How can anyone say that Rocky Marciano was not.........................................?

Question

One of the greatest Boxers of all time & he was overrated? He never LOST, accepted all challenges, ended with a career of 49-0-43ko's.......Yes the heavyweight ranks were terrible in that day, he beat some older champ figure's who CHALLENGED him......Who to this day has a win record with a KO percentage to match the Rock's??

What AMERICAN can match his record? I do not think he is the #1 heavyweight of all time, but he is in my top 5......Tyson lost ALL my respect, Ali I was good, but not the best in my opinion

to Johnnie quest= People say Rocky beat some older men, What about Ali beating older men? Rocky was MUCH smaller in size & weight than, I think almost all heavyweight's at his time & he still KO'D them.....

Answer 1

I sure wouldn't say that. Nobody's ever come close to matching his record. What a lot of people don't consider is the fact that he was a 190 lb heavyweight. I'm old enough to have seen some of his fights on the old Gillette Cavalcade of Sports. His famous "Suzie Q"... that dynamite right hand, was unmatched then, and would be today.

Answer 2

There was no fight between Marciano and Patterson because Marciano retired, then was killed in a plane crash before $$$ problems forced Rocky back into the ring. The Moore comparison is interesting, and it lends credence up to a point for Floyd being superior to Rocky, but it is the reflexes of youth more so than skill level differences that caused Floyd to look better than Rocky against Archie. At 32 Marciano probably would have had enough to stop a 21 year old Patterson, but age and youth play a major role, and eventually father time would have put Floyd in the drivers seat and slowed Rocky down enough to make him vulnerable somewhere along the time line had Rocky lived long enough. I never met Rocky, but I think it's a safe bet fear or cowerdice had nothing to do with a Marciano/Patterson fight never happening. Sonny Liston on the other hand would have most likely taken Rocky in much the same manner as he did Floyd. I rank both Rocky and Floyd in the top my top ten all time great heavyweight listings prior to the turn of the century, but put both of them in the lower five of the top ten.

Answer 3

Rocky Marciano without a doubt is one of the top three heavyweight champions of all time and of course, the only undefeated champion. He hit like a mule, had great heart, determination, and a fierce will to win never fearing anybody in the ring. He was the man who refused to lose and would have been difficult for any of the greats because of this. Rocky was also a good man and a humble man that didn't brag about all of his accomplishments in the ring as he was brought up the true old school way. He was harder to hit than many realize getting into a very low crouch and chose to fight at 187-188 lbs so his endurance would be greater than his opponents. Rocky could have easily tipped the scales at 200-205 lbs but he chose not too. His record clearly speaks for itself and he could have beaten anybody on the horizon had he chosen to for a few more years! Pressure from his wife, and a back problem made him choose to retire as the only undefeated heavyweight champion of all time 49-0-0 43 knockouts. In many ways the Rock is indeed underrated not overrated as some claim.

Answer 4

When he retired one national talking head actually said Rocky would have been immortal if he had taken another fight so he would have been 50-0, not "just" 49-0. It doesn't matter what anyone does there are always second guessers and people who enjoy tearing down successful people. I think it is envy. He fought who was there. Some have said he fought an old Archie Moore, but they never criticize Ali for fighting a much older Moore. I don't worry about what people say, but they should give the dead a little more respect.

Answer 5

Marciano was a great heavyweight, greatest ever, well no. But indeed in the top 5.

Records are weird....

I mean I was a pro fighter, and I often brag about the fact that I was undefeated and KO'd everyone that I faced....I told this story in a bar to a bunch of people, when this old-timer piped up..."What exactly was your record?"

"Ummmm, I was 1-0, 1KO."

I think people make too much out of the 49-0.
Rocky was special, but not so much for his record but his fighting spirit. He was too small to be a heavyweight, but nobody could in his day handle him. He almost in many cases willed himself to victory. That is a champion!!!!, in the true sense of the word. To win against the odds.

Yes, he was great.


Keep Your Hands Up.

Big Nate Dog

Answer 6

Anyone who says Marciano is overrated and isn't one of the greats don't know his boxing. Any boxing expert will rank Ali, Joe Louis and Marciano as the top three heavyweights of all time. As for Rocky Marciano, he certainly is one of the greatest fighters of all time. It wasn't his fault that he fought in an era of less competitive heavyweights. It wasn't his fault that he caught Joe Louis and Jersey Joe Walcott in their twilight years. But 49-0 is 49-0. Larry Holmes tried but missed out on it. The record stands and probably will forever

Answer 7

I get really frustrated about this one....The rock is indeed one of the greatest...people cite his size as a factor and its funny because guys like Mike Tyson and evander holyfield were in the 215 to 220 range as champions and were successful...ali and frazier were in the 205 range for their fist fight and nobody ever mentions that...then the skills come into question well first of all he wasnt the slow, plodding guy people think he was he was not that easy to hit and created all kinds of problems with his bobbing and weaving...nothing against ali, but frazier beat him decisively in their first bout and frazier was a one armed fighter, and nowhere the offensive machine that the rock was, secondly louis who is one of my favs was as vulnerable as anyone else as schmeling proved so I doubt if he would just Roll over the rock either....Ali himself has admitted that he would have had a very hard time against the rock, and that is the greatest compliment of all to the brockton blockbuster

Answer 8

Rocky was a great heavyweight of his era, there is no doubt.

However, when ranking the heavyweights now, you must take into consideration things like speed, size, and defensive skills. Rocky led with his chin, although a pretty good one. At 6' 185 lbs, though, he would have had considerable trouble against big guys like Ali, Liston, Williams, and Lewis, although I think he would give Lewis and Williams some serious trouble because of their suspect chins. A Marciano vs Liston in their primes would be a good matchup.
Ali would have been too much for Rocky, but so too would have been Joe Louis in his prime.

Answer 9

He was a good fighter with a lot of heart and power, but not so much skill. I am one of those guys you are mentioning because he is overrated by the general public. He is a top 10 Heavyweight of all time, but not one of the greatest pound for pound boxers ever.

Why is he overrated? The average person on here that knows nothing about boxing will tell you he was the greatest ever based on his record. Here's what's wrong with that, it matters what your competition is, not what your record is. He had pretty good competition, but not the best by any means. He faced 4 greats, and 3 of them(Walcott, Moore, and Charles) were past their prime blown up Light Heavyweights. The other was Joe Louis, who had been retired ans was basically returning because he was struggling financially and needed some money. He fought some other good fighters, nut not at that class.

Anyway he's overrated because he fought in a poor era, and generally fought the best when they were past their primes. He is one of the greatest at Heavyweight, but not #1 by any means. Ali, Lewis, Louis, etc. all had better resumes than him, and many were more skilled. He was a very tough fighter with a lot of heart, but his accomplishments are blown out of proportion due to his record.

edit:

Wow what a surprise, more of the unknowledgable tards on here give me a bad rating. Thumps down because I said he wasn't the greatest ever? He sure as HELL was not.

Answer 10

You answered you own question.

The fact that he was in an era where Roland LaStarza and Don Cockell are used to prop him up as legendary is laughable.

The fact that no one thereafter was undefeated speaks to the quality of the heavyweight division after Marciano's death. It was too competitive for a guy to go undefeated for a long period of time. It was certainly too competitive for a 5'10" 190 lb'er.

You are judged by the company you keep. Losing to Ali is definitely more significant than going the distance with a guy who's record is 62-56.

Look at all the greats. They push themselves into uncharted territory. A loss is not failure...but the culmination of a mission to discover excellence for fighters like Sugar Ray Robinson. They take on the challenges, thereby exposing themselves to risky opposition. They don't think they can lose and fight as such.

Don't get me wrong, I am not saying that being undeated is insignificant. But I am saying that if you are undefeated against questionable opposition.......your status as a legend will ALWAYS be questioned.

To me, Marciano seems to be the prototype for champs like De La Hoya who have built a reputation fighting guys who are not at their peak....and expect unearned legendary status to be laid at their feet.

Marciano was not challenged in a way that was legendary.

Walcott was 38 when they fought
Charles was 33 and was in his 14 yr of fighting
Louis was 37
Moore was 39

That leaves LaStarza and Cockell. Does beating these two guys merit legendary status?

You can't extrapolate greatness.....the fighter had to display it in the ring. Marciano suffers from opponent anemia, thus ranking him as the best heayweight or overall fighter ever will always be questioned.

Quite simply...he never earned it.