Marciano is overrated - agree or disagree

[Calilloyd]

But it's about whether or not YOU think he's overrated.

I think at one time he was going by what some of the old boxing articles I look up and before the emergence of fighters like Ali, Frazier or Foreman. A lot of the older boxing fans overrate him and a lot of younger fans underrate him.The people that either overrate him or underrate him are people I don't take seriously either way. Most objective people that follow boxing today see Marciano for what he was. No more and no less. As it stands now I would say he is not overrated in my opinion.

[QuietOne]

I think at one time he was going by what some of the old boxing articles I look up and before the emergence of fighters like Ali, Frazier or Foreman. A lot of the older boxing fans overrate him and a lot of younger fans underrate him.The people that either overrate him or underrate him are people I don't take seriously either way. Most objective people that follow boxing today see Marciano for what he was. No more and no less. As it stands now I would say he is not overrated in my opinion.

Fair enough.

[hhascup]

Here's some STATS on Heavyweight Champions:

The 1st number is the amount of different Boxers they fought that were rated in the Top 10 at one time or another. The 2nd number is the amount of total bouts they had against such boxers. The 3rd number is the amount of total bouts they had. The next number is the % of there bouts they had against these boxers.

Ali ------- 38/49/61 = 80.3279%
Louis ----- 43/54/68 = 79.411%
Holyfield -- 29/38/54 = 70.37%
Charles --- 52/77/118 = 65.254%
Sharkey --- 25/35/55 = 63.636%
Lewis ------ 23/26/44 = 59.09%
M. Spinks -- 16/18/32 = 56.25%
Frazier ----- 13/19/37 = 51.35%
Patterson -- 23/32/64 = 50%
Walcott ---- 24/35/71 = 49.2958%
Holmes ----- 31/35/75 = 46.667%
Liston ------ 19/25/54 = 46.296%
Tyson ------ 23/26/58 = 44.8%
Johansson --- 9/11/28 = 39.2857%
Carnera ---- 30/39/103 = 37.864%
Braddock --- 25/29/86 = 33.721%
Foreman ---- 23/27/81 = 33.333%
Baer -------- 22/28/84 = 33.333%
Marciano ---- 13/16/49 = 32.653%
Schmeling --- 14/20/70 = 28.57%
L. Spinks ---- 11/12/46 = 26.087%

Here's a list of bouts each of them had against boxers that were rated in the top 10 at one time or another. It's actually the 2nd number of the above chart. The next number is there record against all these boxers.

Charles ---- 77 -- 56-20-1
Louis ------ 54 -- 51-3-0
Ali --------- 49 -- 44-5-0
Carnera ---- 39 -- 32-7-0
Holyfield --- 38 -- 26-10-2
Sharkey ---- 35 -- 19-13-3
Walcott ---- 35 -- 22-13-0
Holmes ----- 35 -- 29-6-0
Patterson -- 32 -- 23-8-1
Braddock --- 29 -- 8-19-1 (1 NC)
Baer -------- 28 -- 19-9-0
Foreman ---- 27 -- 22-5-0
Lewis ------ 26 -- 23-2-1
Tyson ------ 26 -- 20-4-0 (2 NC)
Liston ------ 25 -- 21-4-0
Schmeling --- 20 -- 13-6-1
Frazier ----- 19 -- 15-4-0
M. Spinks -- 18 -- 17-1-0
Marciano ---- 16 -- 16-0-0
L. Spinks ---- 12 -- 5-6-1
Johansson -- 11 -- 9-2-0

Here's the total wins for each Champion against them.

Charles ---- 56
Louis ------ 51
Ali --------- 44
Carnera ---- 32
Holmes ----- 29
Holyfield --- 26
Patterson -- 23
Lewis ------- 23
Walcott ---- 22
Foreman ---- 22
Liston ------- 21
Tyson ------- 20
Sharkey ----- 19
Baer -------- 19
M. Spinks --- 17
Marciano ---- 16
Frazier ------ 15
Schmeling --- 13
Johansson --- 9
Braddock ---- 8
L. Spinks ---- 5


NOTE: Some Champions boxed in 2 or 3 different weight divisions, such as Charles, Holyfield, Braddock and M. Spinks.

[EzzardFan]

Louis was finished. There's no point in debating about that.

Charles was sliding, by the time Marciano fought him. He was a great fighter, but Marciano didn't fight the best version of him. And keep in mind that the first fight was relatively close.

Walcott was schooling Marciano, until the stoppage. He may have been in his prime, but he was still an old fighter in a pretty weak era.

Marciano may have been an exciting fighter, but I don't see how that equals to greatness,.

Marciano himself was over 30 when he faced Charles, there was only 3 years between them.

I have a couple of questions for you (they aren't trick questions BTW). Firstly - are you really 18? Secondly - do you box?

The reason I ask is that I'm 39 and I'm still sparring. Often I'm sparring against guys 10-20 years younger than me. Nobody I regularly spar with is over 35. It get s a lot harder as you get older. Your reflexes get slightly dulled and your body doesn't react to your inputs with the speed that it used to. If you're still sparring when you're my age then believe me you'd be doing great. You may wish to save this thread and revisit some of your comments in 21 years time LOL

Louis and Walcott both fought Rocky in their late 30s. He was around 10 years younger than they were. A fighter probably hits his physical peak at 30, Rocky was at his peak. Those guys were well past their physical peak. I cannot even imagine how good they'd have to be to get in a ring and fight 8, 9, 10, and in one case 13 rounds with someone who fought at the pace that Rocky did, constantly applying pressure. Those guys were incredible.

You claim that Rocky didn't fight the best version Charles, but I disagree. Charles turned the clock back in both those fights. Someone on this thread said that Charles got stopped in 8 in their second encounter. That's true, but what they omitted to mention was that he was 30 seconds from scoring a TKO at the time! Those fights were Charles swan song.

The point that I'm making is that although Louis, Walcott, Charles, and Moore were well past their physical peaks, and while Charles and Moore may have been small fighters, each of those guys possessed incredible ring craft. The likes of which we don't tend to see any more. They were still formidable fighters at the time they encountered Rocky.

In terms of Rocky fighting inside or not, let be clear on something. When you have a 6"+ reach deficit, just in order to hit the other guy you need to get past his jab and move inside him... That's different from the semi clinched state when both fighters are inside which is known as in-fighting. I think that is what Rocky may have been referring to. The short armed fighter may have his opponent at arms reach, but from the opponents perspective the short armed fighter is inside him If you're hitting someone with tight hooks, uppercuts, shovel hooks, inside crosses etc and he's throwing his arms around you trying to hit back, then you are inside. Watch Rocky's fights, he's clearly inside his opponent. When he's outside he's simply not able to connect with the other guy. I know just how he feels!

Fight someone reasonably experienced who has much longer reach and the chances are they'll appear to school you for several rounds. It's hard to get inside an experienced fighter whilst they are fresh. It takes a lot of heart. To get inside at all you're gonna have to take damage coming in, pretty much every time you come in. You're not going to look good, but the thing with boxing is that it only takes one punch to win a fight. And Rocky demonstrated that principle better than anyone.

[EzzardFan]

Lets just put this back in perspective.

A freakishly short armed, stoop shouldered white man standing 5'11" tall, weighing less than 185lbs and sometimes as little as 175lbs, with a 42" chest and a 68" reach, who didn't take up boxing until his mid-20s, once became heavyweight champion of the world, fighting a 49-0 winning streak with 43 KO's and beating ATG fighters on 6 (almost consecutive) occasions in the process. Then he retired undefeated. I don't care what anyone says, the guy had something very special indeed.

[JAB5239]

Lets just put this back in perspective.

A freakishly short armed, stoop shouldered white man standing 5'11" tall, weighing less than 185lbs and sometimes as little as 175lbs, with a 42" chest and a 68" reach, who didn't take up boxing until his mid-20s, once became heavyweight champion of the world, fighting a 49-0 winning streak with 43 KO's and beating ATG fighters on 6 (almost consecutive) occasions in the process. Then he retired undefeated. I don't care what anyone says, the guy had something very special indeed.

Personally I value heart and determination over skills and talent. To have it all is great, but if you had to choose one set....heart and determination for me.

[QuietOne]

Personally I value heart and determination over skills and talent. To have it all is great, but if you had to choose one set....heart and determination for me.

Oh, come'on. Not this guy, again.

[geribeetus]

Oh, come'on. Not this guy, again.

99 percent of boxing fans would rather watch gatti than judah. deal with it.

[hhascup]

Rocky stated many times that he needed room for his power punches. He also said that he didn't like boxing on the inside because of this. This is Rocky saying this, not me.

As far as Charles goes, he was an all-time Great BUT those who saw him at his peak, know he wasn't the same when he fought Rocky.

After he killed Sam Baroudi he wasn't the same. Sure he continued to win but he wasn't the same kind of puncher after that bout.

Before he was knocked out by Walcott in there 3rd bout Charles was 69-5-1. His only losses were against Ken Overlin, Kid Tunero, Jimmy Bivins, Lloyd Marshall and Elmer Ray, and 2 of them were by split decision and he beat the last 3 in return matches, some more then once.

Just look at his record and all of the Greats he beat before his 3rd bout with Walcott. Charley Burley, Joey Maxim, Archie Moore, Jimmy Bivins, Lloyd Marshall, Elmer Ray, Walcott, Lesnevich, Louis and he beat most of them more then once.

Look at his record after the 3rd Walcott bout. He lost a close one to Walcott again, lost to Rex Layne, but he beat Layne twice too, he lost to Nino Valdez and Harold Johnson in back to back bouts in August and September of 1953, then stopped Coley Wallace and Bob Satterfield before his 1st bout with Rocky in June of 1954.

You don't have to believe me, but the top boxing historians and experts that saw Charles fight when he was at his best, would all tell you that he wasn't the same Charles that fought Rocky in either of there bouts.

Charles had a record of 83-10-1 at the time he 1st fought Rocky, 14-5 since the 3rd Walcott bout, so he was in his 95th pro bout. So he was 69-5-1 in his first 75 bouts and 14-5 in his next 19. What I am saying is that he was almost 33 years old BUT he was an old 33.

[Calilloyd]

Here's some STATS on Heavyweight Champions:

The 1st number is the amount of different Boxers they fought that were rated in the Top 10 at one time or another. The 2nd number is the amount of total bouts they had against such boxers. The 3rd number is the amount of total bouts they had. The next number is the % of there bouts they had against these boxers.

Ali ------- 38/49/61 = 80.3279%
Louis ----- 43/54/68 = 79.411%
Holyfield -- 29/38/54 = 70.37%
Charles --- 52/77/118 = 65.254%
Sharkey --- 25/35/55 = 63.636%
Lewis ------ 23/26/44 = 59.09%
M. Spinks -- 16/18/32 = 56.25%
Frazier ----- 13/19/37 = 51.35%
Patterson -- 23/32/64 = 50%
Walcott ---- 24/35/71 = 49.2958%
Holmes ----- 31/35/75 = 46.667%
Liston ------ 19/25/54 = 46.296%
Tyson ------ 23/26/58 = 44.8%
Johansson --- 9/11/28 = 39.2857%
Carnera ---- 30/39/103 = 37.864%
Braddock --- 25/29/86 = 33.721%
Foreman ---- 23/27/81 = 33.333%
Baer -------- 22/28/84 = 33.333%
Marciano ---- 13/16/49 = 32.653%
Schmeling --- 14/20/70 = 28.57%
L. Spinks ---- 11/12/46 = 26.087%

Here's a list of bouts each of them had against boxers that were rated in the top 10 at one time or another. It's actually the 2nd number of the above chart. The next number is there record against all these boxers.

Charles ---- 77 -- 56-20-1
Louis ------ 54 -- 51-3-0
Ali --------- 49 -- 44-5-0
Carnera ---- 39 -- 32-7-0
Holyfield --- 38 -- 26-10-2
Sharkey ---- 35 -- 19-13-3
Walcott ---- 35 -- 22-13-0
Holmes ----- 35 -- 29-6-0
Patterson -- 32 -- 23-8-1
Braddock --- 29 -- 8-19-1 (1 NC)
Baer -------- 28 -- 19-9-0
Foreman ---- 27 -- 22-5-0
Lewis ------ 26 -- 23-2-1
Tyson ------ 26 -- 20-4-0 (2 NC)
Liston ------ 25 -- 21-4-0
Schmeling --- 20 -- 13-6-1
Frazier ----- 19 -- 15-4-0
M. Spinks -- 18 -- 17-1-0
Marciano ---- 16 -- 16-0-0
L. Spinks ---- 12 -- 5-6-1
Johansson -- 11 -- 9-2-0

Here's the total wins for each Champion against them.

Charles ---- 56
Louis ------ 51
Ali --------- 44
Carnera ---- 32
Holmes ----- 29
Holyfield --- 26
Patterson -- 23
Lewis ------- 23
Walcott ---- 22
Foreman ---- 22
Liston ------- 21
Tyson ------- 20
Sharkey ----- 19
Baer -------- 19
M. Spinks --- 17
Marciano ---- 16
Frazier ------ 15
Schmeling --- 13
Johansson --- 9
Braddock ---- 8
L. Spinks ---- 5


NOTE: Some Champions boxed in 2 or 3 different weight divisions, such as Charles, Holyfield, Braddock and M. Spinks.

Wow. Now THESE are really interesting statistics. Especially when it comes to debating who had the greater career when you compare fighters. I'll have to remember and save this.