Originally Posted by Panthershock
Very solid justification for your argument. Clearly Frazier had better quality wins.
The undefeated record is what gives Marciano the edge, and it's not simply because he never lost. Certainly the 49-0 record stands out and helps his legacy. Losses also give us perspective into what type of fighter or strategy a fighter is vulnerable to. Frazier for example, we saw what Foreman did to him and we saw a post prime Ali outbox him twice.
Marciano is in a position where a further level of speculation is needed to determine what potential flaws could be exploited to beat him. Gun to my head, I'd agree that Marciano loses to 1971 Ali and gets knocked out by Foreman. However, you can't actually bring up specific fights in which he was knocked out early or lost a decision. It creates a less solid basis in which to speculate on Marciano losing.
just look at the walcott fight, rocky was completely outboxed in that one through 12 rounds until rocky eventually caught him. In other words he only barely managed it and walcott was no ali. Frazier over ali is miles better than anything on rocky's record - no way in hell could rocky have gotten the win over the greatest.
I feel as though if frazier had retired after that first ali fight and been undefeated with a win over the GOAT this would be a non debate, but because he went on and lost to guys miles and miles above anything that rocky ever fought and would also have lost to, he ends up being ranked below him.