Do you rank Larry Holmes above Rocky Marciano?

[Elroy The Great]

hi, i butchered your post

no shlt. its the best one can do when they cant back up a claim.

[Marchegiano]

same way rocky gets the auto win vs guys of a certain size. just because hes rocky and has so many legitimate prime corpses laying on the ground.

to blindly give rocky those wins is never said to be ******. and retiring people who are of age isnt that impressive (go on and mention la starza).

You're meant to be a hardcore fan, that's a casual fan conversation. I didn't name anyone, you chose to apply what I said to the names you know and assumed it must be them I was referring to.

Are you really that dense or did you just never stop to think about it? 49 fights and they're all old guys who were on the way into retirement yeah? You pulled that from an article or just another poster? The one young man he beat with a decent record was LaStarza yeah? Showing depth now...you can name the white guy who fought Marciano twice, wowee.

How the **** am I meant to take you seriously when you come at me with surface level criticisms? Learn about the 1890s, then learn about the 1950s, then Marciano, then come back to me and tell me "but dey were all old doe, cue LaStarza". Or don't I don't give a ****, but next time you've something to say that's been written millions of times why not just assume we read articles too and not embarrass yourself by reciting casual ****?

I spoke about forced retirements, you speak about old guys and roland like they're related. Did Roland retire right away? How about Ezzard who is super ancient by the time he faces Marciano even though they're only separated in actual age by a year? How and Archie Moore? What? You mean out of 25 forced retirements the only ones you can claim were old are Louis and Walcott and Roland fought on? Wowzinger you showed me.

Speaking of, did Walcott suffer broken bones? How about Louis? Ah....so what the **** are you talking about? It seems to me retirements, broken bones, being a throwback, and carrying more power than a .41 at the muzzle has **** all to do with age and very little to do with Roland at all. Seems like those are career long accolades reflective of a fighter's skill set.

By now you're thinking you'll just say everyone who wasn't old or Roland was ****ty though. How would you know? The only fighters you know of are the former champions and the only white guy to face Marciano twice. The fighters that grace every article written about Marciano since he retired and most posts that speak to his record. The fighters that go with the criticism that takes maybe a solid minute to find when you search Rock's name...those are the fighters you are familiar with so how the **** would you know if any names that don't make it onto the media driven conversation were worth a damn or not? If Marciano beat a ranked guy with record of over 80 wins and only 3 losses on a winning streak of 50 fights including legends with over 130 ws on his resume and those three losses coming from fighters with hundreds of fights more experience having been avenged after our mystery fighter gained said experience would you have even noticed?

[Elroy The Great]

You're meant to be a hardcore fan, that's a casual fan conversation. I didn't name anyone, you chose to apply what I said to the names you know and assumed it must be them I was referring to.

Are you really that dense or did you just never stop to think about it? 49 fights and they're all old guys who were on the way into retirement yeah? You pulled that from an article or just another poster? The one young man he beat with a decent record was LaStarza yeah? Showing depth now...you can name the white guy who fought Marciano twice, wowee.

How the **** am I meant to take you seriously when you come at me with surface level criticisms? Learn about the 1890s, then learn about the 1950s, then Marciano, then come back to me and tell me "but dey were all old doe, cue LaStarza". Or don't I don't give a ****, but next time you've something to say that's been written millions of times why not just assume we read articles too and not embarrass yourself by reciting casual ****?

I spoke about forced retirements, you speak about old guys and roland like they're related. Did Roland retire right away? How about Ezzard who is super ancient by the time he faces Marciano even though they're only separated in actual age by a year? How and Archie Moore? What? You mean out of 25 forced retirements the only ones you can claim were old are Louis and Walcott and Roland fought on? Wowzinger you showed me.

Speaking of, did Walcott suffer broken bones? How about Louis? Ah....so what the **** are you talking about? It seems to me retirements, broken bones, being a throwback, and carrying more power than a .41 at the muzzle has **** all to do with age and very little to do with Roland at all. Seems like those are career long accolades reflective of a fighter's skill set.

By now you're thinking you'll just say everyone who wasn't old or Roland was ****ty though. How would you know? The only fighters you know of are the former champions and the only white guy to face Marciano twice. The fighters that grace every article written about Marciano since he retired and most posts that speak to his record. The fighters that go with the criticism that takes maybe a solid minute to find when you search Rock's name...those are the fighters you are familiar with so how the **** would you know if any names that don't make it onto the media driven conversation were worth a damn or not? If Marciano beat a ranked guy with record of over 80 wins and only 3 losses on a winning streak of 50 fights including legends with over 130 ws on his resume and those three losses coming from fighters with hundreds of fights more experience having been avenged after our mystery fighter gained said experience would you have even noticed?

i casually thought about this guy...

Buck Smith
181 - 20 - 2 - ktfo 9x;121 KOs

should i be impressed ? i mean....181 cant be bums, right ?

[billeau2]

You're meant to be a hardcore fan, that's a casual fan conversation. I didn't name anyone, you chose to apply what I said to the names you know and assumed it must be them I was referring to.

Are you really that dense or did you just never stop to think about it? 49 fights and they're all old guys who were on the way into retirement yeah? You pulled that from an article or just another poster? The one young man he beat with a decent record was LaStarza yeah? Showing depth now...you can name the white guy who fought Marciano twice, wowee.

How the **** am I meant to take you seriously when you come at me with surface level criticisms? Learn about the 1890s, then learn about the 1950s, then Marciano, then come back to me and tell me "but dey were all old doe, cue LaStarza". Or don't I don't give a ****, but next time you've something to say that's been written millions of times why not just assume we read articles too and not embarrass yourself by reciting casual ****?

I spoke about forced retirements, you speak about old guys and roland like they're related. Did Roland retire right away? How about Ezzard who is super ancient by the time he faces Marciano even though they're only separated in actual age by a year? How and Archie Moore? What? You mean out of 25 forced retirements the only ones you can claim were old are Louis and Walcott and Roland fought on? Wowzinger you showed me.

Speaking of, did Walcott suffer broken bones? How about Louis? Ah....so what the **** are you talking about? It seems to me retirements, broken bones, being a throwback, and carrying more power than a .41 at the muzzle has **** all to do with age and very little to do with Roland at all. Seems like those are career long accolades reflective of a fighter's skill set.

By now you're thinking you'll just say everyone who wasn't old or Roland was ****ty though. How would you know? The only fighters you know of are the former champions and the only white guy to face Marciano twice. The fighters that grace every article written about Marciano since he retired and most posts that speak to his record. The fighters that go with the criticism that takes maybe a solid minute to find when you search Rock's name...those are the fighters you are familiar with so how the **** would you know if any names that don't make it onto the media driven conversation were worth a damn or not? If Marciano beat a ranked guy with record of over 80 wins and only 3 losses on a winning streak of 50 fights including legends with over 130 ws on his resume and those three losses coming from fighters with hundreds of fights more experience having been avenged after our mystery fighter gained said experience would you have even noticed?

Some gratutious advice from a poster who recognizes a fellow thoughtful responder: Don't waste your time on semibrain. Like many, his azz is a check machine writing checks that it cannot cash, the currency of logic and proof having left the bank vault some time ago for semibrain. A mere glance at the choice of avi is very telling.

Its so easy issuing challenges on the internet (not semibrain's forte), and its almost as easy making statements that defy logic and proof (definitely semibrain's forte!). These guys all fit a similar pattern: when you present proof of an assertion they actually become indignant. There will forever be at least a few idiots in this section that hang around... They are the Houdini's of confabulation as they escape logic at every turn... Except Houdini knew he was acting and went on to expose frauds...semi intelligent and his ilk would have drowned a long time ago!

[billeau2]

no shlt. its the best one can do when they cant back up a claim.

You are sour because you know that when asked to argue your points cogently and with proof not only are you incapable of doing so, but become positively indignant that others can do so.

The fact that you are oblivious to how ****** it looks to parrot cliques is all the proof a thoughtful poster needs to know you are an idiot. Its also amusing how an idiot inevitably responds when another poster shows proof of their assertions...You/they become indignant. Like it is the fault of a poster like machego for example, who has obviously looked at Marciano carefully, that you are an idiot. Or, when I presented you with an entire thread with tape, to show you how others who have looked carefully at Marciano view things... instead of perhaps learning something, you went on the offensive.

You got owned on that occasion and that hurt. I get it...But as Oyama once said about karate "get knocked down 9 times, get up 10," you should have taken some constructive critiscism. Live and learn, live and learn...but in the meantime don't blame people who actually take the time to inform themselves.

[StarshipTrooper]

You are sour because you know that when asked to argue your points cogently and with proof not only are you incapable of doing so, but become positively indignant that others can do so.

The fact that you are oblivious to how ****** it looks to parrot cliques is all the proof a thoughtful poster needs to know you are an idiot. Its also amusing how an idiot inevitably responds when another poster shows proof of their assertions...You/they become indignant. Like it is the fault of a poster like machego for example, who has obviously looked at Marciano carefully, that you are an idiot. Or, when I presented you with an entire thread with tape, to show you how others who have looked carefully at Marciano view things... instead of perhaps learning something, you went on the offensive.

You got owned on that occasion and that hurt. I get it...But as Oyama once said about karate "get knocked down 9 times, get up 10," you should have taken some constructive critiscism. Live and learn, live and learn...but in the meantime don't blame people who actually take the time to inform themselves.

Eh, I thought about responding to some of the claims being made, but the truth is I just don't have the energy

[Elroy The Great]

You are sour because you know that when asked to argue your points cogently and with proof not only are you incapable of doing so, but become positively indignant that others can do so.

The fact that you are oblivious to how ****** it looks to parrot cliques is all the proof a thoughtful poster needs to know you are an idiot. Its also amusing how an idiot inevitably responds when another poster shows proof of their assertions...You/they become indignant. Like it is the fault of a poster like machego for example, who has obviously looked at Marciano carefully, that you are an idiot. Or, when I presented you with an entire thread with tape, to show you how others who have looked carefully at Marciano view things... instead of perhaps learning something, you went on the offensive.

You got owned on that occasion and that hurt. I get it...But as Oyama once said about karate "get knocked down 9 times, get up 10," you should have taken some constructive critiscism. Live and learn, live and learn...but in the meantime don't blame people who actually take the time to inform themselves.

well, what do you know, not a single name to support the ''rocky would beat a guy of holmes size'' theory.

not surprised.

[Elroy The Great]

oh, SNAP !!!

''Don't waste your time on semibrain''

[billeau2]

Eh, I thought about responding to some of the claims being made, but the truth is I just don't have the energy

lol I hear you Ziggy, good to hear from you again! We all have to take the slack up...I got diaper duty this week apparently.

[billeau2]

well, what do you know, not a single name to support the ''rocky would beat a guy of holmes size'' theory. Just an entire thread, or two, or three...

not surprised.

Give credit to the people who did the research. Or who wrote the great articles on fighters. for example, Norman Mailer's book on the Ali Foreman fight. But thank you just the same.

Frankly with Google it shouldn't be a problem...