Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

How does Frazier vs Marciano play out?

Collapse
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Originally posted by Ivich View Post

    Any of them weigh 188lbs?Any of them 38/41 years old?
    weight doesn't tell the whole story. Theres lots of ways you can be heavier or lighter.

    The weight classes are there as the only way to somewhat categorize the size of a fighter - but really, if there were no weight classes at all, and every weight fought every weight, you would be randomly surprised about the outcome.

    There would be many a time a fast lhw dismantled a slower HW.

    The real situation is Moore landed a perfectly timed right hand.

    A fighters punch doesn't always land at the same force, because timing plays a huge role. A perfect shot where a fighter sets his opponent up and lands a perfectly leveraged shot on an exposed and unsuspecting chin is far more effective than the heaviest puncher who is forced to throw shorter arm punches to even land anything. They simply can't even land flush even when they connect. thats why skills matter and a lot of these power/weight things don't even matter, they are just the easiest to recognize visually.

    Joe Frazier was strong and fast sure, but what really made Joe Frazier a good fighter was Eddie Futch, and Fraziers heart. Who knows who actually hits the hardest if we are talking about standing still and hitting an object that won't move. It shouldn't matter though.

    For example, Duran's headmovement Forced Hagler to shorten his punches up, because wider shots with more leverage Duran would instantly make Hagler miss. By doing this, Hagler appeared not capable of hurting Duran. People would say it's because he's tough, or Maybe Hagler doesn't hit hard, but in reality he couldn't hit Duran hard. It shouldn't be hit and not get hit, it should be hit and don't get hurt. Smothering is a really thing.
    Dr. Z Dr. Z likes this.

    Comment


    • #32
      188 vs. 205 is not too much difference in weight at heavyweight. It is an advantage though when fought between evenly skilled men. Moore has reach advantage. Both guys had heart. But I think Moore had a better boxing IQ and versatility. It would be a good fight.

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by Dr. Z View Post
        188 vs. 205 is not too much difference in weight at heavyweight. It is an advantage though when fought between evenly skilled men. Moore has reach advantage. Both guys had heart. But I think Moore had a better boxing IQ and versatility. It would be a good fight.
        it really isn't and the weight classes have more to do with how someone is built. they used to measure wrist and ankles to figure out ones weight class, since weight can be put on or taken off

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by them_apples View Post

          it really isn't and the weight classes have more to do with how someone is built. they used to measure wrist and ankles to figure out ones weight class, since weight can be put on or taken off
          Really -- do you have anything primary from the 1920s - 1940s that says that?

          My conjecture is that they just mimicked the measurements used to identify convicts. (Starting in the 1840s and grew in importance with the eugenics guys post 1900.)

          Boxing finally woke up and realized the ankle and wrist measurement meant nothing and eventually abandoned it, circa 1950s - 1960s.

          Also we continue to this day to use the prison method of measuring "reach" while we all know that is not number we want. (We want the number of the length of one arm, extended forward, from shoulder to fist. Not a measurement that crosses the back.)

          If you got any trainers or such saying there is something one can learn from ankle measurements I would like to hear it.

          I say boxing stumbled into using those measurements, because they were already being commonly deployed.

          They thought it was scientific, and that was popular.

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by Dr. Z View Post

            Frazier was down a lot more times is far less fights and by less punchers than Moore.
            Lol touching story. Archie Moore was a natural 160 pound fighter. You do realize there are weight classes in boxing for a reason right? It is like saying because Julian Jackson was a hard puncher at 155/160 it mean he is a hard puncher for heavyweight standards. Joe Frazier was only knocked down by 2 fighters. Oscar Bonavena and George Foreman. Both of these guys are heavyweights. Rocky Marciano was knocked down by a old 38 year old natural middleweight in Archie Moore and to a 39 year old 190 pound Jersey Joe Walcott, Also Ted Lowry a natural 160/170 pound fighter was able to hurt Marciano badly and almost knock him out.

            But yeah Rocky Marciano is a God and the rules that apply to everybody else doesn't apply to him. Sure Marciano was a 180 pounds which means he isn't a heavyweight by modern standards but who cares right? He is Marciano is God so he could beat anybody.

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by shawnkemp804 View Post

              Lol touching story. Archie Moore was a natural 160 pound fighter. You do realize there are weight classes in boxing for a reason right? It is like saying because Julian Jackson was a hard puncher at 155/160 it mean he is a hard puncher for heavyweight standards. Joe Frazier was only knocked down by 2 fighters. Oscar Bonavena and George Foreman. Both of these guys are heavyweights. Rocky Marciano was knocked down by a old 38 year old natural middleweight in Archie Moore and to a 39 year old 190 pound Jersey Joe Walcott, Also Ted Lowry a natural 160/170 pound fighter was able to hurt Marciano badly and almost knock him out.

              But yeah Rocky Marciano is a God and the rules that apply to everybody else doesn't apply to him. Sure Marciano was a 180 pounds which means he isn't a heavyweight by modern standards but who cares right? He is Marciano is God so he could beat anybody.
              Marciano flattens both Klitschko's, Lewis, Fury and prime George Foreman in the same night. He was the ultimate heavyweight competitor. The harder they fought, the harder he hit them. ALL HAIL THE BROCKTON BLOCKBUSTER!!!

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by shawnkemp804 View Post

                Lol touching story. Archie Moore was a natural 160 pound fighter. You do realize there are weight classes in boxing for a reason right? It is like saying because Julian Jackson was a hard puncher at 155/160 it mean he is a hard puncher for heavyweight standards. Joe Frazier was only knocked down by 2 fighters. Oscar Bonavena and George Foreman. Both of these guys are heavyweights. Rocky Marciano was knocked down by a old 38 year old natural middleweight in Archie Moore and to a 39 year old 190 pound Jersey Joe Walcott, Also Ted Lowry a natural 160/170 pound fighter was able to hurt Marciano badly and almost knock him out.

                But yeah Rocky Marciano is a God and the rules that apply to everybody else doesn't apply to him. Sure Marciano was a 180 pounds which means he isn't a heavyweight by modern standards but who cares right? He is Marciano is God so he could beat anybody.
                - - Arch had to move heaven and hell to make 175, the whole reason he started fighting heavies where he could fight at his natural 190-200 lb weight in between his LH mandatories.

                How come you never say what grade you get set back this year?

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by Willie Pep 229 View Post

                  Really -- do you have anything primary from the 1920s - 1940s that says that?

                  My conjecture is that they just mimicked the measurements used to identify convicts. (Starting in the 1840s and grew in importance with the eugenics guys post 1900.)

                  Boxing finally woke up and realized the ankle and wrist measurement meant nothing and eventually abandoned it, circa 1950s - 1960s.

                  Also we continue to this day to use the prison method of measuring "reach" while we all know that is not number we want. (We want the number of the length of one arm, extended forward, from shoulder to fist. Not a measurement that crosses the back.)

                  If you got any trainers or such saying there is something one can learn from ankle measurements I would like to hear it.

                  I say boxing stumbled into using those measurements, because they were already being commonly deployed.

                  They thought it was scientific, and that was popular.
                  I would have to dig it up, but it was not used in the context you are thinking. It may have been ray Arcel.

                  The wrist and ankle have no weight on them so therefore can be somewhat of a determining factor of a fighters true size. It's not just something from the times. Muscles can be grown, fat can be put on - but bone can't change.
                  Joe Frazier also said the same of Holmes.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by them_apples View Post

                    I would have to dig it up, but it was not used in the context you are thinking. It may have been ray Arcel.

                    The wrist and ankle have no weight on them so therefore can be somewhat of a determining factor of a fighters true size. It's not just something from the times. Muscles can be grown, fat can be put on - but bone can't change.
                    Joe Frazier also said the same of Holmes.
                    - - Not true. Bone responds to physical stress just as muscle does, though not as showy.

                    Compare the full time fighter to the part time fighter...


                    614040358_AnthonyJoshuavsJermaineFranklin.thumb.jpg.8b32eeb4689ad50c254f59169efdb223.jpg

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by them_apples View Post

                      I would have to dig it up, but it was not used in the context you are thinking. It may have been ray Arcel.

                      The wrist and ankle have no weight on them so therefore can be somewhat of a determining factor of a fighters true size. It's not just something from the times. Muscles can be grown, fat can be put on - but bone can't change.
                      Joe Frazier also said the same of Holmes.
                      I am absolutely certain prisoners were measured for ID purposes.

                      How it was used in boxing is what I am interested in.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X
                      TOP