who beat better competiton liston or marciano?

[butterfly1964]

ha ha, this how you know you've read to many threads

anyway, i wonder who i'm gunna pick, the only really good hw that liston beat was Patterson (IMO)

Marciano beat a prime, walcott and Moore

he also beat fighters like Layne,LaStarza,Ezzard Charles, etc

i'd have to say Marciano's comptetion was better
Liston was good but 75% of his fame came from losing to a young prospect that talked crazy and said that he was the greatest, Cassius Clay (Muhammad Ali)

not to say Liston wasn't good but i just don't rank them the same

clevland williams was a beast. so were folley and machen. those three are just as good as layne, lastarza, and savold, if not better.

[SuzieQ49]

clevland williams was a beast. so were folley and machen. those three are just as good as layne, lastarza, and savold, if not better.

butterfly,


savold was nowhere near the level of these guys, so dont include him in this conversation.


williams, machen , folley were just as good as lastarza, 1950s joe louis, and rex layne. i agree

[smasher]

[QUOTE=SuzieQ49]patterson did win the title from archie moore in a big upset. archie moore was a better heavyweight than all of those guys u mentioned(excluding liston). moore wasnt fully prepared and sought for a rematch but never got one. i think a rematch would have been a very close fight, but i think moore does not matchup well vs patterson and would end up getting knocked out. however, in there fight moore was outboxing patterson. on the scorecards, two judges had moore winning by a shutout.

another fighter who should have got a shot at pattersons title was harold johnson. harold johnson shutout nino valdes, and in 1961 when far past his prime johnson beat eddie machen.

archie moore rematch? I think this fight would have been very close. moore gave patterson fits until the knockout and moore did not come into that fight 100%. however I think pattersons combination of speed and power is too much for moore. I see him knocking out moore again or winning a close decision. moore always claimed he would have won the rematch.

harold johnson- another very close fight. johnson was a masterboxer and a smart clever fighter. johnson was very hard to hit, however his chin was vunerable and that would be his downfall in this fight. patterson was a great puncher and threw very accurate and sharp combinations, and of course he had godly like handspeed for a heavyweiht. i see patterson by KO./QUOTE]

Thanks for taking the bait. Any excuse to once more heap glowing accolades on the opposition that Walcott, Marciano or Charles faced. I knew you wouldn't let me down. No mention of Moore or Johnson in my original post but I gotta hand it to you, you found a way to do it. Gotta love those 50's heavyweights. By the way Fonzie, how's Eisenhower, the bomb shelter, and your family Studebaker sedan? By the way, can I borrow your Bill Haley 78's? I'm hosting a sock hop this weekend.

PS: I took it upon myself to attempt to condense your quote. You only have to hit the shift button once you know. It will provide an adequate space for breaking up paragraphs.

See?

[SuzieQ49]

smasher,


who do u think beat better opposition, liston or marciano? and why?


you hadvnt offered us ur righteous, well qualified,"boxrec" opinion on this matter?

[smasher]

smasher,


who do u think beat better opposition, liston or marciano? and why?


you hadvnt offered us ur righteous, well qualified,"boxrec" opinion on this matter?

On the interest scale this thread falls somewhere between I DON'T GIVE A FLYING **** and I REALLY DON'T GIVE A FLYING ****. Oh and did I mention I don't give a flying ****? Just checking.

How about something a little fresh like say an advance descriptive breakdown of the up-coming Toney-Rachman fight. That way we can see how accurate your analytical break down of fighters is, instead of the same redundant comparing of Marciano, Walcott, Charles and their opponents, all who have been pushing up daisies for the past few decades.

Just a quick warning to you. If you prepare by viewing recorded fights of Toney and Rachman on your Magnavox the fighters may look a little strange. That's because they are in color. They started taping the fights that way back in the 60's about ten years after the time frame you are obsessed with.

[butterfly1964]

On the interest scale this thread falls somewhere between I DON'T GIVE A FLYING **** and I REALLY DON'T GIVE A FLYING ****. Oh and did I mention I don't give a flying ****? Just checking.

How about something a little fresh like say an advance descriptive breakdown of the up-coming Toney-Rachman fight. That way we can see how accurate your analytical break down of fighters is, instead of the same redundant comparing of Marciano, Walcott, Charles and their opponents, all who have been pushing up daisies for the past few decades.

Just a quick warning to you. If you prepare by viewing recorded fights of Toney and Rachman on your Magnavox the fighters may look a little strange. That's because they are in color. They started taping the fights that way back in the 60's about ten years after the time frame you are obsessed with.

just answer the thread, *****!

[SuzieQ49]

now that you mention james toney........


this heavyweight version of james toney reminds me a lot of archie moore.

[smasher]

now that you mention james toney........


this heavyweight version of james toney reminds me a lot of archie moore.

??????????????It doesn't say that on boxrec...

[SuzieQ49]

??????????????It doesn't say that on boxrec...

well u told me u want an analyisis of styles right?


well if i were going to make it short and to the point, toney fights a lot like archie moore.



as u prob know, toney actually studies a ****load of films on two peticuliar boxers, walcott and moore. if u look at the way toney fights now, hes very similiar in style and has the ring experience and smarts to go along with it.


toney is a master technician. if he ever decided to drop his weight down to 200lb area, no heavyweight today would beat him.

[smasher]

well u told me u want an analyisis of styles right?


well if i were going to make it short and to the point, toney fights a lot like archie moore.



as u prob know, toney actually studies a ****load of films on two peticuliar boxers, walcott and moore. if u look at the way toney fights now, hes very similiar in style and has the ring experience and smarts to go along with it.


toney is a master technician. if he ever decided to drop his weight down to 200lb area, no heavyweight today would beat him.

This truly is killing me but I do agree. I posted on a previous thread that 'old school Toney' will school 'one dimensional' Rahman and most likely win by unanimous decision, with the stipulation that Toney is in reasonable shape.

Toney has been able to capitalize on fighting the ponderous, slow, less skilled fighters presently masquerading as legitimate heavyweight contenders. Fortunately for him there is no young Tyson or Frazier presently fighting.

You still didn't give your educated opinion with a prediction...