfectly timed right cross which to me demonstrates
the speed and power the guy had
Ok, so I guess getting dropped in the first round and getting
staggered in the 11th and 12th rounds doesn't constitute a beating.
But it begs the question; How does Marciano let grandpa Walcott drop
him in the first round and hang around for eleven more to do more
damage?
Post by Dennis
Walcott's age aside he was the
heavyweight champ when there was only one and was a match for any
heavyweight that ever lived.
He 'was a match for any heavyweight that ever lived'? You don't
*really* believe that do you? Goes to show how far Marciano
worshippers will go. Making statements as absurd as the above does
not do you any credit nor does it help to make your case. Had it been
Sonny Liston or Jack Johnson or even Joe Frazier Walcott wouldn't have
made it out of the first round....


the Nay Sayer
d***@cheetah.net
2003-08-01 00:38:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by the Nay Sayer
Post by Dennis
Post by the Nay Sayer
If a *thiry-nine* year old Jersey Joe Walcott can give an in his prime
Rocky Marciano a beating for thirteen rounds only to loose getting
caught by a haymaker then there in NO sound logical reason to think
that the best HW in history, with one of the best chins ever, AND
considering ALI's hand and foot speed, would lose to the Rock. Sorry,
but it's target practice for Ali who dances circles around Marciano
for fifteen rounds...
Walcott was 37 not 39
According to Boxrec.com Walcott was born Jan 31 1914. The first
Marciano fight took place Setp 23 1952. That makes Walcott four
months and one week short of his 39th birthday.....
From the death records of Social Security:

Name Birth Death Last Residence Last Benefit SSN
Arnold 31 Jan 31 Jan 08109 Non specified 144-09-9607
R CREAM 1914 1994 (Merchantville,
Camden)


Hopes this helps.


For fun, the same Social Security records give
Archie Moore's DOB as December 13, 1916.

DCI
Gaz
2003-08-01 01:43:39 UTC
Permalink
Nick

I've just realized where we differ, its in your sentence:

'His era looked weak because he never lost.'

You believe that.

I believe

"He never lost because his era was weak'

Thats the difference.

all the best

Gaz
Dennis
2003-07-30 19:01:00 UTC
Permalink
Marciano complained about his eyes in the fight.
Probably because Walcott kept putting his fists in them...
It was from the ointment rocky's corner pun on the cut on top of his
head that he got from an accidental but earleier in the fight.
NICHOLAS D.
2003-07-30 21:26:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by the Nay Sayer
If a *thiry-nine* year old Jersey Joe Walcott can give an in his prime
Rocky Marciano a beating for thirteen rounds only to loose getting
caught by a haymaker then there in NO sound logical reason to think
that the best HW in history, with one of the best chins ever, AND
considering ALI's hand and foot speed, would lose to the Rock. Sorry,
but it's target practice for Ali who dances circles around Marciano
for fifteen rounds...
the Nay Sayer
The fight was suspect.
Says who? Please, give us some evidence to support your assertion....
Marciano complained about his eyes in the fight.
Probably because Walcott kept putting his fists in them...
Dennis answered this.
Just see what Rocky did to Walcott in the second fight they had if you
want
something closer to reality.
So that makes the first fight a mirage? I guess then that we can also
disregard Lewis-Rahman I or Patterson-Johansson I. Sorry, but ole'
man Walcott gave Marciano a *beating* for 12 1/2 rounds until that
right hand settled matters. That's REAL....
Pay attention. The fact that there was a substance in Marciano's eyes in the
first fight was a true factor. In the second fight without this foriegn
object in his eyes Marciano knocked out Walcott in the first round. So
henceforth yes I'd say we would have seen a different first fight. Maybe not
a 1st round ko because this was Rocky's first title shot and maybe he was a
little nervous, reserved, or precautious as one might expect. As far as your
poor example of an untrained Lewis who was the defending champ at the time I
have to laugh.
Now please reread the other persons post
comparing a far better swarmer then Frazier fighting Ali.
A *far* better swarmer than Frazier? Based on what? His record
against 'A' level opponents? His defense? Boxing ability? Please
explain...
the Nay Sayer
You can not match level of opponents fairly from different eras. You must
see how well each performed in their time with what they had available.
Based upon his fights you will see better conditioning indicating stamina,
endurance. Better ko percentage, indicating power. Before I even bother
going on do you really think Frazier is better, then why?

-Nick
SuperCalo
2003-07-30 21:47:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by NICHOLAS D.
Post by the Nay Sayer
If a *thiry-nine* year old Jersey Joe Walcott can give an in his prime
Rocky Marciano a beating for thirteen rounds only to loose getting
caught by a haymaker then there in NO sound logical reason to think
that the best HW in history, with one of the best chins ever, AND
considering ALI's hand and foot speed, would lose to the Rock.
Sorry,
Post by NICHOLAS D.
Post by the Nay Sayer
but it's target practice for Ali who dances circles around Marciano
for fifteen rounds...
the Nay Sayer
The fight was suspect.
Says who? Please, give us some evidence to support your assertion....
Marciano complained about his eyes in the fight.
Probably because Walcott kept putting his fists in them...
Dennis answered this.
Just see what Rocky did to Walcott in the second fight they had if you
want
something closer to reality.
So that makes the first fight a mirage? I guess then that we can also
disregard Lewis-Rahman I or Patterson-Johansson I. Sorry, but ole'
man Walcott gave Marciano a *beating* for 12 1/2 rounds until that
right hand settled matters. That's REAL....
Pay attention. The fact that there was a substance in Marciano's eyes in the
first fight was a true factor. In the second fight without this foriegn
object in his eyes Marciano knocked out Walcott in the first round. So
henceforth yes I'd say we would have seen a different first fight. Maybe not
a 1st round ko because this was Rocky's first title shot and maybe he was a
little nervous, reserved, or precautious as one might expect. As far as your
poor example of an untrained Lewis who was the defending champ at the time I
have to laugh.
Now please reread the other persons post
comparing a far better swarmer then Frazier fighting Ali.
A *far* better swarmer than Frazier? Based on what? His record
against 'A' level opponents? His defense? Boxing ability? Please
explain...
the Nay Sayer
You can not match level of opponents fairly from different eras. You must
see how well each performed in their time with what they had available.
Based upon his fights you will see better conditioning indicating stamina,
endurance. Better ko percentage, indicating power. Before I even bother
going on do you really think Frazier is better, then why?
fraizier was better at getting hit, getting knocked down and better at being
over rated than Marciano
the Nay Sayer
2003-07-31 21:37:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by NICHOLAS D.
Post by the Nay Sayer
If a *thiry-nine* year old Jersey Joe Walcott can give an in his prime
Rocky Marciano a beating for thirteen rounds only to loose getting
caught by a haymaker then there in NO sound logical reason to think
that the best HW in history, with one of the best chins ever, AND
considering ALI's hand and foot speed, would lose to the Rock. Sorry,
but it's target practice for Ali who dances circles around Marciano
for fifteen rounds...
the Nay Sayer
The fight was suspect.
Says who? Please, give us some evidence to support your assertion....
Marciano complained about his eyes in the fight.
Probably because Walcott kept putting his fists in them...
Dennis answered this.
Just see what Rocky did to Walcott in the second fight they had if you
want
something closer to reality.
So that makes the first fight a mirage? I guess then that we can also
disregard Lewis-Rahman I or Patterson-Johansson I. Sorry, but ole'
man Walcott gave Marciano a *beating* for 12 1/2 rounds until that
right hand settled matters. That's REAL....
Pay attention. The fact that there was a substance in Marciano's eyes in the
first fight was a true factor. In the second fight without this foriegn
object in his eyes Marciano knocked out Walcott in the first round. So
henceforth yes I'd say we would have seen a different first fight. Maybe not
a 1st round ko because this was Rocky's first title shot and maybe he was a
little nervous, reserved, or precautious as one might expect. As far as your
poor example of an untrained Lewis who was the defending champ at the time I
have to laugh.
Whatever substance (if there really was one) that was in Marciano's
eyes didn't become a factor in the fight until the fifth round. That
does not explain how Marciano lets an ole' man put him on the
canvas...
Post by NICHOLAS D.
Now please reread the other persons post
comparing a far better swarmer then Frazier fighting Ali.
A *far* better swarmer than Frazier? Based on what? His record
against 'A' level opponents? His defense? Boxing ability? Please
explain...
the Nay Sayer
You can not match level of opponents fairly from different eras. You must
see how well each performed in their time with what they had available.
Based upon his fights you will see better conditioning indicating stamina,
endurance. Better ko percentage, indicating power. Before I even bother
going on do you really think Frazier is better, then why?
IMHO, an argument can be made for Frazier and one can be made for
Marciano. However, an argument can NOT be made that Marciano was
*far* better than Frazier. Not in a million years. To quote Gene
Tunney in an article he wrote in Dec. 1952:

"Well, I'll say one thing, Rocky is built for the part. He's powerful
and rugged, and as a mat referee he will have plenty of opportunity to
study and learn the various wrestling holds, both offensive and
defensive. In the meantime, I hope he'll study and learn more about
his present profession. For while he is the top man in his business, I
believe he has still plenty to learn. I believe that he will learn,
too, and will gradually grow better and better as he climbs to his
zenith, at which time he will not suffer by comparison with any of his
predecessors as the kingpin among ring fighting champions."

"Rocky is a fighter who appears to learn rapidly. He showed immense
improvement in his last fight over his previous performances in the
ring. Jersey Joe Walcott made him look pretty amateurish at times in
their encounter, but there was no time, in my opinion, when the wily
and experienced veteran had him in serious trouble--and make no
mistake about Walcott not being a very high grade artisan at his
trade."


I challenge anyone to find an article or a quote that would suggest
Joe Frazier "has still plenty to learn" or "look pretty amateurish at
times" when he was champ.


the Nay Sayer
NICHOLAS D.
2003-08-01 02:59:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by the Nay Sayer
Whatever substance (if there really was one) that was in Marciano's
eyes didn't become a factor in the fight until the fifth round. That
does not explain how Marciano lets an ole' man put him on the
canvas...
You make it sound like no one else has been knocked down before. Rocky was
down for 3 seconds then came out brawling again. What other fighter in his
career never went down? What other fighter has only gone down 1 or 2 times?
What other fighter was never ko'd?
Post by the Nay Sayer
I challenge anyone to find an article or a quote that would suggest
Joe Frazier "has still plenty to learn" or "look pretty amateurish at
times" when he was champ.
the Nay Sayer
No one is discrediting Frazier he just wasn't as good as Rocky which should
be a well known fact if you look at Ring Magazine rating the best swarmer.

-Nick
the Nay Sayer
2003-08-01 03:48:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by NICHOLAS D.
Post by the Nay Sayer
Whatever substance (if there really was one) that was in Marciano's
eyes didn't become a factor in the fight until the fifth round.
That does not explain how Marciano lets an ole' man put him on the
canvas...
You make it sound like no one else has been knocked down before. Rocky
was down for 3 seconds then came out brawling again. What other
fighter in his career never went down? What other fighter has only
gone down 1 or 2 times? What other fighter was never ko'd?
There's no shame in getting knocked down when it comes at the hands of a
young strong big puncher. But Marciano's knock down @ the hands of Walcott
needs to be put in it's proper context. Marciano was knocked down by a 39
year old LHW. That's relevent, especially since it wouldn't be the last time
an ole' LHW would drop Marciano early...
Post by NICHOLAS D.
Post by the Nay Sayer
I challenge anyone to find an article or a quote that would suggest
Joe Frazier "has still plenty to learn" or "look pretty amateurish
at times" when he was champ.
the Nay Sayer
No one is discrediting Frazier he just wasn't as good as Rocky which
should be a well known fact if you look at Ring Magazine rating the
best swarmer.
You can certainly make that argument however I was taking issue with the
statement that Marciano was a *far* better swarmer than Frazier. IMHO, you
can't honestly make that argument. Especially considering Frazier's level of
opposotion compared to Marciano.



the Nay Sayer
BoxMuham
2003-08-01 09:06:56 UTC
Permalink
From: "the Nay Sayer"
needs to be put in it's proper context. Marciano was knocked down by a 39
year old LHW. That's relevent
That is a *very* weak argument. The much more important part is
that Marciano got up immediately, never appeared hurt in the slightest, and
knocked his opponent out.

BoxM
Robert Phillips
2003-08-01 12:48:10 UTC
Permalink
From: "the Nay Sayer"
needs to be put in it's proper context. Marciano was knocked down by a 39
year old LHW. That's relevent
That is a *very* weak argument.


It's also factually incorrect and analytically incorrect.
According to BoxRec, Marciano weighed 184 in the Walcott fight, whereas
Joe weighed 196. While both were small heavyweights by modern
standards, Walcott was 20 pounds over the lt.heavyweight limit, and
Marciano himself was much closer to being the LHW in the ring.


Pie
the Nay Sayer
2003-08-01 14:58:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by BoxMuham
From: "the Nay Sayer"
needs to be put in it's proper context. Marciano was knocked down by a 39
year old LHW. That's relevent
That is a *very* weak argument.
It's not an argument, only an observation....
Post by BoxMuham
The much more important part is
that Marciano got up immediately,
never appeared hurt in the slightest, and
knocked his opponent out.
You make it sound like he KO'ed Walcott in the very next round.
You've forgotten a bunch of details.....


the Nay Sayer
NICHOLAS D.
2003-08-01 19:56:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by the Nay Sayer
Post by BoxMuham
From: "the Nay Sayer"
needs to be put in it's proper context. Marciano was knocked down by a 39
year old LHW. That's relevent
That is a *very* weak argument.
It's not an argument, only an observation....
Post by BoxMuham
The much more important part is
that Marciano got up immediately,
Do you dare to post your source?
Post by the Nay Sayer
Post by BoxMuham
never appeared hurt in the slightest, and
knocked his opponent out.
You make it sound like he KO'ed Walcott in the very next round.
You've forgotten a bunch of details.....
the Nay Sayer
No that was the very next fight were Rocky proved to the naysayers of the
50's he could do it again.

-Nick :o)
the Nay Sayer
2003-08-02 06:12:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by NICHOLAS D.
Post by the Nay Sayer
Post by BoxMuham
From: "the Nay Sayer"
needs to be put in it's proper context. Marciano was knocked down by
a
Post by NICHOLAS D.
39
Post by the Nay Sayer
Post by BoxMuham
year old LHW. That's relevent
That is a *very* weak argument.
It's not an argument, only an observation....
Post by BoxMuham
The much more important part is
that Marciano got up immediately,
Do you dare to post your source?
http://cyberboxingzone.com/boxing/w0502-pd.html


the Nay Sayer
BoxMuham
2003-08-02 06:31:15 UTC
Permalink
From: "the Nay Sayer"
You haven't seen the fight, have you? Marciano was up from the
canvas in *2 seconds.* Yes, as I said, he immediately got up.
The man counting the knockdown seconds strangely counted "3, 4, 5"
AFTER Marciano was up. If you've ever seen the fight, that would all be very
clear to you. It isn't.
With all of your BS about Marciano being "beaten up" for 13 rounds, it
is obvious that you haven't seen the fight, and are only grasping at straws in
a losing attempt to discredit one of the greatest heavyweights of all time.

Of course, when a fighter wins *every single time* he ever
fights, it's very hard to discredit him. Marciano is the ONLY champion in any
weight division in the last 120 years who won every single one of his fights.

You kept pointing to the knockdown by Walcott, as though that's some
evidence that Marciano wasn't tough. Of course, Rocky Marciano was one of the
toughest fighters who ever lived.

BoxMuhammad
NICHOLAS D.
2003-08-01 14:48:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by the Nay Sayer
There's no shame in getting knocked down when it comes at the hands of a
needs to be put in it's proper context. Marciano was knocked down by a 39
year old LHW. That's relevent, especially since it wouldn't be the last time
an ole' LHW would drop Marciano early...
For 3 seconds? He wasn't even stunned. Besides he went on to Ko Walcott
twice and a ko is what really matters not dropping a person for 3 seconds.
Post by the Nay Sayer
You can certainly make that argument however I was taking issue with the
statement that Marciano was a *far* better swarmer than Frazier. IMHO, you
can't honestly make that argument. Especially considering Frazier's level of
opposotion compared to Marciano.
the Nay Sayer
Frazier had a left hook. Rocky had both a left and a right. Rocky could take
a punch and certainly give one. Rocky was just as productive in the first
round as he was in the last round. If you ever goto Bobby Bearden's site
Frazier rates Marciano above himself.
http://www.geocities.com/Colosseum/Arena/1047//Rock.html

-Nick
the Nay Sayer
2003-08-02 06:14:30 UTC
Permalink
"NICHOLAS D." <***@OPTONLINEBULLSHIT.NET> wrote in message
news:j5vWa.23101
Post by NICHOLAS D.
Frazier had a left hook. Rocky had both a left and a right. Rocky could take
a punch and certainly give one. Rocky was just as productive in the first
round as he was in the last round. If you ever goto Bobby Bearden's site
Frazier rates Marciano above himself.
What great HW did Marciano ever beat?


the Nay Sayer
Loki
2003-08-03 05:26:20 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 03 Aug 2003 00:37:41 GMT, "NICHOLAS D."
Post by the Nay Sayer
news:j5vWa.23101
Post by NICHOLAS D.
Frazier had a left hook. Rocky had both a left and a right. Rocky could
take
Post by NICHOLAS D.
a punch and certainly give one. Rocky was just as productive in the
first
Post by the Nay Sayer
Post by NICHOLAS D.
round as he was in the last round. If you ever goto Bobby Bearden's site
Frazier rates Marciano above himself.
What great HW did Marciano ever beat?
the Nay Sayer
All of them for his era. 49-0.
The point you are missing is that there were none in his era.


Loki
Robert Phillips
2003-08-03 14:20:06 UTC
Permalink
mariciano was white, thats why people think he was so good
and thats the bottom line
The novelty factor of him being the last white meaningful champion
(meaning, excluding guys like Coetzee, Morrison, etc.) is a big part of
the romantic appeal of Marciano, but it's only one of several factors.


Pie
BoxMuham
2003-08-03 15:07:44 UTC
Permalink
From: Robert Phillips
is a big part of
the romantic appeal of Marciano, but it's only one of several factors.
Plus the fact that Rocky Marciano is the ONLY champion in any division
in the past 120 years to win every single one of his fights.
49-0. 43 KO's. The great Rocky Marciano. The man Joe Louis thought
would beat up Muhammad Ali...

BoxM
BoxMuham
2003-08-01 09:04:39 UTC
Permalink
From: "NICHOLAS D."
? What other fighter has only gone down 1 or 2 times?
What other fighter was never ko'd?
You forgot one. What other champion won *every single time* he
fought?

None. Only Marciano. He's the only one in 120 years of Queensbury
rules.
No one is discrediting Frazier he just wasn't as good as Rocky which should
be a well known fact if you look at Ring Magazine rating the best swarmer.
Joe Frazier was great. Marciano was better.

BoxMuhammad
BoxMuham
2003-08-01 09:02:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by the Nay Sayer
That
does not explain how Marciano lets an ole' man put him on the
canvas...
You're seriously disrespecting the "ole man," who in this case was
the great Jersey Joe Walcott.
Of course, Marciano got up *immediately*, wasn't hurt at all, and
continued to fight like hell. Same as it ever was.

The fact that Marciano was caught cold early on, got up quickly and
came back to KO his opponent is a quality that earns respect, not something he
can be put down for! Damn... A lot of fighters fold as soon as they're
knocked down. Tyson, for example. Every time he was knocked down in a fight,
he was knocked the f*ck out.
Post by the Nay Sayer
To quote Gene
May as well quote Joe Louis, who said in his autobiography that
Marciano would have been too much for Ali.

BoxM
Robert Phillips
2003-08-01 12:34:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by BoxMuham
The fact that Marciano was caught cold early on, got up quickly and
came back to KO his opponent is a quality that earns respect, not something he
can be put down for! Damn... A lot of fighters fold as soon as they're
knocked down. Tyson, for example. Every time he was knocked down in a fight,
he was knocked the f*ck out.
I figured it was only a matter of time before your Tyson insults started
flying, as usual, in a thread that has nothing to do with Tyson. At
least you waited until your third paragraph.
Tyson was never "caught cold early on" in a fight, and was never knocked
down early in any fight, the way you imply by using him as an example.


Pie
Robert Phillips
2003-08-01 12:53:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by BoxMuham
Post by the Nay Sayer
To quote Gene
May as well quote Joe Louis, who said in his autobiography that
Marciano would have been too much for Ali.
Of course he would. That's ego. Louis already had to admit that for
their one fight, Marciano was better. Admitting that someone would beat
Marciano means admitting, by extention, that an additional fighter
besides Marciano might be better than himself. Nobody wants to admit
that. Like most other fighters when presented with that question, Louis
picks the guy whose superiority makes himself look best. I'd expect
Louis to say that.
Means nothing.


Pie
NICHOLAS D.
2003-08-01 20:08:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by Robert Phillips
Post by BoxMuham
Post by the Nay Sayer
To quote Gene
May as well quote Joe Louis, who said in his autobiography that
Marciano would have been too much for Ali.
Of course he would. That's ego. Louis already had to admit that for
their one fight, Marciano was better. Admitting that someone would beat
Marciano means admitting, by extention, that an additional fighter
besides Marciano might be better than himself. Nobody wants to admit
that. Like most other fighters when presented with that question, Louis
picks the guy whose superiority makes himself look best. I'd expect
Louis to say that.
Means nothing.
Pie
Pie when you look at how well Frazier did to Ali and then compare how Rocky
is to Frazier you would expect Rocky would be better then Ali. I borrowed
this from Bobby's site. It is Louis's take on Rocky vs. Ali:

Joe Louis:

(From the book "My Life: Joe Louis" by Joe Louis w/ Edna and Art Rust, Jr)

"That jabbing and running would have made it hard for me to catch a guy like
Ali, but eventually I'd get him and knock him out. Ali's a great fighter,
but I think a Rocky Marciano or Jack Dempsey would rate ahead of him. So
would Walcott. Ali makes too many mistakes, his hands are down allot, and
he
takes too many punches to the body."


-Nick
Robert Phillips
2003-08-02 01:16:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by NICHOLAS D.
Pie when you look at how well Frazier did to Ali and then compare how Rocky
is to Frazier you would expect Rocky would be better then Ali.
I would?
No, I wouldn't.

I borrowed
Post by NICHOLAS D.
(From the book "My Life: Joe Louis" by Joe Louis w/ Edna and Art Rust, Jr)
"That jabbing and running would have made it hard for me to catch a guy like
Ali, but eventually I'd get him and knock him out. Ali's a great fighter,
but I think a Rocky Marciano or Jack Dempsey would rate ahead of him. So
would Walcott. Ali makes too many mistakes, his hands are down allot, and
he
takes too many punches to the body."
-Nick
Gee, that's nice.
Doesn't change what I said.
Heck, it doesn't even contradict what I said.
But gee, it's nice.


Pie
NICHOLAS D.
2003-08-02 06:13:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by Robert Phillips
Post by NICHOLAS D.
Pie when you look at how well Frazier did to Ali and then compare how Rocky
is to Frazier you would expect Rocky would be better then Ali.
I would?
No, I wouldn't.
Answer this is Frazier better then Marciano? Yes or no without a song or
dance.
Post by Robert Phillips
I borrowed
Post by NICHOLAS D.
(From the book "My Life: Joe Louis" by Joe Louis w/ Edna and Art Rust, Jr)
"That jabbing and running would have made it hard for me to catch a guy like
Ali, but eventually I'd get him and knock him out. Ali's a great fighter,
but I think a Rocky Marciano or Jack Dempsey would rate ahead of him.
So
Post by Robert Phillips
Post by NICHOLAS D.
would Walcott. Ali makes too many mistakes, his hands are down allot, and
he
takes too many punches to the body."
-Nick
Gee, that's nice.
Doesn't change what I said.
Heck, it doesn't even contradict what I said.
But gee, it's nice.
Pie
Actually he addressed Ali's strengths and weakness's first then made a
rational decision. IMO ego wouldn't account for such calculations rather it
would put a decision without thought first and wait to be asked why.

-Nick
Robert Phillips
2003-08-02 13:55:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by NICHOLAS D.
Answer this is Frazier better then Marciano? Yes or no without a song or
dance.
There's not much valid basis for comparison, since they fought in such
disparate eras. I mostly don't do cross-era comparisons anymore.
But I'd certainly pick Frazier. A larger man, he fought and beat better
fighters than Marciano ever did, and the only guys who ever beat him
were guys who would dribble Marciano like a basketball (Foreman) and
treat him like speedbag (Ali).
Yes, I'd pick Frazier without losing a wink of sleep about it.
Remember, you're not talking to Bobby Bearden. You're talking to
someone who understands that Marciano, while a good fighter for his
time, is one of the most overrated champs in history and is the
beneficiary of a great deal of affection that has nothing to do with his
in-the-ring performances.


Pie
NICHOLAS D.
2003-08-03 00:37:41 UTC
Permalink
Post by Robert Phillips
Post by NICHOLAS D.
Answer this is Frazier better then Marciano? Yes or no without a song or
dance.
There's not much valid basis for comparison, since they fought in such
disparate eras. I mostly don't do cross-era comparisons anymore.
But I'd certainly pick Frazier. A larger man, he fought and beat better
fighters than Marciano ever did, and the only guys who ever beat him
were guys who would dribble Marciano like a basketball (Foreman) and
treat him like speedbag (Ali).
Yes, I'd pick Frazier without losing a wink of sleep about it.
Remember, you're not talking to Bobby Bearden. You're talking to
someone who understands that Marciano, while a good fighter for his
time, is one of the most overrated champs in history and is the
beneficiary of a great deal of affection that has nothing to do with his
in-the-ring performances.
Pie
It's funny when the same fighters you mention place Marciano above
themselves. Guess you know more then them. Talk about ego rather ignorance.

-Nick
Robert Phillips
2003-08-03 01:55:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by NICHOLAS D.
It's funny when the same fighters you mention place Marciano above
themselves. Guess you know more then them. Talk about ego rather ignorance.
As I recall, Frazier has ranked himself over Ali on an all-time basis.
Speaking of ignorance...(and ego, for that matter).


Pie
NICHOLAS D.
2003-08-03 00:37:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by NICHOLAS D.
Actually he addressed Ali's strengths and weakness's first then made a
rational decision. IMO ego wouldn't account for such calculations rather it
would put a decision without thought first and wait to be asked why.
-Nick
Oh, horseshit. Of course ego accounts for all of that. Ego makes a guy
come up with a reasonable explanation that casts himself in the best
light. That he didn't just blurt out a self-serving answer doesn't mean
that what he DID say wasn't ego-driven. And that he bothered to come up
with some analysis doesn't mean what he said wasn't ego-driven. Notice
that the guys he mentions as Ali's superiors were all from his own
generation or before. He doesn't even mention or credit the two guys
(at the time) who had, in fact, fought and beat Ali; he mentions only
guys who never fought him and whose superiority or inferiority can only
be speculated about. You think there's no ego or bias there?
Of course it's ego. When talking to a fighter, just take that for
granted.
Pie
Oh come on Louis's book was written after Ali's career ended. There were
many reasons from Cooper on to pick Marciano over Ali. Louis was a humble
person, if we were talking about Ali I'd say it is ego.

-Nick
Robert Phillips
2003-08-03 01:42:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by NICHOLAS D.
Oh come on Louis's book was written after Ali's career ended.
Well, the significant portion of Ali's career, at least.
But it's irrelevant to my point WHEN it was written. In fact, that it
was written AFTER Ali's two losses to Frazier and Norton supports my
claim, since Louis STILL didn't mention them.
Post by NICHOLAS D.
There were
many reasons from Cooper on to pick Marciano over Ali.
Sure.
If you're Bobby Bearden. Or you.


Pie
the Nay Sayer
2003-08-01 14:54:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by BoxMuham
Post by the Nay Sayer
That
does not explain how Marciano lets an ole' man put him on the
canvas...
You're seriously disrespecting the "ole man," who in this case was
the great Jersey Joe Walcott.
So are you asserting that Walcott was a great heavyweight?
Post by BoxMuham
Of course, Marciano got up *immediately*, wasn't hurt at all, and
continued to fight like hell. Same as it ever was.
The fact that Marciano was caught cold early on, got up quickly and
came back to KO his opponent is a quality that earns respect, not something he
can be put down for!
He was caught cold early, made to look like an amateur, got staggered
in both the 11th and 12th rounds, and was behind on the scorecards
going into the 13th. Call a spade a spade....
Post by BoxMuham
Damn... A lot of fighters fold as soon as they're
knocked down. Tyson, for example. Every time he was knocked down in a fight,
he was knocked the f*ck out.
The fact that he was able to put Walcott out of his misery after
absorbing a beating is a credit to Marciano. Problem is it took him
13 rounds....
Post by BoxMuham
Post by the Nay Sayer
To quote Gene
May as well quote Joe Louis, who said in his autobiography that
Marciano would have been too much for Ali.
That still doesn't explain how a senior citizen made him look like an
amatuer....


the Nay Sayer
BoxMuham
2003-08-01 18:53:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by the Nay Sayer
So are you asserting that Walcott was a great heavyweight?
Of course he was. Why do you think Muhammad Ali considers him one of
the 10 greatest heavyweights of all time?
Post by the Nay Sayer
The fact that he was able to put Walcott out of his misery after
absorbing a beating is a credit to Marciano. Problem is it took him
13 rounds....
Problem? LOL! Was it a "problem" that it took Ali 14 rounds to stop
Frazier? A "problem" that it took Larry Holmes 13 rounds to stop Cooney? A
"problem" that it took Joe Louis 11 rounds to stop Walcott? A "problem it took
Holyfield 11 rounds to stop Tyson?

The fact that Walcott lasted 13 rounds with Marciano is a credit to
Jersey Joe, although the fact that Marciano was blinded from the 5th round on
certainly had a lot to do with it. You conveniently ignore that fact as you go
on and on about the "beating" that Marciano, in reality, didn't take from
Walcott.

Of course, in the rematch Marciano knocked Walcott out in the 1st
round. You must be very satisfied with that result.
Post by the Nay Sayer
That still doesn't explain how a senior citizen made him look like an
amatuer....
Yes, if only every heavyweight could be so "amateurish." 49-0.

BoxMuhammad
the Nay Sayer
2003-08-01 21:44:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by BoxMuham
Post by the Nay Sayer
So are you asserting that Walcott was a great heavyweight?
Of course he was. Why do you think Muhammad Ali considers him one of
the 10 greatest heavyweights of all time?
Yeah he was so great in fact that he defended the HW title all of
*one* time. Against the man whom he had taken it from & previously
lost to. BTW, have you posted your top ten all-time HW list lately?
Post by BoxMuham
Post by the Nay Sayer
The fact that he was able to put Walcott out of his misery after
absorbing a beating is a credit to Marciano. Problem is it took him
13 rounds....
Problem? LOL! Was it a "problem" that it took Ali 14 rounds to stop
Frazier? A "problem" that it took Larry Holmes 13 rounds to stop Cooney? A
"problem" that it took Joe Louis 11 rounds to stop Walcott? A "problem it took
Holyfield 11 rounds to stop Tyson?
Frazier, Cooney, and Tyson were not *39* year ole' men. Compare
apples to apples...
Post by BoxMuham
The fact that Walcott lasted 13 rounds with Marciano is a credit to
Jersey Joe, although the fact that Marciano was blinded from the 5th round on
certainly had a lot to do with it. You conveniently ignore that fact as you go
on and on about the "beating" that Marciano, in reality, didn't take from
Walcott.
Carrying a geriatric HW for 5 rounds is still nothing to be proud of.
Sonny Liston, a guy who damn sure doesn't get enough credit around
here, did away with a weak HW champ in one round. Twice. The only
fact that conveniently gets ignored is the fact that Marciano let the
fight go on for 11 1/2 rounds too long....
Post by BoxMuham
Of course, in the rematch Marciano knocked Walcott out in the 1st
round. You must be very satisfied with that result.
He should have done that the first time, like Liston did. Instead,
Marciano let an ole' man give him a boxing lesson for 12 1/2
rounds....
Post by BoxMuham
Post by the Nay Sayer
That still doesn't explain how a senior citizen made him look like an
amatuer....
Yes, if only every heavyweight could be so "amateurish." 49-0.
49-0 in the weakest era in HW history. Context....


the Nay Sayer
the Nay Sayer
2003-08-02 06:22:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by the Nay Sayer
Yeah he was so great in fact that he defended the HW title all of
*one* time.
That's because he was fighting Rocky Marciano.
Post by the Nay Sayer
Against the man whom he had taken it from & previously
lost to.
That man's name was Ezzard Charles. Another *great* fighter.
Great fighter yes, great HW no....
Post by the Nay Sayer
Frazier, Cooney, and Tyson were not *39* year ole' men. Compare
apples to apples...
yo
Your point is silly. There is zero shame in Marciano being
dropped
by Walcott. He got right up, was never hurt, kept on fighting, and
knocked
Walcott smoooth the f*ck out.
Well maybe we have different criteria for shame. In my book, there's
something seriously wrong when you let senior citizens put you on the canvas
early in a fight...
Heavyweights drop other heavyweights. Your point is meaningless.
Now if Marciano had been KO'd by Walcott, you'd be onto
something.
But of course, Marciano *never* lost a fight.
Marciano never fought anyone with a pulse....
Post by the Nay Sayer
Carrying a geriatric HW for 5 rounds is still nothing to be proud of.
You've beaten yourself into the ground.
No, Marcaino beat a geriatric HW into the ground. 12 rounds too late...
Post by the Nay Sayer
49-0 in the weakest era in HW history. Context....
Nah. Marciano beat great fighters Jersey Joe Walcott, Ezzard
Charles
and Archie Moore.
Walcott was NOT a great HW. Ezzard Charles and Archie Moore were great
LHWs......


the Nay Sayer
BoxMuham
2003-08-02 06:33:21 UTC
Permalink
From: "the Nay Sayer"
Marciano never fought anyone with a pulse....
You've sunken to the level of trolling. Add another loss to your
record, nay sayer. I'm done with you.
the Nay Sayer
2003-08-01 20:41:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by BoxMuham
Post by the Nay Sayer
That
does not explain how Marciano lets an ole' man put him on the
canvas...
You're seriously disrespecting the "ole man," who in this case was
the great Jersey Joe Walcott.
PS

After looking @ Walcott's record I noticed that in his 41st
professional fight he lost to a guy who was 0-0-0. Now I know that
Boxrec.com doesn't have the most complete database in the world BUT
upon further investigation I discovered that in his 21st pro fight he
lost to a guy who was 13-19-1. The thing that baffles me most is that
Walcott had just beaten this bum in his previous fight. In his very
next fight he gets KO'ed by a guy nobody's ever heard of. Three
fights later Walcott loses to a guy who is 7-0.


From what I can ascertain there are only two names of consequence on
Walcott's resume with a 'W' in the win column. Joey Maxim, a LHW, and
Ezzard Charles, a washed up LHW....


Now, do you still want to hang the title of 'great' around Jersey Joe
Walcott's neck?


the Nay Sayer
the Nay Sayer
2003-08-02 06:24:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by the Nay Sayer
Now, do you still want to hang the title of 'great' around Jersey Joe
Walcott's neck?
Of course.
And one day, you may learn.
Ok, then make your case. Please explain exactly what makes Walcott a great
HW? Then take a poll and see how many here agree with you....

the Nay Sayer
Peter M Anal
2003-08-01 22:18:56 UTC
Permalink
***@aol.com (BoxMuham) wrote in message news:<***@mb-m15.aol.com>...
. Tyson, for example. Every time he was knocked down in a fight,
Post by BoxMuham
he was knocked the f*ck out.
Jeez!! That a serious anti-Tyson obsession you have there tate!
BoxMuham
2003-08-01 08:54:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by the Nay Sayer
If a *thiry-nine* year old Jersey Joe Walcott can give an in his prime
Rocky Marciano a beating for thirteen rounds only to loose
First of all, Walcott was still near his best at that time, and of
course, he was the heavyweight champion of the world and was favored to beat
Marciano.
Secondly, Walcott did *not* give Marciano a beating for 13 rounds,
by any stretch of imagination. Marciano was blinded from the 5th round on by
cut medication on the gloves (similar to what happened in the Clay-Liston
match). The fight was still fairly even at the time Marciano knocked Walcott
smooooth the f*ck out, in one of the best single shot KO's in history.

BoxM
the Nay Sayer
2003-08-01 14:45:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by BoxMuham
Post by the Nay Sayer
If a *thiry-nine* year old Jersey Joe Walcott can give an in his prime
Rocky Marciano a beating for thirteen rounds only to loose
First of all, Walcott was still near his best at that time, and of
course, he was the heavyweight champion of the world and was favored to beat
Marciano.
Cow chips. There's no way you're going to convince me that a 39 year
old who was 2-2 in his last four fights was anywhere near his best.
No freggin' way. Walcott was @ the end of the line and Marciano just
happened to be there to put the old gray mare out of his misery....
Post by BoxMuham
Secondly, Walcott did *not* give Marciano a beating for 13 rounds,
by any stretch of imagination. Marciano was blinded from the 5th round on by
cut medication on the gloves (similar to what happened in the Clay-Liston
match). The fight was still fairly even at the time Marciano knocked Walcott
smooooth the f*ck out, in one of the best single shot KO's in history.
Fairly even? Who's revisionist history have you been reading? In
Gene Tunney's own words Walcott made Marciano look 'Amateurish'. The
fight was not even in the same zipcode as 'Fairly Even'....


the Nay Sayer
Blade Of Sorrow
2003-08-02 07:53:21 UTC
Permalink
Nah. Marciano beat great fighters Jersey Joe Walcott, Ezzard Charles
and Archie Moore.
The weakest era was Tyson's era. Until Holyfield came along...
That's like saying that Holmes was knocked the fuck out by Tyson therefore
making Tyson great. An old version Holmes is still far superior than old
lightheavyweights Walcott, Charles or Moore. Your point is?
BoxMuham
2003-08-02 08:01:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by Blade Of Sorrow
An old version Holmes is still far superior than old
lightheavyweights Walcott, Charles or Moore. Your point is?
The 38-year old Larry Holmes who had been out of the ring for 2 1/2
years and who had just been beaten twice in a row by Michael Spinks was NOT
better than the Ezzard Charles, Moore, or Walcott that Marciano beat. You
kiddin'?!

BoxMuhammad
Blade Of Sorrow
2003-08-02 15:16:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by BoxMuham
The 38-year old Larry Holmes who had been out of the ring for 2 1/2
years and who had just been beaten twice in a row by Michael Spinks was NOT
better than the Ezzard Charles, Moore, or Walcott that Marciano beat. You
kiddin'?!
An old great heavyweight certainly has to be better than an old great
lightheavyweight. And no I am not kidding.
If Holmes can beat Mercer and go the distance with a young lion like Holyfield
in his 40s then there is no reason to believe that Walcott, Charles or Moore
were better than him at heavyweight at the same stage of their careers.
BoxMuham
2003-08-02 16:20:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by Blade Of Sorrow
If Holmes can beat Mercer and go the distance with a young lion like Holyfield
in his 40s
Holmes was significantly sharper when he faced Mercer than he was
when he faced Tyson. He'd been fighting regularly, and that made all the
difference. Even Larry Holmes, after 2 1/2 years out of the ring, gets rusty.


But at that stage in his career, no, Larry Holmes certainly not
better than the 31/32 year old Ezzard Charles, or Walcott or Moore, IMO.
Post by Blade Of Sorrow
there is no reason to believe that Walcott, Charles or Moore
were better than him at heavyweight at the same stage of their careers.
Charles was ten years younger when he faced Marciano than Holmes was
when he faced Holyfield. Archie Moore had nearly a decade of being the light
heavyweight champion ahead of him when he faced The Rock. He was far more "in
the thick" of his career than Holmes was at any point from '85 on.
Walcott was near the end of his career when he faced Marciano, but
he *was* the Heavyweight Champion of the World. Not a former great fighter
who'd never be champ again.

BoxMuhammad
Dennis
2003-08-02 22:13:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by BoxMuham
The 38-year old Larry Holmes who had been out of the ring for 2 1/2
years and who had just been beaten twice in a row by Michael Spinks was NOT
better than the Ezzard Charles, Moore, or Walcott that Marciano beat. You
kiddin'?!
It's hard to find someone that's objective about Marciano. They either
worship him or hate him so much they make shit up like "Walcott was a
light heavyweight" Ignorant of the fact that he never weighed less than
190 in his entire career. Marciano had to fight Walcott because Walcott
was the champ. In an era when there was only one champ. He was supposed
to fight Charles twice for the title but Charles ducked him. Both the
Louis and the LaStarza fights were elimination bouts for the title and
Charles was supposed to fight the winners but didn't.


The fact that Frazier called himself the "Black Marciano" is in itself a
tribute from one great fighter to another or that Roberto Duran called
himself "Rocky" after Marciano even after he won the lightweight title.
There was a light heavy named Peralta that gave Foreman trouble in an
era of big heavyweights. There was a light heavy named Marshall that
beat Liston and a light heavy named Jones that nearly beat Ali and a
light heavy that Beat Holmes twice. This goes in the "so what" column
As does the fact that a guy that started out as a super welterweight
will beat Lennox Lewis if and when they fight.

It means nothing. The fact is that Marciano fought and beat the best of
his era. He didn;t have Frazier or Foreman as a measuring stick but he
does have 49-0- 43 kos and that is impressive no matter what era you
fought in.
Dennis
2003-08-03 07:29:07 UTC
Permalink
Mike Tyson, who is so often criticized here, fought much
better opposition than Marciano and was far more dominant against that
opposition than Rocky was against his.
-Isaiah
I don;t critisize Tyson, More the fans that keep paying to see him. But
I don;t think he was as sucessfull or fought much better opposition than
Marciano. The 5 fighters that gave him trouble were Louis, Walcott,
Lastarza, Charles, and Moore. All very fine boxers.
BoxMuham
2003-08-03 10:02:05 UTC
Permalink
From: Dennis
Mike Tyson, who is so often criticized here, fought much
better opposition than Marciano and was far more dominant against that
opposition than Rocky was against his.
-Isaiah
Damn, is it great to have this virgin killfiled. Otis, isaiah,
loki... Three of a perfect freakin' pair.
BoxMuham
2003-08-03 09:59:59 UTC
Permalink
From: Dennis
they make shit up like "Walcott was a
light heavyweight" Ignorant of the fact that he never weighed less than
190 in his entire career. Marciano had to fight Walcott because Walcott
was the champ. In an era when there was only one champ. He was supposed
to fight Charles twice for the title but Charles ducked him. Both the
Louis and the LaStarza fights were elimination bouts for the title and
Charles was supposed to fight the winners but didn't.
The fact that Frazier called himself the "Black Marciano" is in itself a
tribute from one great fighter to another or that Roberto Duran called
himself "Rocky" after Marciano even after he won the lightweight title.
There was a light heavy named Peralta that gave Foreman trouble in an
era of big heavyweights. There was a light heavy named Marshall that
beat Liston and a light heavy named Jones that nearly beat Ali and a
light heavy that Beat Holmes twice. This goes in the "so what" column
As does the fact that a guy that started out as a super welterweight
will beat Lennox Lewis if and when they fight.
It means nothing. The fact is that Marciano fought and beat the best of
his era. He didn;t have Frazier or Foreman as a measuring stick but he
does have 49-0- 43 kos and that is impressive no matter what era you
fought in.
You are so right, Dennis, and all of that should go without saying.
There is a small percentage of boxing fans who love to mutter such BS. Usually
turns out they have hardly ever seen Marciano fight.
There is a reason that after 50 years, Marciano still rates so highly
in heavyweight history. Some people lose a lot of stature as soon as their
reign ends, such as Tyson. Some gain stature as soon as their reign ends, such
as Holmes.
Rocky Marciano has stood the test of time. That's that.

BoxMuhammad
BoxMuham
2003-08-02 19:10:04 UTC
Permalink
From: "the Nay Sayer"
You're right I've never seen the whole fight.
LMFAO! Of course you've never seen it. How many of Marciano's fights
have you ever seen?
And yet, you let yourself post and post on about it. You let yourself
draw conclusions about something you've never even seen. Do you realize what
you make yourself into, stating dribble that Marciano was beaten up for 13
rounds, when you've haven't even seen the fight? Damn... People shouldn't let
themselves live that way, tate.
Yet millions upon millions do. Guess I'll just consider you an enemy
of mankind from now on, nay sayer.
Walcott was not a
great HW buy any stretch of the imagination.
Muhammad Ali and I and millions of others will have to disagree with
you. But again, something tells me you have *never* seen a single Walcott
fight. Except perhaps Marciano-Walcott II, by which time Jersey Joe was
finally done.
Nor was Charles or Moore. The
burden of proof is on you
History has proven these things, tate. If you need me to talk you
into them, you need a whole hell of a lot more than that.

BoxMuhammad
BoxMuham
2003-08-02 20:10:09 UTC
Permalink
Yeah... That would be as stupid as saying that one of your favorite
fighters was one you never even saw film of...
You still don't understand why Harry Greb is one of the favorite
fighters of many a fight fan? Of course you don't.
As I recall, I listed him among my favorite 20 fighters, based on
everything I've read about him in the ring, everything I know about his career.
You came for about a month after that. We have another loki hissy fit coming
on?
Enjoy the menopause!

BoxMuhammad
Loki
2003-08-02 20:19:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by BoxMuham
Yeah... That would be as stupid as saying that one of your favorite
fighters was one you never even saw film of...
You still don't understand why Harry Greb is one of the favorite
fighters of many a fight fan? Of course you don't.
As I recall, I listed him among my favorite 20 fighters, based on
everything I've read about him in the ring, everything I know about his career.
You came for about a month after that. We have another loki hissy fit coming
on?
Enjoy the menopause!
Greb was an all time great, to be sure. However, there is a world of
difference between aknowleging someone as an all time great from a
historical perspective and saying that he is one of your favorite
fighters. To say that someone you never saw is one of your favorite
fighters is as stupid as saying that one of your favorite restaurants
is a place you have never eaten, or one of your favorite symphonies is
one you have never heard.

It is a common trait among people with so little world experience that
they depend on the experiences of others to fulfill the emptiness in
their lives.


Loki
Isaiah
2003-08-03 09:22:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by Loki
Post by BoxMuham
Yeah... That would be as stupid as saying that one of your favorite
fighters was one you never even saw film of...
You still don't understand why Harry Greb is one of the favorite
fighters of many a fight fan? Of course you don't.
As I recall, I listed him among my favorite 20 fighters, based on
everything I've read about him in the ring, everything I know about his career.
You came for about a month after that. We have another loki hissy fit coming
on?
Enjoy the menopause!
Greb was an all time great, to be sure. However, there is a world of
difference between aknowleging someone as an all time great from a
historical perspective and saying that he is one of your favorite
fighters. To say that someone you never saw is one of your favorite
fighters is as stupid as saying that one of your favorite restaurants
is a place you have never eaten, or one of your favorite symphonies is
one you have never heard.
It is a common trait among people with so little world experience that
they depend on the experiences of others to fulfill the emptiness in
their lives.
Not only that, but he's lying about having seen Walcott/Marciano I.
Check this out:


<quote>

"A near shutout?" Anyone who's ever seen this bout knows
it wasn't
any kind of one-sided ass kicking.
Walcott was down, what five or six times? Bleeding early
on. A
very back and forth bout until the final stanza, when Marciano knocked
the
champion smooooth the f*ck out with one of the single most memorable
punches in
heavyweight history.


<end quote>


This is from about a month ago. It's clear that he's not confusing it
for another fight and it's clear he didn't see the fight he's talking
about. I'd love to see him try to weasel his way out of this one, but
I guess that's why he claims to have me KFed.



-Isaiah
Robert Phillips
2003-08-03 14:28:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by Isaiah
Not only that, but he's lying about having seen Walcott/Marciano I.
<quote>
"A near shutout?" Anyone who's ever seen this bout knows
it wasn't
any kind of one-sided ass kicking.
Walcott was down, what five or six times? Bleeding early
on. A
very back and forth bout until the final stanza, when Marciano knocked
the
champion smooooth the f*ck out with one of the single most memorable
punches in
heavyweight history.
<end quote>
This is from about a month ago. It's clear that he's not confusing it
for another fight and it's clear he didn't see the fight he's talking
about. I'd love to see him try to weasel his way out of this one, but
I guess that's why he claims to have me KFed.
-Isaiah
Because sometimes I'm just a troublemaker, I'm going to repost the above
"out in the open," so BoxM can see it in the post of someone he
(presumably) doesn't have killfiled and hasn't claimed to have
killfiled. He'll see it, since he's following this thread, but whether
or not he responds or how he responds is up to him.


Pie
BoxMuham
2003-08-03 15:01:56 UTC
Permalink
From: Robert Phillips
Because sometimes I'm just a troublemaker, I'm going to repost the above
"out in the open," so BoxM can see it in the post of someone he
(presumably) doesn't have killfiled and hasn't claimed to have
killfiled.
Thanks, Pie. Normally I wouldn't respond to isaiah, but I'll just
say that I was mixing Archie Moore's knock downs at the hands of Marciano into
the first Walcott-Marciano fight. That's the way it goes. I'm always happy to
admit any mistake. Usually comes from going a day without sleep, getting into
a boxing frenzy.

But I love how little isaiah logs and memorizes every word I post.
The guy is obsessed with me, going over and over my posts, looking for some
meaning in his life.

As Hank Williams would say, I saw the light, and killfiled that
strange, little stalker... He reminds me of a smaller version of the tiny guy
in Twin Peaks. The guy who peaks around every corner, hoping to find Peggy
Lipton in the arms of BoxM...

BoxM
BoxMuham
2003-08-03 09:54:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by Loki
It is a common trait among people with so little world experience that
they depend on the experiences of others to fulfill the emptiness in
their lives.
LOL! Back into the killfile, dimwit...
Loki
2003-08-03 16:01:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by BoxMuham
Post by Loki
It is a common trait among people with so little world experience that
they depend on the experiences of others to fulfill the emptiness in
their lives.
LOL! Back into the killfile, dimwit...
First of all, I couldn't care less if you actually did kill file me,
but beyond that I know by your past that you will not.


Loki

Continue reading on narkive:
Loading...