Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Marciano was overrated and not an ATG.

Collapse
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #91
    Originally posted by Rafael Benitez View Post
    I meant a rematch after the second fight. The public wanted but why did he not give it to him? He made the old fool retire instead.

    Yeah he gets praise from experts so what? His accomplishments ARE outstanding mainly because he was competitive at such a ripe old age! It does speak for itself but so does the fact that Marciano struggled with a slow old man! Mate you don't have single answer for that one do you? The fact that Walcott would not even make it as a sparring partner in the 70's is a fact you crackers can't deal with. Before I get accused of racism by you ladies again, I would like to say that Quarry would wipe the floor with Walcott and that is a fact! I never said they were not good for their time and did not entertain, which is what our great sport is all about. All I am saying is Marciano is not an all time great and is overrated. He would not make it in top ten and would not have been known is 70's. he acheived alot for a small guy in a dead era. Good on him, but the small turd wouldhave been flushed in any decent era including the early 90's!
    Lmao!! You are a joke as is your opinion. You offer NO FACTS, only conjecture. Saying Wallcott was "slow" and would only be a sparring partner in the 70's is hilarious in unto itself! Claiming Quarry would have "wiped the floor with Walcott" as fact is not only laughable, but a lie that you hjave no PROOF of. The only thing getting "flushed" is your opinion and credibility on this subject.

    Comment


    • #92
      Marciano is eaither Saverly underrated or Saverly Overrated there a few who Rate him were he should be on any top ten list even thought he is my aa-time fav fighter I would rate him around the 5th spot

      and to say Hop and Woods would beat him Leads me to belive your just a ****** troll Looking for an argument

      Comment


      • #93
        Originally posted by JAB5239 View Post
        Lmao!! You are a joke as is your opinion. You offer NO FACTS, only conjecture. Saying Wallcott was "slow" and would only be a sparring partner in the 70's is hilarious in unto itself! Claiming Quarry would have "wiped the floor with Walcott" as fact is not only laughable, but a lie that you hjave no PROOF of. The only thing getting "flushed" is your opinion and credibility on this subject.
        Walcott was slow and that actually is a FACT.

        Originally posted by marciano1952 View Post
        Marciano is eaither Saverly underrated or Saverly Overrated there a few who Rate him were he should be on any top ten list even thought he is my aa-time fav fighter I would rate him around the 5th spot

        and to say Hop and Woods would beat him Leads me to belive your just a ****** troll Looking for an argument
        You should note that the word is severely before calling people ******. I can understand him being a favourite and there is no problem with that, as boxing is showbiz and his style did entertain. But top five? LOL.

        Comment


        • #94
          Originally posted by Fernando Torres View Post
          Walcott was slow and that actually is a FACT.

          You should note that the word is severely before calling people ******. I can understand him being a favourite and there is no problem with that, as boxing is showbiz and his style did entertain. But top five? LOL.
          Rafael Benitez is back and headed for another ban

          Poet

          Comment


          • #95
            [QUOTE=Fernando Torres;3850764]Walcott was slow and that actually is a FACT.QUOTE]

            Really, is that so? Why don't you, with your infinite wisdom, provide some factual evidence of this? I promise you, anything you think you can come up with, I'll tear it down and make you look foolish. I'll be waiting.

            Comment


            • #96
              Originally posted by poet682006 View Post
              Rafael Benitez is back and headed for another ban

              Poet

              I don't want him banned. I'd rather drop a steaming turd on his sorry opinions. Some of these guys just baffle me with their ignorance.

              Comment


              • #97
                [QUOTE=JAB5239;3851687]
                Originally posted by Fernando Torres View Post
                Walcott was slow and that actually is a FACT.QUOTE]

                Really, is that so? Why don't you, with your infinite wisdom, provide some factual evidence of this? I promise you, anything you think you can come up with, I'll tear it down and make you look foolish. I'll be waiting.
                The tapes say it all. Have you seen them? LOL. they also prove Chalres was also way over the hill and had been knocked out and beaten numerous times coming into the fight. Some of the beatings were vicious and recent.

                Why don't YOU give me one reason, just one good reason why you think Marciano could hold his own with by blocking shots with his head versus the likes of Ali, Holmes, Frazier, Tyson, Foreman and Liston. If he is number five he could go 15 with any of them and beat at least 2 for sure!!!!! LMAO!

                Comment


                • #98
                  Jersey Joe was certainly not slow. Walcott's problem was his overconfidence when he was in control...






                  Joe Louis -vs- Joe Walcott II 1948 - more free videos

                  Now I do agree that Charles was past his best years but he came in more prepared for the first Marciano fight which was his last good performance.
                  After those losses he became a completely shot fighter only fighting for money.



                  Last edited by TheGreatA; 07-29-2008, 12:08 PM.

                  Comment


                  • #99
                    [QUOTE=Fernando Torres;3852894]
                    Originally posted by JAB5239 View Post

                    The tapes say it all. Have you seen them? LOL.
                    The tapes do say it all. And they prove he was slow of niether hand nor foot, as well as being an excellent technician.

                    they also prove Chalres was also way over the hill and had been knocked out and beaten numerous times coming into the fight. Some of the beatings were vicious and recent.
                    Gotta tell ya, I love the colorful description. To bad its not true and doesn't paint the whole picture. Lets go back as far as Charles' SD loss to Elmer Ray in 1947 and start there till we get to the first Marciano fight. Between these time Ezzard fought 44 times going 38-6. All 6 losses were to top 10 rated fighters at the time. No shame there. In that time frame he beat most of the fighters that had defeated him. His ONLY ko loss was to Walcott in 1951. Other losses were to Walcott in August of 1952 (dec), Rex Layne a month and a half later (dec), Nino Valdes (dec) in August of 1953 and Harold Johnson a month later by (SD). If you do the math you will realize charles was fighting at an incredible pace (more than 7 times a year) over that time frame. Injuries would have been inevitable and he would have had to fight with then in order to pay the bills and put food on the table, something you have failed to acknowledge again. so please, explain to me how any of those losses detract from Charles as a fighter in give us some detail to these so called "vicious beating".
                    Why don't YOU give me one reason, just one good reason why you think Marciano could hold his own with by blocking shots with his head versus the likes of Ali, Holmes, Frazier, Tyson, Foreman and Liston. If he is number five he could go 15 with any of them and beat at least 2 for sure!!!!! LMAO!
                    First off, I dont rank him in the top five. Second, the man cleared out his entire division and retired undefeated. He accomplished everything he had to accomplish. You can't blame anyone for the era they fought in. It can't detract from what he did. And lastly, every fighter you named has struggled with much lesser fighters than Marciano. Marciano would be a cruiser weight in most of those era's and still would have been a force at heavyweight. Bank on it.

                    Comment


                    • [QUOTE]
                      Originally posted by TheManchine View Post
                      Jersey Joe was certainly not slow. Walcott's problem was his overconfidence when he was in control...

                      Now I do agree that Charles was past his best years but he came in more prepared for the first Marciano fight which was his last good performance.
                      After those losses he became a completely shot fighter only fighting for money.QUOTE]

                      This is a reasonable post from somebody who knows the facts.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X
                      TOP