Was Rocky Marciano an ATG?

Some people used to make a big deal out of Rocky winning 49 fights, with no losses, but to be an ATG you need to win over top competition and Rocky never did that. He fought many "big names"; Joe Louis, Jersey Joe Walcott, Ezzard Charles, Archie Moore, etc.; but they were way past their prime when Rocky fought them. So my answer is: No, because he only fought "bums". A 49-0 record means nothing if the "big names" you face are not in their prime anymore. People who consider Rocky Marciano as top 50 ATG know nothing about boxing. . You could just as easily be talking about Floyd.

No he wouldn't have. A prime Patterson would have been the best guy Marciano had fought. I won't count a 36/37 year old inactive Joe Louis as a great opponent. Have you seen a prime Peterson. Although quick for a heavyweight, he lacked a chin that could handle the bombs Marciano flew. Based off what Johansson did, Marciano would have done much worse

I don't know who wins this one but one thing is for sure, people have this idea that Patterson was a weak fighter. ..he certainly is not one of the best heavies but he was very good. He was practically Jones fast, put his punches together really well and had fast feet. I think Patterson may have been, along with johnson, the next heavy at setting traps. If he could keep from behind overwhelmed by marciano...and liston had a lot more reach and size than marciano, this could have been a great fight.

If a great fighter is out of his prime, that still doesn´t make a win over them "meaningless". Hell, Manny is way out of his prime, yet Floyd´s win over that great fighter isn´t meaningless, not at all. While it is of course not as good as victory over a prime great fighter, but it definitely still counts.

The revisionist history done on Marciano to make him seem like an average fighter on here is honestly sickening. The guy is easily an ATG and easily a top 10 HW ATG. The people who usually revise Marcianos talent are ethnics with agendas, I'm serious about that. They're the same people who give Louis full credit for beating the shadow of himself Max Schemling 2 years after Schemling crumpled him.

Some people used to make a big deal out of Rocky winning 49 fights, with no losses, but to be an ATG you need to win over top competition and Rocky never did that. He fought many "big names"; Joe Louis, Jersey Joe Walcott, Ezzard Charles, Archie Moore, etc.; but they were way past their prime when Rocky fought them. So my answer is: No, because he only fought "bums". A 49-0 record means nothing if the "big names" you face are not in their prime anymore. People who consider Rocky Marciano as top 50 ATG know nothing about boxing. . Now which undefeated fighter does that remind me of?

Some people used to make a big deal out of Rocky winning 49 fights, with no losses, but to be an ATG you need to win over top competition and Rocky never did that. He fought many "big names"; Joe Louis, Jersey Joe Walcott, Ezzard Charles, Archie Moore, etc.; but they were way past their prime when Rocky fought them. So my answer is: No, because he only fought "bums". A 49-0 record means nothing if the "big names" you face are not in their prime anymore. People who consider Rocky Marciano as top 50 ATG know nothing about boxing. . This will get good... Is Floyd a bum too because I can't name many big names he fought in their prime either...

No he wouldn't have. A prime Patterson would have been the best guy Marciano had fought. I won't count a 36/37 year old inactive Joe Louis as a great opponent. Inactive as in 8 fights (all wins) in the previous year? Louis was well past his best, which is why isn't usually counted in Rocky's best wins. At least try to be somewhat accurate in your statements if possible. Patterson wasn't even a top 3 LHW when Marciano retired, but it's doubtful his chin would've held up had Rocky stuck around.

Marciano would have KO'ed Patterson, I can say that with no other question in my mind. No he wouldn't have. A prime Patterson would have been the best guy Marciano had fought. I won't count a 36/37 year old inactive Joe Louis as a great opponent.

Retired at 32. Meanwhile Mayweather, who will be 39 next spring, is being pressed to keep fighting. Marciano saw that young talented floyd patterson and played duck duck goose. Marciano would have KO'ed Patterson, I can say that with no other question in my mind.

However Marciano didnt have to fight 6'3 super heavyweights,beating the 40's Moore of sub 200 pounds at around 5'8 is no comparison to the kind of fighters Tyson had.....Marciano is an all time great soley on his undeafetted record as Tyson is on youngest HW champ ever. Do we give Joe Louis more credit because he beat Primo Carnera and Buddy Baer? Had he not fought those two would you really look at him any differently than you do now? You can if you like, but I'm not about to give Tyson a nod because he came from an era which produced bigger guys like Bonecrusher Smith, Pinklon Thomas, Buster Douglas and the great Mitch Blood Green. Fighters (like humans in general) have gotten bigger throughout the years, just like training methods have changed. It is an accepted difference between eras imo and, of course, Mike Tyson had no great super heavyweight to deal with in his prime years, they came later.

Retired at 32. Meanwhile Mayweather, who will be 39 next spring, is being pressed to keep fighting. Marciano saw that young talented floyd patterson and played duck duck goose.

Yes he is :ANYWORD:

He's an ATG for his time. There's no doubt about that. If you want to scale back his ATG status based on the times competition level I have no problem with that. IMO Vitali & Wlad will have the same kind of asterik in there careers. Great fighters but the competition to prove they were truly amongst the top of the ATG list just wasn't there. Not there fault, but it is what it is. Vitali IMO could of been one if the best at any time period.

However Marciano didnt have to fight 6'3 super heavyweights,beating the 40's Moore of sub 200 pounds at around 5'8 is no comparison to the kind of fighters Tyson had.....Marciano is an all time great soley on his undeafetted record as Tyson is on youngest HW champ ever. Marciano beat a 38 year old more less than 5 months after Archie beat the number 1 HW contender, 6'3", 210 lb Nino Valdez. Moore was 5'11", not "around 5'8." Carry on.

You must remember who Mike was then. Where he came from and all the problems he had in his life. He had been distracted for a long time, and he definitely underestimated the challenge from Douglas. Remember also that the fight was in Tokyo, Japan. There were too many distractions for Mike at that time. It was a disaster waiting to happen. You are too critical, in my opinion, when it comes to judging Mike. With his background and with the people he had around him, it was expected that he would slip up now and then. I don't mean that Marciano lacked courage, it was a general statement referring to fighters who are obsessed with their undefeated record. . Dude....Every fighter had distractions! If you research Marciano you would see that his taste for the ladies made Mike look like a choir boy...He also loved to eat...dude could inhale a bowl of pasta! (I am exxagerating about the pasta ahem). Tyson had a rough time? Jim Braddock, the Cindarella man had to fight with arthritis and the knowledge that if he did not win his family could starve to death.... Joe Louis? pressure? what pressure? every service man counting on you to win the war in the ring for America....as a black man. Distractions are part of the game. I bet I could become heavyweight champion...at least heavyweight...if you took my wife and kids, chained me to the floor, let me out to train, eat and ****. The very definition of focus is when you can commit homicide in a confined space and all you have to worry about is punching the other guy in the face as hard as you can.

Yes, and too ask such a stupid question is moronic. Considering the mans limitations; he won the most coveted prizes in the history of the sport. Although a small man, with very small arms, a man easy to cut, far from balanced and often referred to as clumsy... He accomplished a whole hell of a lot. People give Marciano criticism for his win against Louis, Charles, Walcott being saw as past prime but fact remains those three named where dangerous to the end and ATGs some say top 10 heavyweights... Yet this is often over looked by the likes of Mayweather and Pacquaio, yet I don't rate either of their past prime opponents near as great as Marcianos 3. Not to mention beating a great boxer in La Starza and coming back to knock out Moore.

Ezzard Charles had lost to both Harold Johnson and Nino Valdes, and was way out of his prime when he fought Marciano. Ezzard was slightly lighter than Marciano in their first fight and slightly heavier in their second. Archie Moore was 7 years older and slightly lighter than Marciano. Joe Walcott was 9 years older than Marciano and well past his prime. Joe Louis was forced to fight in a comeback out of financial problems. Sad, sad. This fight counts for nothing. Do you really mean light heavyweight? .Yes. Marciano could easily have fought at 175 even in his day of same day weigh ins. Heavyweights don't have to make weight and I have seen photos of Marciano weighing in in street clothes and only weighing in the low 180s. He didn't skip meals of beverages for the weigh in either.Marciano weighed in as light as 176. Charles is often called the best light heavyweight ever but it's not a proven fact. Charles took loses at 175 and Harold Johnson was a great light heavyweight. Valdez was a good, very large heavyweight. Yes, Joe Louis, Walcott and Charles were all old and past prime when Marciano fought them. Still they were the guys he had to beat to win and keep the heavyweight title. I don't think there was anyone Marciano should have fought who he avoided or ducked. If you aren't as high on Marciano as I am that's your right and maybe you are right and I have him overrated. This all time great stuff is opinion based and can't really be proven. There are no right or wrong answers. What ever someone thinks about a fighters place in history is the right answer for them.

I'm not blowing up the importance of "a few", there was one in particular and virtually everyone who I would rank ahead of Marciano had more than he did, including Henry Armstrong who had more than 20. In Tyson's case, in his prime he lost to Buster Douglas. He didn't 'get caught', he was systematically broken down and knocked out in his prime by arguably the worst undisputed heavyweight champion in the modern era of boxing. You must remember who Mike was then. Where he came from and all the problems he had in his life. He had been distracted for a long time, and he definitely underestimated the challenge from Douglas. Remember also that the fight was in Tokyo, Japan. There were too many distractions for Mike at that time. It was a disaster waiting to happen. You are too critical, in my opinion, when it comes to judging Mike. With his background and with the people he had around him, it was expected that he would slip up now and then. Tyson's legacy as a fighter is almost exclusively built on the big play. His knockouts were so insanely beautiful that we tend to forget who exactly was getting knocked out which, as I tried to say before, is what we do to Marciano with his record. We see this big and shiny undefeated record and that's enough. Had he stuck around, I don't think Marciano would have went through Sonny Liston and Floyd Patterson still undefeated and even if he had beaten Douglas and not gone to prison, Holyfield, Lennox Lewis and a few others were on their way for Tyson. The two had comparable opposition at their best - primarily less than average save for some old greats who stuck around too long - had similar results and, at least for me, rank very near one another historically, with the large determining factor being that Marciano was never beaten by one of those less than average opponents and certainly not destroyed by one during his prime. If you think there were 100 better fighters than Marciano, that's fine, it's your opinion I disagree with you. But to talk about courage and challenges in regards to him is something different. Marciano was no cutey, he blocked punches with his face and his ribs. He was one of the greatest brawling fighters in my opinion and that was what was spectacular about him. Those type of fighters don't do what he did for the most part. He won fights because of his heart, his chin and a big punch. He was trying to be the last man standing and he was the last man standing every time he fought. I don't mean that Marciano lacked courage, it was a general statement referring to fighters who are obsessed with their undefeated record. .