youtube channel with upscaled old fights

[them_apples]

very high quality of rocky and charles

Charles is heavier than rocky - shouldn't Rocky get credit for beating maybe the greatest lhw ever and being smaller?

check this channel out, many of the framerates are ai restored and the movements and detail are much better

You can really see the phenominal skills of both men evenRocky. charles is as savvy as they come, the subtle rolls and slips and set ups

[Willie Pep 229]

Great images - thanks for posting.

I wish they were the complete fights with the original announcers.

I really enjoy the old time introductions, the excitement of the live announcer, and when applicable the TV commercials. It brings together the whole historical experience.

But the images are the best I've seen.

[Ivich]

very high quality of rocky and charles

Charles is heavier than rocky - shouldn't Rocky get credit for beating maybe the greatest lhw ever and being smaller?

check this channel out, many of the framerates are ai restored and the movements and detail are much better

You can really see the phenominal skills of both men evenRocky. charles is as savvy as they come, the subtle rolls and slips and set ups

Why should Rocky get credit for beating a past prime Charles who put on 7lbs in the 3 months gap between their 2 fights? Charles came in at a then career high of 192lbs,he scaled just under 182lbs when he won the title, what advantage do you think the added weight gave him?

[them_apples]

Why should Rocky get credit for beating a past prime Charles who put on 7lbs in the 3 months gap between their 2 fights? Charles came in at a then career high of 192lbs,he scaled just under 182lbs when he won the title, what advantage do you think the added weight gave him?

I don’t think it gave him an advantage, but a large portion of this forum would. They put heavy emphasis on weight even though history tells us we shouldn’t. There are a lot of other factors at play.

you think Fury isn’t carrying literally an extra 100 lbs of dead weight? Let alone 7 lbs, which is nothing.

my main point is rocky was literally lighter than Charles but Marciano is always written off for being too small and also too big (against lhw). And putting 7 lbs on in 3 months won’t kill you lol. That coulda been a meal for all we know.

the only thing wrong with Rocky is he’s so tough he beats up men bigger than him so people call him a heavyweight. Then when he beats up the best fighters in his day who happen to be lhws, all of a sudden he’s too big and strong even at 187 lbs. mean while Spinks beat Holmes and Holyfield (with roids) was the HW champ. Then once again, Moorer a lhw beat Holyfield.

so nothing new here, main reason is at first glance Rocky seems amatuerish and small for a heavyweight. Same beef he got in the 50s he gets today. There was no reason for Charles and Walcott to lose to Rocky if he was so unskillful. Problem is nobody knows what they are watching.

he’s a very clever fighter and has the capability of throwing very hard punches from in close. He uses his head as bait so get oponents to throw at him so he can duck under neath and get inside.

[Willie Pep 229]

Why should Rocky get credit for beating a past prime Charles who put on 7lbs in the 3 months gap between their 2 fights? Charles came in at a then career high of 192lbs,he scaled just under 182lbs when he won the title, what advantage do you think the added weight gave him?

Because a fighter can only heat the man you put in front of him. He didn't duck, he didn't stall the timing. He did his job the best he could.

Any fight cam be discredited if you really want to; no fight has perfect circumstances.

[billeau2]

Love this channel! There is another decent one also... These guys do a lot of work to get that stuff restored and it really is revealing.

[them_apples]

I love how these guys deliberately use their heads to bait punches and make opponents miss, create openings. Its not even a defensive move really. You can see both charles and Rocky placing their head in positions that are difficult to reach or land well (like inner shoulder of oponent). Always something good you can get out of this stuff

[Ivich]

Because a fighter can only heat the man you put in front of him. He didn't duck, he didn't stall the timing. He did his job the best he could.

Any fight cam be discredited if you really want to; no fight has perfect circumstances.

I'm not discrediting him, I'm asking a valid question. Personally I think Charles was significantly diminished after their first fight ,15 rds with a relentless attrition puncher at that stage of your career will do that.

[Ivich]

I don’t think it gave him an advantage, but a large portion of this forum would. They put heavy emphasis on weight even though history tells us we shouldn’t. There are a lot of other factors at play.

you think Fury isn’t carrying literally an extra 100 lbs of dead weight? Let alone 7 lbs, which is nothing.

my main point is rocky was literally lighter than Charles but Marciano is always written off for being too small and also too big (against lhw). And putting 7 lbs on in 3 months won’t kill you lol. That coulda been a meal for all we know.

the only thing wrong with Rocky is he’s so tough he beats up men bigger than him so people call him a heavyweight. Then when he beats up the best fighters in his day who happen to be lhws, all of a sudden he’s too big and strong even at 187 lbs. mean while Spinks beat Holmes and Holyfield (with roids) was the HW champ. Then once again, Moorer a lhw beat Holyfield.

so nothing new here, main reason is at first glance Rocky seems amatuerish and small for a heavyweight. Same beef he got in the 50s he gets today. There was no reason for Charles and Walcott to lose to Rocky if he was so unskillful. Problem is nobody knows what they are watching.

he’s a very clever fighter and has the capability of throwing very hard punches from in close. He uses his head as bait so get oponents to throw at him so he can duck under neath and get inside.

Charles and Walcott were past prime when Rocky got to them,that's not his fault but it's a fact. It would have been nice to see the Charles and Walcott who fought Louis against Rocky.

[Ivich]

I don’t think it gave him an advantage, but a large portion of this forum would. They put heavy emphasis on weight even though history tells us we shouldn’t. There are a lot of other factors at play.

you think Fury isn’t carrying literally an extra 100 lbs of dead weight? Let alone 7 lbs, which is nothing.

my main point is rocky was literally lighter than Charles but Marciano is always written off for being too small and also too big (against lhw). And putting 7 lbs on in 3 months won’t kill you lol. That coulda been a meal for all we know.

the only thing wrong with Rocky is he’s so tough he beats up men bigger than him so people call him a heavyweight. Then when he beats up the best fighters in his day who happen to be lhws, all of a sudden he’s too big and strong even at 187 lbs. mean while Spinks beat Holmes and Holyfield (with roids) was the HW champ. Then once again, Moorer a lhw beat Holyfield.

so nothing new here, main reason is at first glance Rocky seems amatuerish and small for a heavyweight. Same beef he got in the 50s he gets today. There was no reason for Charles and Walcott to lose to Rocky if he was so unskillful. Problem is nobody knows what they are watching.

he’s a very clever fighter and has the capability of throwing very hard punches from in close. He uses his head as bait so get oponents to throw at him so he can duck under neath and get inside.

Charles was best around the 180/185lbs mark and even better as a light heavy. AGE,and RING MILEAGE is the reason they lost