Whose 49-0 is truly greater? Mayweather or Marciano?

[joseph5620]

Joe was almost 30 pounds heavier. You mention champions as if fighting a guy like victor Ortiz is some triumph. Floyd fans always mention how many champions he beat and the divisions he went through but never mention what great fighter he beat in his prime or even who those champions were because it's laughable. All you guys got is these silly references to "champions" like baldomir, Ortiz, maidana, etc. Rock and Floyd never beat an atg in their prime so we have to reference things outside of who they beat. For some reason you guys refuse to acknowledge anything Rock did such as going 49-0 in the heavyweight division, in 8 years. The time frames are totally different but you guys refuse to acknowledge that, you think guys like maidana would be 80-5 if he fought in rocks era and actually fought once a month.

I never even mentioned Victor Ortiz so don't try to put words in my mouth. I can speak for myself. Why don't you list the names of Marciano's opponents and place them next to Mayweather's opponents Then we'll see who's being "silly". The level of competition between the two is not even close in favor of Mayweather. But don't take my word for it. Forget the talking and going back and forth. Let's look at the facts and compare their level of opposition. If you're not willing to do that and debate it you don't have a leg to stand on with this.



"For some reason" you don't acknowlefge anything that Mayweather has accomplished. So don't pretend that you're being Mr. Neutral here.

Let's start with this. Who was the better opponent, Willis Applegate or Victor Ortiz?

[El-blanco]

I never even mentioned Victor Ortiz so don't try to put words in my mouth. I can speak for myself. Why don't you list the names of Marciano's opponents and place them next to Mayweather's opponents Then we'll see who's being "silly". The level of competition between the two is not even close in favor of Mayweather. But don't take my word for it. Forget the talking and going back and forth. Let's look at the facts and compare their lever of opposition. If you're not willing to do that and debate it you don't have a leg to stand on with this.

You didn't have to mention Ortiz, nor did you want to, but you did reference him when referring to all those "champions," Floyd beat. You can line up the names if you want but the reality is they fight in vastly different eras so comparing pampered, guarded fighters of today who fight three times a year, to guys who fought every month and weren't protected, isn't a fair comparison. What would Guerrero, Ortiz, Diego corrales', etc. records be if they fought once a month? Chances are the records would look a lot like rocks opposition. This is a pointless conversation.

Edit: I do acknowledge Floyd's accomplishments, I just don't think beating champions in this era is that impressive considering how many belts there are.

[mathed]

If we're speaking in reality and not the abstract, I think it's safe to say most heavyweights would hospitalize Floyd and all the opponents he's had. I'm certain Rock could do the same if he fought in this era. Speaking in the abstract is fine and creates conversation but let's not be ridiculous, p4p means ****all in reality and if you actually wanted to see who's truly the best you'd put them in the ring, but you can't because it would end in carnage. So, instead, we have these ****** conversations about hypothetical matchups that people actually take for reality.

Heavyweight>everyone else.

HAha, I was just messing around. But I like the way it works out...TBE couldn't beat more than 1 or 2 of the guys on Marciano's record.

[joseph5620]

You didn't have to mention Ortiz, nor did you want to, but you did reference him when referring to all those "champions," Floyd beat. You can line up the names if you want but the reality is they fight in vastly different eras so comparing pampered, guarded fighters of today who fight three times a year, to guys who fought every month and weren't protected, isn't a fair comparison. What would Guerrero, Ortiz, Diego corrales', etc. records be if they fought once a month? Chances are the records would look a lot like rocks opposition. This is a pointless conversation.

The era's are not relevant when comparing their competition. It has nothing to do with it. The bottom line is Marciano's competition is not very good if you're going to compare it to Mayweather's. That's just a fact and the era doesn't matter.


I can pick other fighters with better or equal resumes to Mayweather's from the past. But Marciano is not one of them. Not by a long shot.

[IronDanHamza]

I never even mentioned Victor Ortiz so don't try to put words in my mouth. I can speak for myself. Why don't you list the names of Marciano's opponents and place them next to Mayweather's opponents Then we'll see who's being "silly". The level of competition between the two is not even close in favor of Mayweather. But don't take my word for it. Forget the talking and going back and forth. Let's look at the facts and compare their level of opposition. If you're not willing to do that and debate it you don't have a leg to stand on with this.



"For some reason" you don't acknowlefge anything that Mayweather has accomplished. So don't pretend that you're being Mr. Neutral here.

Let's start with this. Who was the better opponent, Willis Applegate or Victor Ortiz?

There's no point.

He considers Heavyweights to be superior regardless because they're the biggest and would win if they fought in the ring.

Strange I know and people seem to be using that kind of logic now too. Especially since the whole Marciano vs Mayweather thing started.

[IronDanHamza]

HAha, I was just messing around. But I like the way it works out...TBE couldn't beat more than 1 or 2 of the guys on Marciano's record.

He couldn't beat any because they're like 60 lbs heavier than him.

Same can be said for Ray Robinson or Ray Leonard it doesn't change the fact they're both on completely different stratospheres to Marciano.

[El-blanco]

There's no point.

He considers Heavyweights to be superior regardless because they're the biggest and would win if they fought in the ring.

Strange I know and people seem to be using that kind of logic now too. Especially since the whole Marciano vs Mayweather thing started.

How is judging who's better by actually fighting, strange? You think having a hypothetical conversation about fights is a better indicator? Do you not see how ****** that is? You rather overlook empirical evidence for an abstract discussion? I know why you do, because if they actually fought you'd look like an idiot.

[joseph5620]

There's no point.

He considers Heavyweights to be superior regardless because they're the biggest and would win if they fought in the ring.

Strange I know and people seem to be using that kind of logic now too. Especially since the whole Marciano vs Mayweather thing started.

Yeah, Marvin Hagler even said something about that.

[IronDanHamza]

How is judging who's better by actually fighting, strange? You think having a hypothetical conversation about fights is a better indicator? Do you not see how ****** that is? You rather overlook empirical evidence for an abstract discussion? I know why you do, because if they actually fought you'd look like an idiot.

But obviously it's unfair to use that as criteria because just because they're bigger doesn't make them better fighters.

That's why we use resume and skillsets to judge fighters as opposed to "Who would win Tyson Fury or Roberto Duran? Fury? Ok so that means Fury>>>>Duran"

It's ****** and illogical. No one with a grain of sense is going to rank Tyson Fury over Duran just because he'd beat him if they fought in the ring.

If that were the case there's no point doing ATG lists because they would all be Heavyweights.

Do you actually have a Top 10 or 20 ATG list and are they all Heavyweights?

[krazyn8tive]

But obviously it's unfair to use that as criteria because just because they're bigger doesn't make them better fighters.

That's why we use resume and skillsets to judge fighters as opposed to "Who would win Tyson Fury or Roberto Duran? Fury? Ok so that means Fury>>>>Duran"

It's ****** and illogical. No one with a grain of sense is going to rank Tyson Fury over Duran just because he'd beat him if they fought in the ring.

If that were the case there's no point doing ATG lists because they would all be Heavyweights.

Do you actually have a Top 10 or 20 ATG list and are they all Heavyweights?

With the higher weights, the chance of injury or k.o. Is far greater than at 147. Especially at HW. Marciano was fighting guys that wanted to decapitate him and he fought that was as well. When was the last time Floyd fought that way? Hatton?