Marciano ruined boxing...

I'm resurrecting this old topic of mine to put in the following article taken from Budd Schulberg's anthology "Ringside: A Treasury of Boxing Reportage". Alas, I was searching for heroes in the mode of the great ones of old, from Barney Ross and Henry Armstrong to the lightweight version of Roberto Duran, unbeatable at 135. And believing I had found a twenty first century model in Sugar Shane. And then he comes apart against a latter day entry, Vernon Forrest, who in turn is taken out by the primitive Ricardo Mayorga, who is soon exposed as a mindless punching bag by Felix Trinidad, who then loses every round to defensive marvel with the wicked right jab, Winky Wright. Our trouble today is that the top performers don't have enough fights to establish a credible average. In the days when boxing was more of a mainline sport, the best fighters fought several times a month. They were gaining experience our best boys will never know. Good God, while winning the featherweight title in 1937, Henry Armstrong fought twenty-six times. And after winning the world lightweight title from Barney Ross (The greatest Jewish fighter since my old man's hero, the great Benny Leonard) our little buzzsaw from LA defended his crown twenty times, finally losing it to Fritzie Zivic when he was beginning to slow down at last after one hundred fights, in there with a score of immortals and so many other toughies whose names still ring a bell with long memoried old timers. A grand master in chess doesn't win a world title on his first or second time out. He learns by playing other masters. Our chess game with blood is no different. If Sugar Shane had been fighting sixy or seventy years ago, he might have learned from a Vernon Forrest defeat how to cope with that type of fighter. Learning on the job even when losing was par for the course in those busy old days. But in today's fifty-to-a-million-dollar HBO or Showtime extravaganzas, to lose a mega-match, often that once-a-year PPV for all the marbles, is to find yourself in virtual eclipse, if not retirement. Great fighters, indeed Hall of Famers, often lost their share. Kid Gavilan. Billy Graham. Jake LaMotta. Emile Griffith... a distinguished list. Because the quality of the opposition was so high and fought so often. But today, with a lovely boxer like Shane Mosley (and three or four others come to mind), instead of three, it's one strike and you're out. Either you're a multi-million-dollar-baby or a bum. I look before and after and pine for the days when boxing was as frequently competitive as big time tennis.

I dont think Marciano is the reason... I see the creation of all these championship belts as the real reason why top fighters are able to avoid eachother and maintain an unbeaten record. If there was one championship belt for each weight, it would be impossible to avoid fighters in the same division with zero's in the lose column. Boxers and promoters and the governing bodies should sort this mess out, if they did, and people could recognise the one champion at each weight, boxing would be GREAT again. edit: looks like someone already made this point..... I couldn't agree more with this post, if there was only one champion, it would be impossible to avoid the best and remain undefeated. Now...people can be "champions" for years without ever having fought the elite fighters in their division. This is boxing's biggest problem.

.....Damn, this new guy is good. Excellent thread topic and very well thought out. indeed,its exellent

I AGREE.. EVEN THO A COUPLE BLACK FIGHTERS WERE ROBBED AGAINST HIM ... who were robbed?

I dont think Marciano is the reason... I see the creation of all these championship belts as the real reason why top fighters are able to avoid eachother and maintain an unbeaten record. If there was one championship belt for each weight, it would be impossible to avoid fighters in the same division with zero's in the lose column. Boxers and promoters and the governing bodies should sort this mess out, if they did, and people could recognise the one champion at each weight, boxing would be GREAT again. edit: looks like someone already made this point.....

I don't hate Marciano at all. I just don't rate him that highly just because he retired undefeated. He had a tremendous achievement but his undefeated record suddenly became something a target to aim for as opposed to something that happened. It became more important in the minds of promoters and fighters than fighting the best. The word robbery is thrown around so much in boxing lately that half the time I don't even listen. Next if a fighter gets knocked out, they're going to say he was robbed. People are still saying that Vitali Klitschko was robbed against Lennox Lewis, when half of Vitali's face was hanging off.

very interesting thread. i think that your point of view is really interesting, but there is something that i am very confused about. What years did the wba and wbc started???...cos on the old times there werent that many federeations, so per weight there was only one world champion. but now its "easy" to be a champion and not fight the best one on the category, because of all the belts that are out there. well, if im wrong please correct me =P and something else to add, im very surprise that there are a lot of people that hate marciano. i thought that he was respected and admired by almost everyone =P.

That's right, Godzilla came on the scene big in 1954, and guess who retired a year later? That's right, good old 49-0 scardy cat Marciano.:owned: I was just *waiting* for somebody to play the tired old giant-space-lizard card :nonono:

Well I am sorry to spoil the news to all the Maricano nuthuggers, but he did dodge a fight with the big Japanese (Gojira, AKA GODZILLA), so Marciano is not the greatest. That's right, Godzilla came on the scene big in 1954, and guess who retired a year later? That's right, good old 49-0 scardy cat Marciano.:owned: Do you have any proof of this because I've heard anybody, not even the biggest Marciano haters ever say anything about this... And honestly if this "Godzilla" came on the scene in 1954 he would have no right to challenge Marciano, you can't just start fighting and challenge the Heavyweight champion of the world...

Well I am sorry to spoil the news to all the Maricano nuthuggers, but he did dodge a fight with the big Japanese (Gojira, AKA GODZILLA), so Marciano is not the greatest. That's right, Godzilla came on the scene big in 1954, and guess who retired a year later? That's right, good old 49-0 scardy cat Marciano.:owned:

ya blame it on the rock and not on the promoters

they tried to get rocky out of retirement to fight patterson

The word robbery is thrown around so much in boxing lately that half the time I don't even listen. Next if a fighter gets knocked out, they're going to say he was robbed. Marciano against Tiger Ted, from what I read and heard were very close fights. I would say robbery is the wrong word to use, if that is what someone was thinking. A robbery is Walcott-Louis I or Brinkley-Bonsante. There was another fight called a robbery that just happened but I didn't see it so I won't mention more of it.

wnot becuase hes white becuase hes slow easy to hit and still lost to ezzard charles and ted lowry and maybe more early in his career.." the only good black fighter he fought were almost 40 and he refused to fight floyd patterson.. he was a good fighter but really had less talent then most,, your kidding me right? Patterson ducked Marciano Odd how Marciano wanted to fight Patterson but Floyd's people wouldn't make the fight, and as soon as Marciano retired Patterson was the first one to step up and fight for the title...

Very nice thread. Interesting points that I cannot dissagree with. I would be less of a Duran fan if he hadn't tried to take on the biggest challenges that he could reasonably face. His legend resonates so strongly because he tested himself so hard against the undisputed best at way beyond his natural weight. That he was battered by Hearns and pyschologically beaten by Leonard (the second time) still speak volumes over him not taking those challenges and keeping his sheet clean. '0' really means nothing.

according to vagabond(manga) and Musashi(novel) i think Musashi lost to Inshun of the Hozoin but ran away before being killed, but beat him in a rematch almost killing him. I know Musashi and Vagbond are not official, but I think Eiji said according to his investigations, it did happen Alot of that stuff is about confirmed as his participation at the battle of Sekiagahara, Musashi's life and times are extremely hard to confirm because of all the bullshit heresay that comes with it.

Yeah don't start this anti-Marciano shit because he's white. The good black fighters of the day all lost to him BY KNOCKOUT. wnot becuase hes white becuase hes slow easy to hit and still lost to ezzard charles and ted lowry and maybe more early in his career.." the only good black fighter he fought were almost 40 and he refused to fight floyd patterson.. he was a good fighter but really had less talent then most,,

No black fighters were ever robbed against him...The only fighter that ever had a chance of being robbed against him was Roland LaStarza, and the reason behind that MD was because Marciano A)hadn't trained B)was afraid to go full force both were in response to almost killing the fighter in his previous fight (Carmine Vingo)... No other black fighter was robbed... Black Fighters like Ezzard Charles and Jersey Joe Walcott did well against him but neither were robbed my friend... ted lowry. early early in his career the were many questionable decisions

lol ur welcome, Musashi is my idol, since i first read Vagabond, and i started to investigate a lot about his life I started reading about him a couple of years ago, incredible read.

Who had the quote that said "Show me a fighter that hasn't lost, and I will show you a fighter who hasn't fought anybody" ?