Marciano vs Holifield

[OptimusWolf]

one thing for sure - it would be a hell of a fight. In fast as fantasy fights go I think it is one of the best.

I took evander by TKO, but if anyone could stop evander then it would be rocky.

[Boogie Nights]

I see that the popular opinion is that Evander is the better technical fighter, as well as the faster and stronger one.

But is that accurate?

Based on those slow-motion looking tapes from that period, yes.
But dig deeper and you will quickly find that the fighters of yesteryear were very technical as well, just in a different way.

I doubt we will ever see a fighter with more will to win than Marciano, and based on that, I pick Rocky.

i agree ty, rocky had a strong will and desire to win, and i think that goes unmatched

but

slow-motion looking tapes? in the dempsey, johnson era, yes, but the rocky footage is clear as it can be. it's black and white, but the speed is standard

for example there's some footage of carnera vs baer fight where it's sped up, but it's those replays on espn classic, and they cut some of the rounds where it's 10 minute time frame. ive seen a clear version and it runs smoothly, both on tape, and other espn broadcasts

and besides it's evident that rocky doesnt have the greatest hand speed

[TheGreatA]

Here's a brutal knockout win by Marciano against a capable boxer Harry 'Kid' Matthews. Matthews had not lost in almost 10 years before this fight, had won 50 fights in a row and had a record of 81-3, good fighter but a little undersized for the HW division.

Shows some of Marciano's training and also his basic style as Marciano starts slowly (reminds of Joe Frazier), eats some counter punches in the first round then knocks out Matthews with two left hooks in the second (07:30 in the vid). Hurtful...

Perhaps he is under-appreciated by many because of his style, same as Joe Calzaghe today. Marciano usually figured out his opponents in the later rounds and if he didn't, he would just keep going until the other man couldn't.

[OptimusWolf]

prospect, do you think handspeed is a big issue in this fight? I wouldn't have thought it would matter that much, especially over 15 rounds.

[tyson]

i agree ty, rocky had a strong will and desire to win, and i think that goes unmatched

but

slow-motion looking tapes? in the dempsey, johnson era, yes, but the rocky footage is clear as it can be. it's black and white, but the speed is standard

for example there's some footage of carnera vs baer fight where it's sped up, but it's those replays on espn classic, and they cut some of the rounds where it's 10 minute time frame. ive seen a clear version and it runs smoothly, both on tape, and other espn broadcasts

and besides it's evident that rocky doesnt have the greatest hand speed

Well, it's probably more accurate to say "****e filming".
They film from too far away, taking away the small details like the power of the punches, the snaps, the finer details in movement etc.

The eyes plays tricks is all I'm saying.

Rocky did not have fast hands, but neither did I say he did.
I referred to the subtle skillset, not speed.

[Boogie Nights]

prospect, do you think handspeed is a big issue in this fight? I wouldn't have thought it would matter that much, especially over 15 rounds.

naw, i was just pointing that out because i thought tyson confused the old footage with marciano being quicker

rocky did have decent speed, but he didnt have speed like say, mike tyson. both stocky, compact punchers. and speed is what made tyson succesful against those modern heavyweights.

also aside from being forward marching fighters, rocky and joe frazier are not the same.

in the rocky days, heavyweights were still smaller. i dont think that speed would have been an issue, that's not what helped rocky win fights. it was his will, and work rate. he suffocated you with pressure. he broke the other guy's will. and he shown the ability to dominate without having a reach, significant speed, or height.

against evander i dont think it would matter. rocky can fight his usual fight and apply pressure, the outcome is debatable

but against a guy like, bowe, klitschko, lewis, if you're 5'10, and have 69'' reach, or 72 like tyson had, you have to be quick. not only with handspeed, but good upper body movement.

[Boogie Nights]

Well, it's probably more accurate to say "****e filming".
They film from too far away, taking away the small details like the power of the punches, the snaps, the finer details in movement etc.

The eyes plays tricks is all I'm saying.

Rocky did not have fast hands, but neither did I say he did.
I referred to the subtle skillset, not speed.

oh okay, yes in some fights the camera would film from a single angle

and they didnt have the advanced slow motion replays that we have today so it might be confusing a little. but ive seen lot's of rocky's fights where camera angles are a bit closer, and you could see what's going on.

but it's not how it is today, it's not up close i agree

[Mushashi]

I don't know who would win, but it'd be one HELLUVA fight!

[Thunder Lips]

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH

you think roland laStarza would have ****ed up a prime mike tyson??? LMFAOOOOOOOOOOO

**** i was actually gonna respond to your other posts, but seeing this.........LOL discussion is ovaa

lastarza beating tyson......holyyyy ****

As good time as any to throw in the towel. Do you really think the 207 lb former cruiser with a losing record Tillis that nearly broke even with Mike was that much better than 37-0 LaStarza. The quick and mobile defensive minded Tillis was like an average version of LaStarza and one of the few fighters of that type we got to see Mike against.

Thanks, Manchine on the Rocky/Matthews post. I made a similar one in some other Rocky was a mindless midget that beat up old men thread. I like how he starts using the jab to shut down Matthews counters in the second round.

[Boogie Nights]

As good time as any to throw in the towel. Do you really think the 207 lb former cruiser with a losing record Tillis that nearly broke even with Mike was that much better than 37-0 LaStarza. The quick and mobile defensive minded Tillis was like an average version of LaStarza and one of the few fighters of that type we got to see Mike against.

Thanks, Manchine on the Rocky/Matthews post. I made a similar one in some other Rocky was a mindless midget that beat up old men thread. I like how he starts using the jab to shut down Matthews counters in the second round.

i cant actually believe that im replying to this bull**** trying to make a point, but ill make your day

mike won that fight and knocked tillis down in the process. it wasnt his best performance, but there was nothing shady about the decision. you dont seem to factor in the fact that tyson wasnt in his prime. he was still at a learning stage and a young, up and coming contender with only 19 fights! there was a huge gap in experience. tillis had 31 fights having fought the likes of witherspoon, shavers, carl williams, pinklon thomas, greg page, and mike weaver.

your comparison is very ******, no offence. you dont look at the facts. you seem to really romance rocky too much, and tend to to think that anyone who gave him a hard time or gone the distance with him would give trouble to mike or any other fighter.

you also showed your biase toward holyfield and i dont like it. saying he faded in fights??? if that's the case i can point out almost every other heavyweight that faded in fights either early or late. a win is a win, and holyfield beat some opposition and gone the distance with guys rocky wouldnt even have a chance with

and who the **** is roland lastarza? what the **** has he ever done? what other name has he been in the ring with other than rocky???

the guy is a contender whom people called a trialhorse. like i said lastarza beating tyson is the most diotic statement i ever heard. nothing comes close

im not gonna waste my time and respond to any ****** posts unless you start making sense and come up with reasonable posts.