A technical survey of Marciano, why he was a great fighter despite his reach

[Elroy The Great]

debunked rocky myths....

he has a good resume
he should be ranked in the top 10
he was fighting and beating up giants with long arms
was doing things defensively that would make may take notice

and ive learned that boxing experts DKSAB
(unless they win you a debate )

[Elroy The Great]

'' Most boxing people had tremendoud respect for Goldman....''

whatever the bold stuff means

[TBear]

People always look at being short as a disadvantage. Remember shorter fighters like Marciano and even Tyson spend a lot of time fighting tall fighters and turn it into an advantage. Tyson learned to fight even shorter in his early career making taller fighters reach in, making them an open target. This was discussed before the Tyson-Carl Williams bout and guess what happened...

[Elroy The Great]

People always look at being short as a disadvantage. Remember shorter fighters like Marciano.

bold stuff = not true

[TBear]

bold stuff = not true

You think? Or is this just about Marciano? I have spoke with many fighters that hate fighting against short fighters. It is like fighting southpaws. They fight orthodox fighters all the time, just like taller and normal height fighters fight other fighters that are normal height all the time. When you have to adjust and they are used to it becomes their advantage.
I admit Marciano had flaws that would be exposed in other eras. But I also admit Marciano found a way to win under various circumstances. Many of his weaknesses went out the window when the bell rang.

[Elroy The Great]

You think? Or is this just about Marciano? I have spoke with many fighters that hate fighting against short fighters. It is like fighting southpaws. They fight orthodox fighters all the time, just like taller and normal height fighters fight other fighters that are normal height all the time. When you have to adjust and they are used to it becomes their advantage.
I admit Marciano had flaws that would be exposed in other eras. But I also admit Marciano found a way to win under various circumstances. Many of his weaknesses went out the window when the bell rang.

mostly rocky. you can add frazier in there as well. tua and tyson had exceedingly fast hands. cant say that about rocky or frazier. they also worked the body better. they were also dangerous with their right hand (not so much frazier).

i have to say, if rocky had just 1 L, id find it impossible for people to give him the treatment they give him now.

[TBear]

mostly rocky. you can add frazier in there as well. tua and tyson had exceedingly fast hands. cant say that about rocky or frazier. they also worked the body better. they were also dangerous with their right hand (not so much frazier).

i have to say, if rocky had just 1 L, id find it impossible for people to give him the treatment they give him now.

I understand the point about Rocky, but remember we are looking back. With Frazier we see his losses and see the flaws. It is easier looking back and seeing weakness after all is said and done. For example there was a time where Frazier cleaned out the heavyweight division. It was a time where he was on the top of his game. By the time he faced Foreman he had dropped a bit. I am not saying it would have ended differently, because it was a bad style matchup, just that we base our views of these fighters as we can see their losses and weakness after it over. This might be true about fighters like Marciano and Frazier. Just consider the possibility.

[Elroy The Great]

I understand the point about Rocky, but remember we are looking back. With Frazier we see his losses and see the flaws. It is easier looking back and seeing weakness after all is said and done. For example there was a time where Frazier cleaned out the heavyweight division. It was a time where he was on the top of his game. By the time he faced Foreman he had dropped a bit. I am not saying it would have ended differently, because it was a bad style matchup, just that we base our views of these fighters as we can see their losses and weakness after it over. This might be true about fighters like Marciano and Frazier. Just consider the possibility.

true....

then why are we keeping the myths alive today ? obviously rocky should get more credit from the guys of his era. but now ? when there is so much evidence against it ?

and i dont hate him at all (who could hate a face like his ?!?!?). tbf, there arent (isnt ?) many fighters i hate. its the hype.

if people in the future dont see tyson in the same overrated light, ill be shocked.

[TBear]

true....

then why are we keeping the myths alive today ? obviously rocky should get more credit from the guys of his era. but now ? when there is so much evidence against it ?

and i dont hate him at all (who could hate a face like his ?!?!?). tbf, there arent (isnt ?) many fighters i hate. its the hype.

if people in the future dont see tyson in the same overrated light, ill be shocked.

I appreciate that you consider the importance and achievements of these guys at one time but the term "myth" might not be correct. Yes it was a long time ago and their flaws are apparent now but they are a important part of the legacy that leads us to todays champions. When we see great fighters today we have a hard time seeing how they could possibly ever be beaten.
But ten years from now somebody will post on here how they were limited by the losses they eventually suffered and use the term myth. Semi, I might be going in the wrong direction with this but those old myths are no different than today's great myths. The pattern repeats. and repeats...

[Elroy The Great]

I appreciate that you consider the importance and achievements of these guys at one time but the term "myth" might not be correct. Yes it was a long time ago and their flaws are apparent now but they are a important part of the legacy that leads us to todays champions. When we see great fighters today we have a hard time seeing how they could possibly ever be beaten.
But ten years from now somebody will post on here how they were limited by the losses they eventually suffered and use the term myth. Semi, I might be going in the wrong direction with this but those old myths are no different than today's great myths. The pattern repeats. and repeats...

absolutely dead on. but those who are nostalgic for those guys wont give an inch. stubborn to a fault.