Beterbiev vs Marciano

[elfag]

Marciano is vastly over rated and over romanticised as some all-conquering monster. The truth is that he was a chubby 5ft10 guy who fought a load of over the hill, part timer boxers and hopless contenders with some decent boxers in between.

Beterbiev has access to better training, science and nutrition. He also has incredible pedigree; 295-5 as an amateur and a 2 x Olympian in the MODERN era.

In comparison, Marciano didn't even take boxing seriously until the age of 25 when he started feasting on a bunch of palookas.

Beterbiev mauls him to an ugly late TKO. Marciano's toughness keeps him in the game but eventually he would be overwhelmed.

Finally someone with an unbiased opinion.

I mean for *** sake Marciano doesnt even have a size advantage here, hes actually smaller than beterbiev in many dimensions. People want to make him out to be a giant slayer, what giants did he face most of his top competition were former light heavyweights who were 175 fight night so nearly middleweights of today, then a shot joe lewis one of the few actual full size heavyweights with a pedigree he fought and the rest of his competition was atrocious.

"over romanticized" hits the nail on the head, people cant admit a decent but not proven ATG level lightweight of today would knock out the old school "heavyweight" of the past.

[Willie Pep 229]

Finally someone with an unbiased opinion.

I mean for *** sake Marciano doesnt even have a size advantage here, hes actually smaller than beterbiev in many dimensions. People want to make him out to be a giant slayer, what giants did he face most of his top competition were former light heavyweights who were 175 fight night so nearly middleweights of today, then a shot joe lewis one of the few actual full size heavyweights with a pedigree he fought and the rest of his competition was atrocious.

"over romanticized" hits the nail on the head, people cant admit a decent but not proven ATG level lightweight of today would knock out the old school "heavyweight" of the past.

Come on, the other guy calls Marciano chubby, and you need to learn the man's name "Joe Louis."

The former needs to lighten up on the hyperbole, and with the latter (while it might seem to be trivial nick picking on my part,) it's important that you get the important names correct if we are going to except your extrapolations on the quality of Marciano's other opponents.

Why the Rocky bashing? Let the old guys enjoy their golden years. Make your counter points but don't sound so condescending and angry.

[Ivich]

Finally someone with an unbiased opinion.

I mean for *** sake Marciano doesnt even have a size advantage here, hes actually smaller than beterbiev in many dimensions. People want to make him out to be a giant slayer, what giants did he face most of his top competition were former light heavyweights who were 175 fight night so nearly middleweights of today, then a shot joe lewis one of the few actual full size heavyweights with a pedigree he fought and the rest of his competition was atrocious.

"over romanticized" hits the nail on the head, people cant admit a decent but not proven ATG level lightweight of today would knock out the old school "heavyweight" of the past.

I'd pick Marciano to beat Beterbiev,there are very very few men under 190lbs,I'd give a decent chance to beat Rocky,
Dempsey,Tunney ,a fresher Charles,Langford

.I'd give them a fair chance .In fact I'd pick Dempsey to beat him.

.Beterbiev no

[Willow The Wisp]

Happy to help find the real answers to these types of questions, and to why such questions are even being asked.


https://www.forbes.com/sites/neilhow...h=4efccb1b8b7f


You're Not The Man Your Father Was

Neil Howe


Oct 2, 2017,11:23am EDT

More From Forbes


According to a recent report from JAMA, testosterone therapy among American men is on the rise. From 2010 to 2013, prescriptions more than doubled, which researchers partially attribute to ubiquitous drug marketing campaigns urging older men to boost “low T” levels. The swell of interest reflects a genuine physiological shift: Across the population, men today have less testosterone compared to men of the same age a generation ago. Asking why requires untangling a complex web of social, environmental, and behavioral factors that are dismantling age-old ideas about masculinity and triggering real anxiety over changing gender roles.

Studies show that men’s testosterone levels have been declining for decades. The most prominent, a 2007 study in the Journal of Clinical Endocrinology and Metabolism, revealed a “substantial” drop in U.S. men’s testosterone levels since the 1980s, with average levels declining by about 1% per year. This means, for example, that a 60-year-old man in 2004 had testosterone levels 17% lower than those of a 60-year-old in 1987. Another study of Danish men produced similar findings, with double-digit declines among men born in the 1960s compared to those born in the 1920s.
The challenges to men’s health don’t end there. Rates of certain reproductive disorders (like testicular cancer) have risen over time, while multiple European studies have found that ***** counts are sinking. These trends coincide with a decline in musculoskeletal strength among young men: In a 2016 study, the average 20- to 34-year-old man could apply 98 pounds of force with a right-handed grip, down from 117 pounds by a man of the same age in 1985. Though grip strength isn’t necessarily a proxy for overall fitness, it’s a strong predictor of future mortality.
Also playing a role are long-term shifts in the ways we work and live. Young men are far less likely to hold jobs in manual labor, so they don’t have to be as physically strong as previous generations. Meanwhile, certain forms of close relationships—such as marriage, fatherhood, and increased time spent with children—are causally linked to lower testosterone levels. Yet here again the evidence is muddled: On the one hand, Gen-X and Millennial men are marrying later and having fewer kids. On the other hand, young men today are more likely to live with other people—which may promote prosocial hormones like oxytocin that are natural antagonists to testosterone. And those who are fathers are spending more time with their children.

One reason why it’s so hard to pinpoint what’s driving the declines is the sheer number of factors that could be in play. To account for low testosterone, researchers have cited other lifestyle trends as wide-ranging as increased temperatures in homes and offices, lack of exercise, and even tight underwear. It’s also difficult to establish the direction of causality. Has testosterone declined in response to a changed world, or has the world changed to accommodate less virile men? Or is it both? Take declines in strength, for example: While we know supplementing with extra testosterone by itself increases muscle mass, we also know that strenuous exercise by itself promotes natural testosterone .

[Willow The Wisp]

I'd pick Marciano to beat Beterbiev,there are very very few men under 190lbs,I'd give a decent chance to beat Rocky,
Dempsey,Tunney ,a fresher Charles,Langford

.I'd give them a fair chance .In fact I'd pick Dempsey to beat him.

.Beterbiev no

I am appreciative of your presence on this board. You and the many with whom we share a genuine interest in the long and fascinating history of "the world's martial art". This collective is combined to provide a strong body of knowledge that many posters here, who reveal themselves in the nature of their statements, hypotheses and inquiries as being young or being peripheral fans of the sport, can benifit from hearing out. I enjoy it when someone is eager to learn. I see it as courageous to admit a need for more information to aid in the forming of sound ideas. I am conversely discouraged when reading someone with indefensible and ill-informed conclusions defending those with the vigor that only willful ignorance can arrange.

[Ivich]

I am appreciative of your presence on this board. You and the many with whom we share a genuine interest in the long and fascinating history of "the world's martial art". This collective is combined to provide a strong body of knowledge that many posters here, who reveal themselves in the nature of their statements, hypotheses and inquiries as being young or being peripheral fans of the sport, can benifit from hearing out. I enjoy it when someone is eager to learn. I see it as courageous to admit a need for more information to aid in the forming of sound ideas. I am conversely discouraged when reading someone with indefensible and ill-informed conclusions defending those with the vigor that only willful ignorance can arrange.

That's very kind of you, but I fear you are in the minority, . There is a," Quasi Quartet "that do not appreciate my presence here, I must confess to being less than heartbroken by that fact.

We are all here to learn ,or we should be I've learned a lot from boxing forums over the years and hope to continue doing so.

[GhostofDempsey]

The versions of Charles and Walcott who Rocky defeated were far better and far more dangerous than Betebiev. Let's not pretend Beterbiev hasn't been knocked down by far lesser fighters. Beterbiev gets brutally KO'd in the mid to late rounds against Rocky, Charles, Walcott on any given night.

[Bundana]

Bolded doesn't mean jack ****, we saw Mccallum knock out Donald Curry who was 400-4 in the ams. Marciano stopped Moore who had 200+ pro fights. As usual, Marciano is being written off by a casual. Just like he was back in the 50's!

Access to better training? this doesn't even need a response. As if Marciano needs better conditioning. Or there is some magical method modern boxers use. Ever been to a boxing gym lately? What are they doing there thats so special? shooting TRT into their buttcheeks? please tell me. What modern methods are going to give him such an advantage that it shows up on fight night? what type of diet is going to give him an advantage in a fight? people are deluded it seems, all around the world lol.

I'd pick Marciano by knockout in 5 rounds if the fight was made this year. He'd knock Usyk out as well. Charles, Moorer and Walcott were all better than Usyk, even when he fought them.

So Beterbiev's amateur experience means jack ****... because Curry was ko'd by McCallum in the pros 35 years ago. Brilliant... I wonder how this obvious connection has escaped my attention!

[Willow The Wisp]

Bundana and them-apples, two of my favorites, are chewing an a bone of minute significance and Ivich is taking a break from hostility. WTF!!

[elfag]

Bolded doesn't mean jack ****, we saw Mccallum knock out Donald Curry who was 400-4 in the ams. Marciano stopped Moore who had 200+ pro fights. As usual, Marciano is being written off by a casual. Just like he was back in the 50's!

Access to better training? this doesn't even need a response. As if Marciano needs better conditioning. Or there is some magical method modern boxers use. Ever been to a boxing gym lately? What are they doing there thats so special? shooting TRT into their buttcheeks? please tell me. What modern methods are going to give him such an advantage that it shows up on fight night? what type of diet is going to give him an advantage in a fight? people are deluded it seems, all around the world lol.

I'd pick Marciano by knockout in 5 rounds if the fight was made this year. He'd knock Usyk out as well. Charles, Moorer and Walcott were all better than Usyk, even when he fought them.

The competition that Beterbiev faced in the amateurs was far superior to the first 40 factory workers and union men that Marciano fought. Also Usyk would toy with Marciano and pick what round he wanted to stop him in.