Originally posted by Unstable89
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Is Marciano of the one most overrated HW of all time?
Collapse
-
-
Originally posted by Unstable89 View PostIs this meant to clean up Rocky weak resume and try to put some gloss on it??
It ain't that simple, very average fighters in a weak eraLast edited by Chase8400; 09-26-2008, 02:17 PM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Unstable89 View PostWOW, Mayweather never lost nor did Ottke.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Chase8400 View PostAnd? They fought how many fights against top competition? 34 and 39 fights total. Floyd fought a few good fighters only. Do you honestly think Floyd would win 10 more fights against top fighters in his division? That's what i thought. Ottke was never **** anyways and never fought anyone. 6 KO's in 34 fights is less than pathetic. Piss off.
Comment
-
I will be honest in that I really enjoy watching the old Tyson fights. He was quick, strong and fierce as a competitior. A fighter based upon fear. However if were talking about overrated... did Tyson beat any true greats? Yes, but only one- an old Larry Homes. He lost to the best two fighters of his era in Lennox Lewis and the 'real deal' Holyfield. He is the youngest heavyweight and a former undisputed champion and therefore gets respect. He also beat three top fighters in Tyrell Briggs, Frank Bruno and (his best victim) Micheal Spinks. The man is a clear boxing legend. Should have been better if were honest but crucially never fufilled his promise and that is why he is overrated.
Comment
-
This thread perfectly illustrates all the holes in evaluating other era fighters (boxing in the 30's through the 50's was an especially transitional time to get to what we have today and before that it was practically prehistoric). A lot of the grumbles are completely immaterial.
- Being a small HW. Well, too freakin' bad. The landscape of boxing changed and the average weight and height of HW's quickly got bigger and bigger. Marciano still fought guys that were mostly his size because that was what was considered average for a HW at the time. Move on.
- Bum's. Again, is that Rocky's fault? You fight who is out there and there aren't exactly blatant examples of Marciano ducking anyone worthwhile that fans really wanted to see him fight. Louis and Holmes had much the same problem. You take note of this fact, sure, but it is unfair to use it as tarnish against a fighters overall career.
^ Also with ^ "his best wins were old/washed up guys." 99% of all boxers face past champs and old vets at some point. Its how you build a record and make a good payday. So **** off with that nonsense.
-Rattling off names of so-and-so could beat him and anyone he beat. Too easy, you'll never know, pure speculation, and therefore stupid. You especially just don't compare guys from vastly different eras because there are too many varying factors like guys getting more refined, training better, getting bigger, having different schedules, gloves, rounds, rules, and so forth. (This also goes back to the first point, a modern day Marciano probably wouldn't even be fighting at HW and would benefit from modern era training.) Its just childish to time machine compare one way or the other and very dumb when you use 20, 30, 40+ years differance.
Marciano was good for his time. That is a fact. He should be respected for being at the top, fighting all comers and beating them, illustrating fight changing power and tenacity, and being one of the few boxers to retire before he became a joke, stay retired, and actually manage to retain his money. Even if you cannot respect the first three points, you can at least acknowledge the third. I wish we could say the same of so many greats who we just see sadly fade before our eyes and stick in there way too long.Last edited by Not Monty; 09-26-2008, 06:16 PM.
Comment
Comment