Why do Maraciano fans think he is best? Who was his best primed opponent? Could they have lasted in the 90's?

Question

Could old Moore, Charles, LaStarza, Walcott etc. have been able to hang with Lewis, Holyfield, Tyson, Bowe, Tua etc.? With that said or asked rather, how can people possibly believe Marciano was the best outside of his record?

Answer 1

Marciano during his time was the best as his record attests, but putting him in the ring in the 70's and beyond would have been a death sentence. Could he rumble with Smokin' Joe or Big George, of course not. Could he catch Ali and survive, not a chance. Would he last in the ring with a young Tyson, only if he bit his ear or his b#lls and did not get disqualified. Could he whoop the russain Klit, nope. And even that fake champ Lummox um Lennox Lewis would send him to early ring retirement.

Answer 2

He had the best KO punch of any heavyweight. He was undefeated. Ric this is a good question and would require alot of research to give more of a precise answer but the following is what I have right now. Charles and Holyfield are compareable. They would be ranked higher than Walcott and Lennox Lewis who are compareable. Archie Moore was better fighting light heavyweights and you are right he was old and will always be thought of as old because he never got a shot until he was old but he was good. Tyson, Tua, and Bowe are all ranked below all these guys. Ric the name you left out would have beaten Marciano if he were prime and that is Joe Louis. Joe Louis was the best opponent Marciano fought. If the fight were a few years earlier Louis would have won. This is a great question

Answer 3

I've always been one to tell you that Marciano is overrated. Like you said the biggest name on his record IMO is Joe Louis and he was well past his prime. Fighting only because he was in debt and needed money. He had no business even being back in the ring at that time. On the other hand Marciano had an iron chin and a huge heart no question. He would've never gone undefeated in the golden era of the heavyweight division. Foreman, Frazier, Ali, Norton, Ect Ect. I'm not sure about the 90's era of the heavyweight. He could've probably dominated but would've had losses. Holyfield was a warrior with alot of heart and would've lasted in any era. Tyson had no heart and a so-so chin and would've lost to Marciano. Lennox Lewis could've possibly beat rocky, but you have to remember Lewis had a next to glass jaw. If Marciano would've caught him he'd go down no question. In today's heavyweight division any of these guys mentioned could dominate. Marciano could destroy any of the current heavyweight champs. Anyways I wouldn't rank Marciano as the greatest as most say. In Ali's era he wouldn't be. I always believed Ali could beat Marciano. Joe Louis would've in his prime.

Answer 4

Lewis had no chin and hand picked his opponents when they were at there worst times in there career. Tyson threw away his career, bums were beating him, Holyfield was a good boxer, a real warrior, but he is a small heavyweight and no where near as tough as marciano. Moore had no heart, Bowe had even less heart, he was good for a while but then fell apart young. Marciano held his career together for a whole career. these guys you mention are just flashes of greatness. They were good for a short period of time and they fell apart one way or another. Marciano may have been small but he hit hard. For him to be as small as he was and dominate the heavyweight division like he did has to tell you something right there.

Answer 5

Ric, Rocky had disadvantages in size and reach yet never lost so that should tell you something about the man's determination and fierce will to win. Of course he made up for his limitations with incredible punching power in both fists. The punch he hit Walctott with would have stretched any heavyweight who ever lived and I mean any of them. 43 knockouts in 49 fights is certainly nothing to sneeze at either. He was undefeated because he refused to lose and never had any fear in the ring. He was relentless and always in tremendous physical condition Despite weighing 188 lbs Rocky is still one of the strongests fighters ever too. He was harder to hit with a clean shot than Joe Frazier going into a low crouch had a left hook as good as Joe Frazier and a right hand second to none, Rocky also chose to fight at 188 so he would have more endurance and stamina and could have easily fought at 200-205 lbs is another fact that a lot of people don't consider. His toughest opponent in the ring was Ezzard Charles who was 32 when he fought Rocco and Rocky was 30. LaStarza was highly ranked when they fought the second time and an outstanding boxer. Walcott was dangerous the night he lost the title to Marciano and probably nobody but the Rock could have beaten him that night. Walcott was better at an advanced age like Archie Moore who also fought Ali 5 years after fighting Rocky and lasting 4 rounds. Moore was lgt heavy champ for almost 10 years holding on to that crown until 1962 at the age of 48! Cockell was a punching bag for Rocky without a doubt. The opponents that Ali fought were better than the one's Rocky fought altogether but I also believe that Walcott and Charles would have been tough for any of them to beat including the great Ali who many times acknowledged this. Marciano would have given any of Ali's or Lewis's opponents trouble and probably would have knocked most of them out. Just ask Angelo Dundee and Lou Duva two people who knew Rocky and a thing or two about this great sport and it's history. Ric regardless of opinions, he never lost, fought the best of his era and was the best of his era and should be given more respect for the champion that he was. Good question sir!

Answer 6

It's unlikely Marciano and his era could compare with the fighters of Ali's day. Guys like Frazier, Forman, Liston, and even Norton & Holms would have dominated Maraciano's group.

I am not so sure about the Holyfield era, Lewis, Bowe and even Tyson all have suspect chins and questionable heart. Maraciano would, if nothing else tested those chins and no one questioned his heart. Size in and of itself isn't as determining a factor as some would have you believe. Bigger isn't always better. I hold Holylfield in the highest esteem of the era, and he would have given anyone trouble in his prime, yet he was arguable the smallest man of his era to win the title. Rocky dominated his time frame, and in my eyes Holyfield eclipsed the talent of his day. I have no doubt Tua would have exposed Tyson long ago if Mike didn't duck him, at no time in his career could Tyson have beaten Tua, let alone the others.

Rocky always makes the blogbaba's top ten all time list, but he is always in the lower five of the top ten. Tyson barely makes the top 100. and I rate him as the poorest example of a world heavyweight titlist in the history of boxing.

Answer 7

It's somewhat relative. Heavies were 190 pounds then.
Walcott was very real. Charles could outbox any cruiser today. Archie Moore had a huge heart.
Lewis, Holyfield, Tyson, Bowe are all washed up now, so the answer is yes, against the current division.

Answer 8

We can never compare the deeds of yesteryear with today.In any sport. As today's champions will tomorrows has beens.
Marchiano was a great boxer,He did what no heavyweight had ever done.He retired undefeated champion of the world.Even the peerless Ali never held this distinction.In fact it's doubtful if anyone ever will.
It is unfair to laud a champion as best of the best and to denegrate another because the contenders were mediocre.
The champion has to fight and defeat allcomers.Marchiano did this,What else could he do

Answer 9

If you think about it, its all relative. Maraciano was way ahead of his peers, at the time when he boxed. That makes him a great. Can't really compare different era's cause just like anything the sport is evolving, and the bar is being pushed higher year by year.

If you think about it could the fighters of today have gone as far in maraciano's time when the time between fights was a few months at the highest level, whereas now they get at least 6months between fights

Answer 10

Honestly, I don't think that the old guys could have handled the more contemporary boxers. However, I also don't think that it is fair to compare boxers from different eras. Times change and sports change with them. Rules are different and styles have changed as well. Boxing stance and tactics have changed as well. Boxers from our time could be considered "better" because they have learned a lot from the fighters that came before them. I do agree with you when you say that he is not the best, though. As a technical boxer he just wasn't that good. But, he was very overpowering, and his power was awesome.