Marciano: alternate legacy

[Greatest1942]

More important than who is when, Bivins was past it as was Louis, it's not like their ranking holds any weight at that point. If you took the heavies ranked after them in their prime against those versions of Bivins and Louis many of them would beat them, so that's not really a good measure. Also Bivins isn't consensus top 30 and even if he was its such an even field after awhile where many fighters can be thrown out for others. In addition Charles was also brutally KO'ed by Walcott which is a detriment to his heavyweight legacy.

Bivins was still in the top 10 when the fight took place. Louis was a good not a great win. Ultimately Jeffries gets mentioned in the resume of Johnson right?

"Many beating Louis"
Who did it other than Charles and Marciano on his return? What people fail to take notice is that he was still good enough to win vs most contenders and achieve a good ranking. He wasn't the force he was but he was still good.

Besides Charles beat Bivins multiple times once in 1948 , when Bivins was still close to his prime or in his prime.We happy?

See this is a resume...ultimately you will also lose some fights when you get old. Frazier was over the hill when George destroyed him. He is still there right. Liston barely managed to stay relevant after the Ali fights. But it was a great win for Ali. Resumes are made by who you beat, ofcourse you can then put extra marks for when you meet them . I made the list of top 10 victims of Charles and Liston...you will see its pretty even.

And no Bivins is not a consensus top 30. Ring ranked him there. I used the Ring rankings to just potray guys Liston, Tyson or Dempsey beat vs Charles. I can't go on listing people by how I rank them, that will be less OBJECTIVE IMO.


"Brutally knocked out"

Atleast he did not quit did he? Like Liston did vs Clay?
I think many have got knocked out (heavys who were in the top 30).

Lewis by much lesser fighters, Johnson, Tyson, Willis, Mcvey, Wlad same etc etc. Charles is a top 25 heavy, why give him so much slack when so called better heavies have failed against lesser opponents (Unless you say Rahman was better than Walcott). No one is ranking Charles in top 5 , where these arguments carry some weigh.

You need to remember Walcott is a top 20 max 25 heavy too.

[joseph5620]

So beating top 10 contenders does not mean anything? Only knocking out them counts? Who is dis*****g this was the Louis of old...he was a great champion..at these stage he was a very good contender. I hope you get the difference. He did KO Savold however brutally in this spree.

Me biased againt Liston? Just because in one thread I gave Rocky a chance against him, and showed how he might win? This is a comment.

Can you find the post where I stated Charles was better than Liston as a heavyweight..
here is what I posted "How many guys did Liston beat who can be ranked in the top 30 or Dempsey or Tunney or even Tyson."So before alleging that someone is backing up try and ascertain what they were saying. Show this piece of text to a School student who has moderate IQ and he will let you now the actual meaning.



All I tried to say was that Charles probably had better wins in his kitty than Liston has at heavyweight. Charles beat three guys who were ranked in the top 30 (edit:- by Ring magazines ranking). Liston beat 1(Patterson). My question applied to Dempsey and Tunney too.

I will restate so that you can get this in your head "Liston has lesser top 30 wins than Charles".

I am not trying to spin anything but stating the fact. And just signifying that Charles was a pretty good heavyweight, and a good win for Rocky. I have him in my top 30.

Care to elaborate what is so offensive in that post? You really are touchy about Liston it seems.

Try to read properly before posting this irrelevant stuff.

No, I don't get "touchy" at all about Liston. What I don't like is when people try to play both sides of the fence for the purpose of looking right either way or to conceal their true motives.You did the same thing when you tried to come up with the ridiculous "evidence" that Patterson could have beaten Liston if he had fought with a different strategy or like Ali did.(biased much?) Following that you made sure to quickly add " I'm not saying Patterson could have won." Same thing here. In one sentence you claim you believe Liston was a better heavyweight and ranks higher than Charles as a heavyweight. In another you claim Charles heavyweight resume matches Liston's with better wins. So which is it? And what exactly are you arguing? Because at this point, the only "irrelevant stuff" is coming from you.


I read it properly. And right now your post is as transparent as glass. It's pretty obvious that you're trying to make a case that Charles was the better heavyweight or at least equal to Liston which he wasn't. Whether you "say it" or not. If this is not true, then what is your point exactly?

[Marchegiano]

So do you think Marciano falls out of the top ten with no Louis, Charles, Moore or Walcott's on his resume?

The showing is more important to me than the names. The first Rocky fight I ever saw was Walcott-Marciano 1. I had no idea who either fighter was, and almost no knowledge of the periods before the 80's. When it was done I was a lifetime fan of both men. Everything that I learned about both strengthened that fanatic resolve. I like watching Roland go through the ropes as much as Joe. I don't actually use those names in his defence much. Everyone just writes old Joe Louis off as old....It's like there's no Archie Moore in an old Archie.....I'd love to have KO'd the Mongoose at any point in his career...hell I'd retire on it. In the classic pedigree style of boxing I feel Joe more then proved himself king, but in the sacred art of slugging Rocco reigns almighty. It's not so much that Joe held the title so long, or the names he beat that make me call him the greatest, but when I go to practice a punch, or footwork etc. I watch how most of the greats did it if possible, and find not only is Joe damn near perfect all the time. He's efficient in a way Ali only dreamed of. Rocky, being a slugger, is one of the worst to watch for anything other than making yourself small, and throwing your body in terrific motion. He could hit harder and last longer...that's as much slugging as landing punches and getting punched is boxing. Rocco put out about 40 to 50 psi more than what is necessary to break a man's skull. That's in fact so much more than needed it's safe to say no man could develop a skull thick enough to take the full force blow. We'd need to have evolved for Rocky to not have that over the rest of the boxing world. My answer is definitely no. It doesn't change the fact that no matter who you bring up, he might get his head broken if steps in the ring with Marchegiano.

Joseph- I think you misunderstood me. My point was you claim Liston cleared the top comp, while somehow Ezzard didn't. Rex was a top contender. Joey Maxim top comp. Barone, Kahut, Reynolds, and Brion all top competition.

McGrooty- No love for Sonny? LoL, it's cool...I dont much like him myself....I mean he's ok...it's just like he's a poor man's Frazier or something... Kinda like watching Tua...he's great, but c'mon...I wish he was Tyson as much as he does.

[joseph5620]

I doubt some who are arguing "I know how it works",, ever tried to make a top 10 list for both Charles and Liston, so here goes

Sonny Liston's top 10 :-

1. Patterson
2. Machen
3. Folley
4. Williams
5. Valdes
6. Harris
7. Bethea
8. DeJohn
9. Clark
10. Summerlin

Ezzard charles top 10 (at heavy)

1. Joe Walcott
2. Jimmy Bivins
3. Elmer Ray.
4. Rex Layne
5. Pat Valentino
6. Gus Lesnevich
7. Joe Baksi
8. Lee Oma
9. Joe Louis (put him down here, because he was just a contenderif you guys think he was worse than ATGS like DeJohn or Clark even at this stage okay )
10.Bob Satterfield.


Made 8 defences of his title.Lost in his 9th. Couldn't fit Maxim there though he weighed over the 175 mark.

Now Joseph tell why is Ezzard's resume not on par with Liston's, unless you think LAyne, Oma, Baksi, Elmer Ray, Bivins etc were much worse than Williams, Folley, MAchen, Bethea, Clarke, Summerlin etc.

Because for one, I don't see Bivens as a "top 30 heavyweight" No matter how much you want to believe it. And Liston beat most of these guys by knocking them out, and clearly beating them. Comparing the two against the listed opponents, Liston's resume is better. Why did you leave Valdes out from Charles list? Charles has losses and inconsistency mixed in with his wins there. And to get to the real topic here, Charles was clearly on his way out when he fought Marciano. So was Louis. You want to make them both better than they were at the time but the facts are against you. Bivens/Savold were not "great" wins for Louis. They did nothing for his legacy.Charles did not have positive momentum going into either fight. And certainly not what Liston had when facing Ali.




Charles lost twice to Walcott, once by KO. Liston destroyed Patterson twice and losing to Ali doesn't compare to losing to Walcott. Ali was a better fighter than Walcott. Two, Liston destroyed Nino Valdes easily. Charles lost to Valdes. Whether you think Charles was robbed or not, Liston's win was more impressive.


I'll say it again. Liston's heavyweight resume is better than Charles and head to head I believe Liston would have knocked Charles out. Which is what I've been saying all along. Either you agree with this or you don't. You can't have it both ways.

[Marchegiano]

Because for one, I don't see Bivens as a "top 30 heavyweight" No matter how much you want to believe it. And Liston beat most of these guys by knocking them out, and clearly beating them. Comparing the two against the listed opponents, Liston's resume is better. Why did you leave Valdes out from Charles list? Charles has losses and inconsistency mixed in with his wins there. And to get to the real topic here, Charles was clearly on his way out when he fought Marciano. So was Louis. You want to make them both better than they were at the time but the facts are against you. Biven's/Savold were not "great" wins for Louis. They did nothing for his legacy.Charles did not have positive momentum going into either fight. And certainly not what Liston had when facing Ali.




Charles lost twice to Walcott, once by KO. Liston destroyed Patterson twice and losing to Ali doesn't compare to losing to Walcott. Ali was a better fighter than Walcott. Two, Liston destroyed Nino Valdes easily. Charles lost to Valdes. Whether you think Charles was robbed or not, Liston's win was more impressive.


I'll say it again. Liston's heavyweight resume is better than Charles and head to head I believe Liston would have knocked Charles out. Which is what I've been saying all along. Either you agree with this or you don't. You can't have it both ways.

Well, Joe, just because you don't like the HW's from the era doesn't mean he didn't fight them. It doesn't give you ammunition to make claims of an easy road. Personally, I like both fighters. I don't see either list of names as particularly strong.

The writing off of Old Joe Louis is crazy. WATCH what he's doing. Old Joe Louis has better hands and feet then most of boxing's prime. Everyone jumps on Old as if it takes away the displayed skills, or somehow changes the fact that guys like well any of those on the lists....hell Sonny himself, are less boxer in their prime than Joe was old. Old Joe Louis has a decent chance against any HW. Old Joe Louis would mop up today's HWs. Old Joe Louis has a chance against Young Joe Louis.....****ing look up why I'd say that...figure that one out.

I know all your gonna say is "blah blah blah, name name name, ko ko ko" but the way Sonny boxed isn't that damn impressive. like I said before he's a ****ty Frazier. You take out names, and only include displayed skills. Ezzard's lightyears ahead there. Power, and chin are Sonny's domain. Neither one really destroyed their comp. They both sat marginally better then the rest waiting for the real champ of the time to show up....I mean Rocco and Ali of course...I don't care who'd win between Ezzard and Sonny. Not even enough to speculate.

[McGoorty]

The showing is more important to me than the names. The first Rocky fight I ever saw was Walcott-Marciano 1. I had no idea who either fighter was, and almost no knowledge of the periods before the 80's. When it was done I was a lifetime fan of both men. Everything that I learned about both strengthened that fanatic resolve. I like watching Roland go through the ropes as much as Joe. I don't actually use those names in his defence much. Everyone just writes old Joe Louis off as old....It's like there's no Archie Moore in an old Archie.....I'd love to have KO'd the Mongoose at any point in his career...hell I'd retire on it. In the classic pedigree style of boxing I feel Joe more then proved himself king, but in the sacred art of slugging Rocco reigns almighty. It's not so much that Joe held the title so long, or the names he beat that make me call him the greatest, but when I go to practice a punch, or footwork etc. I watch how most of the greats did it if possible, and find not only is Joe damn near perfect all the time. He's efficient in a way Ali only dreamed of. Rocky, being a slugger, is one of the worst to watch for anything other than making yourself small, and throwing your body in terrific motion. He could hit harder and last longer...that's as much slugging as landing punches and getting punched is boxing. Rocco put out about 40 to 50 psi more than what is necessary to break a man's skull. That's in fact so much more than needed it's safe to say no man could develop a skull thick enough to take the full force blow. We'd need to have evolved for Rocky to not have that over the rest of the boxing world. My answer is definitely no. It doesn't change the fact that no matter who you bring up, he might get his head broken if steps in the ring with Marchegiano.

Joseph- I think you misunderstood me. My point was you claim Liston cleared the top comp, while somehow Ezzard didn't. Rex was a top contender. Joey Maxim top comp. Barone, Kahut, Reynolds, and Brion all top competition.

McGrooty- No love for Sonny? LoL, it's cool...I dont much like him myself....I mean he's ok...it's just like he's a poor man's Frazier or something... Kinda like watching Tua...he's great, but c'mon...I wish he was Tyson as much as he does.

I certainly don't hate Sonny,.... put it this way, just imagine this scene { average sized Aussie white boy walks up to Liston and says, "I love you Sonny",.... what is Listons 1st reaction ????.....},... get the picture ??.. lol..... I'd wake up in 2011... lol..... in a wheelchair...... and then there was the MOB.... Nah, I think I'd have kept a distance, let's say,,....... The Pacific Ocean.

[McGoorty]

Well, Joe, just because you don't like the HW's from the era doesn't mean he didn't fight them. It doesn't give you ammunition to make claims of an easy road. Personally, I like both fighters. I don't see either list of names as particularly strong.

The writing off of Old Joe Louis is crazy. WATCH what he's doing. Old Joe Louis has better hands and feet then most of boxing's prime. Everyone jumps on Old as if it takes away the displayed skills, or somehow changes the fact that guys like well any of those on the lists....hell Sonny himself, are less boxer in their prime than Joe was old. Old Joe Louis has a decent chance against any HW. Old Joe Louis would mop up today's HWs. Old Joe Louis has a chance against Young Joe Louis.....****ing look up why I'd say that...figure that one out.

I know all your gonna say is "blah blah blah, name name name, ko ko ko" but the way Sonny boxed isn't that damn impressive. like I said before he's a ****ty Frazier. You take out names, and only include displayed skills. Ezzard's lightyears ahead there. Power, and chin are Sonny's domain. Neither one really destroyed their comp. They both sat marginally better then the rest waiting for the real champ of the time to show up....I mean Rocco and Ali of course...I don't care who'd win between Ezzard and Sonny. Not even enough to speculate.

I know he ain't known for his boxing, but neither Liston or Charles ever fought Chuck Norris, don't laugh, they say that Norris has beard with a fist in it.... He knocked out Brian Griffin with it,... I know because I just saw it happen.

[Marchegiano]

I know he ain't known for his boxing, but neither Liston or Charles ever fought Chuck Norris, don't laugh, they say that Norris has beard with a fist in it.... He knocked out Brian Griffin with it,... I know because I just saw it happen.

lol, word. Chuck Norris is magic though. Just ain't fair for these mere mortals.

Liston was a mean, bad, man...but I like bad guys too. Villains are fun. Personally, I feel like records have undermined talent. Damn near everyone of point lost to everyone else of point during the late forties an through the fifties. Multiple times. It's always been a way of saying "this guys no good he lost to a guy with a bunch of losses a few times" It's odd to me that in a time where having 8 or 9 losses is normal for the top 30 a guy rises up with none, and it's called a weak era. very, very, very few guys here actually dissect displayed skill sets during a video, nor do the pay attention to the training lineage...No one but me and you know The Gypsy. I doubt even the older, well respected, knowers of boxing really know what they're watching. Like you said pre-fitzs is unknown territory.

[joseph5620]

Well, Joe, just because you don't like the HW's from the era doesn't mean he didn't fight them. It doesn't give you ammunition to make claims of an easy road. Personally, I like both fighters. I don't see either list of names as particularly strong.

The writing off of Old Joe Louis is crazy. WATCH what he's doing. Old Joe Louis has better hands and feet then most of boxing's prime. Everyone jumps on Old as if it takes away the displayed skills, or somehow changes the fact that guys like well any of those on the lists....hell Sonny himself, are less boxer in their prime than Joe was old. Old Joe Louis has a decent chance against any HW. Old Joe Louis would mop up today's HWs. Old Joe Louis has a chance against Young Joe Louis.....****ing look up why I'd say that...figure that one out.

I know all your gonna say is "blah blah blah, name name name, ko ko ko" but the way Sonny boxed isn't that damn impressive. like I said before he's a ****ty Frazier. You take out names, and only include displayed skills. Ezzard's lightyears ahead there. Power, and chin are Sonny's domain. Neither one really destroyed their comp. They both sat marginally better then the rest waiting for the real champ of the time to show up....I mean Rocco and Ali of course...I don't care who'd win between Ezzard and Sonny. Not even enough to speculate.

Again, this is about who was a better heavyweight between Liston and Charles. And again your changing the topic. I say Liston was a better heavyweight than Charles. And I don't think I'm alone with that choice. As far as me "not liking the fighters of that era" and easy road" that's not my stance or the point I'm making. It's all about Liston and Charles. If you don't care about the comparison between the two then why are you questioning it?




As far as Joe Louis, he was not even close to being what he was in his prime when he fought Marciano. You can talk all you want about how great he still was but I'm not buying it and the facts are clearly against you. I personally find it ridiculous when people try to argue this. Joe Louis retired for a reason the first time. He only came back to fight because he was broke. He needed money and he didn't care about championships. His needs had changed. This is all in his book btw. He didn't even train as hard as he used to and his fight with Charles should have ended any doubts about whether he could compete with the elite in the division. And no, Bivens and Savold wasn't it. After that fight Louis won a handful of carefully selected match ups and had a lot of problems pulling the trigger on his punches which is probably why he wasn't knocking fighters out who really had no business going the distance with him. He said he could see the openings but his body couldn't respond to them in time. His reflexes had diminished terribly.






And you can talk all you want about how "Liston couldn't box" "only had power and chin" and he "didn't really destroy his comp" because at this point you're telling lies with those comments.

[joseph5620]

The showing is more important to me than the names. The first Rocky fight I ever saw was Walcott-Marciano 1. I had no idea who either fighter was, and almost no knowledge of the periods before the 80's. When it was done I was a lifetime fan of both men. Everything that I learned about both strengthened that fanatic resolve. I like watching Roland go through the ropes as much as Joe. I don't actually use those names in his defence much. Everyone just writes old Joe Louis off as old....It's like there's no Archie Moore in an old Archie.....I'd love to have KO'd the Mongoose at any point in his career...hell I'd retire on it. In the classic pedigree style of boxing I feel Joe more then proved himself king, but in the sacred art of slugging Rocco reigns almighty. It's not so much that Joe held the title so long, or the names he beat that make me call him the greatest, but when I go to practice a punch, or footwork etc. I watch how most of the greats did it if possible, and find not only is Joe damn near perfect all the time. He's efficient in a way Ali only dreamed of. Rocky, being a slugger, is one of the worst to watch for anything other than making yourself small, and throwing your body in terrific motion. He could hit harder and last longer...that's as much slugging as landing punches and getting punched is boxing. Rocco put out about 40 to 50 psi more than what is necessary to break a man's skull. That's in fact so much more than needed it's safe to say no man could develop a skull thick enough to take the full force blow. We'd need to have evolved for Rocky to not have that over the rest of the boxing world. My answer is definitely no. It doesn't change the fact that no matter who you bring up, he might get his head broken if steps in the ring with Marchegiano.

Joseph- I think you misunderstood me. My point was you claim Liston cleared the top comp, while somehow Ezzard didn't. Rex was a top contender. Joey Maxim top comp. Barone, Kahut, Reynolds, and Brion all top competition.

McGrooty- No love for Sonny? LoL, it's cool...I dont much like him myself....I mean he's ok...it's just like he's a poor man's Frazier or something... Kinda like watching Tua...he's great, but c'mon...I wish he was Tyson as much as he does.

That's not what I said. I said Liston has the better heavyweight resume and Maxim was not a top heavyweight.