By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
Come on it’s Christmas … 1. Louis 2.Ali 3.Marciano 4.Lennox Lewis 5.Jack Johnson 6 Dempsey 7.Larry Holmes 8.Mike Tyson 9.Joe Frazier 10. Evander Holyfield
Boxing GOATs (Heavyweights ) on 18:04 - Dec 18 by shingle
To believe a man weighing 13 st could beat proven greats who weigh 18st coupled with a superior skill set is what i would call clueless, and also devoid of all logic, and i am certainly not ridiculing Rocky he was indeed the best at that time but lucky his opponents were not of the best quality and like him to small to compete in different era`s.
You calling Jersey Joe Walcott of poor quality then. Come on Shings His opponents were dispatched mercilessly
Boxing GOATs (Heavyweights ) on 18:04 - Dec 18 by shingle
To believe a man weighing 13 st could beat proven greats who weigh 18st coupled with a superior skill set is what i would call clueless, and also devoid of all logic, and i am certainly not ridiculing Rocky he was indeed the best at that time but lucky his opponents were not of the best quality and like him to small to compete in different era`s.
You can only fight who is available and unless Marciano could time travel, what could he do?
You cannot easily compare boxers from different eras which is why the GOt will always be a matter of opinion.
0
Boxing GOATs (Heavyweights ) on 19:46 - Dec 18 with 959 views
Boxing GOATs (Heavyweights ) on 19:09 - Dec 18 by SullutaCreturned
You can only fight who is available and unless Marciano could time travel, what could he do?
You cannot easily compare boxers from different eras which is why the GOt will always be a matter of opinion.
Very true , its subjective out of necessity but the best we can do is refer to people with a greater knowledge of the fight game than you I or any one else on this forum . The list they came up with -see previous post has Rocky at number 4 . Thats vindication enough for me.
0
Boxing GOATs (Heavyweights ) on 23:34 - Dec 18 with 924 views
Boxing GOATs (Heavyweights ) on 19:46 - Dec 18 by howenjack
Very true , its subjective out of necessity but the best we can do is refer to people with a greater knowledge of the fight game than you I or any one else on this forum . The list they came up with -see previous post has Rocky at number 4 . Thats vindication enough for me.
It's why Ali, Louis Dempsey Marciano are on every top ten list of heavyweights Argue over who is no 1 but these four are pre eminent for the way they changed boxing
Boxing GOATs (Heavyweights ) on 23:34 - Dec 18 by onehunglow
It's why Ali, Louis Dempsey Marciano are on every top ten list of heavyweights Argue over who is no 1 but these four are pre eminent for the way they changed boxing
Except for Ring magazine founder and long-time editor, Nat Fleischer, who didn't have Ali in his top 10.
One of his main reasons being that he would have to drop Marciano, who he had at #10, to make way for Ali and he considered Marciano better.
0
Boxing GOATs (Heavyweights ) on 13:11 - Dec 19 with 864 views
Firstly look at who Walcott fought and then look at his weight. again how can a 13 st guy beat an 18 st guy with a far better skill set. You guys must all be in your seventies or older and because of bias towards these fighters back in your day or before just have no logic in what you are saying.
Boxing GOATs (Heavyweights ) on 19:09 - Dec 18 by SullutaCreturned
You can only fight who is available and unless Marciano could time travel, what could he do?
You cannot easily compare boxers from different eras which is why the GOt will always be a matter of opinion.
Again you miss the point of course it is not his fault he was such a poor era and he was certainly the best of thst era that is why he remained unbeaten lol but other era`s consisted of athletic fit and hard 18 st beasts so how would it be feasible possible for a guy weighing just 13 st like Rocky being able to compete against them the poor guy would be obliterated within a few rounds.
0
Boxing GOATs (Heavyweights ) on 18:23 - Dec 19 with 817 views
Boxing GOATs (Heavyweights ) on 19:46 - Dec 18 by howenjack
Very true , its subjective out of necessity but the best we can do is refer to people with a greater knowledge of the fight game than you I or any one else on this forum . The list they came up with -see previous post has Rocky at number 4 . Thats vindication enough for me.
Well you best go and take a look at the survey done by the current sky pundits and Dempsey was not in any of the top ten and the best Rocky got was no`9 and the main reason he was so low was how can a 13st guy beat a more skilled 18st guy it is common sense, these pundits are all under the age of seventy so are no doubt being more realistic and logical.
0
Boxing GOATs (Heavyweights ) on 18:32 - Dec 19 with 811 views
Boxing GOATs (Heavyweights ) on 18:09 - Dec 19 by shingle
Again you miss the point of course it is not his fault he was such a poor era and he was certainly the best of thst era that is why he remained unbeaten lol but other era`s consisted of athletic fit and hard 18 st beasts so how would it be feasible possible for a guy weighing just 13 st like Rocky being able to compete against them the poor guy would be obliterated within a few rounds.
You could be right but we'll never know. Sport can be funny like that. Who would have bet on Swansea rugby beating the All Blacks or Hereford beating Arsenal. Del Potro v Federer, Leicester winning the EPL, Spinks v Ali.
Sport is full of upsets and as Marciano was known to have a good jaw and a really hard punch then maybe he could win. Not forgetting of course, if Marciano was around today he would have access to modern training and coaching.
Anything is possible.
0
Boxing GOATs (Heavyweights ) on 19:01 - Dec 19 with 804 views
Boxing GOATs (Heavyweights ) on 18:03 - Dec 19 by shingle
Firstly look at who Walcott fought and then look at his weight. again how can a 13 st guy beat an 18 st guy with a far better skill set. You guys must all be in your seventies or older and because of bias towards these fighters back in your day or before just have no logic in what you are saying.
You sound Ike a typical young un,unable to countenance anything before your time It’s a bit of fun ,mun.
Boxing GOATs (Heavyweights ) on 19:11 - Dec 19 by SullutaCreturned
And I haven't even reached my 60's yet either
Why do young people think being younger makes them right. They haven't seen the people or things they write off!
lol. I’ll keep schtum We had a poster, a notorious piece of work ,now banned ,who was the definitive age hater . We test our old people with contempt,proven by so many dumped into “ care” homes .
Boxing GOATs (Heavyweights ) on 19:27 - Dec 19 by theloneranger
That Nat Fleischer top 10 list was compiled for the Ring magazine in 1968.
Nat started by ranking the top six in all divisions in the 1953 edition of his annual Ring Record Book. He expanded it to a top ten in his 1958 book - “50 years at ringside”. They remained unchanged to his death. The 1968 Ring article reprinted those rankings.
Fleischer witnessed the whole of Ali's first reign and nine defences of the title before his exile. The part of Ali's career that is generally considered his peak. He also seen the first three fights of his comeback and was ringside for the first Frazier fight. He wrote an editorial in late 1971, addressing the issue of not including Ali in his top ten. One of the reasons given was what I mentioned earlier, he would have to drop Marciano to accommodate Ali and he considered Rocky the better fighter. His exact words - “Clay never could have beaten Marciano”. He stated he could see no reason to change his rankings from 1958. Another reason was the decisiveness of Frazier's victory over Ali, another fighter who Fleischer didn't include in his top ten.
1
Boxing GOATs (Heavyweights ) on 21:07 - Dec 19 with 750 views
Boxing GOATs (Heavyweights ) on 20:58 - Dec 19 by Cleddau
Nat started by ranking the top six in all divisions in the 1953 edition of his annual Ring Record Book. He expanded it to a top ten in his 1958 book - “50 years at ringside”. They remained unchanged to his death. The 1968 Ring article reprinted those rankings.
Fleischer witnessed the whole of Ali's first reign and nine defences of the title before his exile. The part of Ali's career that is generally considered his peak. He also seen the first three fights of his comeback and was ringside for the first Frazier fight. He wrote an editorial in late 1971, addressing the issue of not including Ali in his top ten. One of the reasons given was what I mentioned earlier, he would have to drop Marciano to accommodate Ali and he considered Rocky the better fighter. His exact words - “Clay never could have beaten Marciano”. He stated he could see no reason to change his rankings from 1958. Another reason was the decisiveness of Frazier's victory over Ali, another fighter who Fleischer didn't include in his top ten.
If Rocky was fighting today,he would be a cruiseweight and God knows what havoc he would have caused .
Boxing GOATs (Heavyweights ) on 23:34 - Dec 18 by onehunglow
It's why Ali, Louis Dempsey Marciano are on every top ten list of heavyweights Argue over who is no 1 but these four are pre eminent for the way they changed boxing
Well if you ignore Iron Mike Tyson perhaps.
Mike Tyson might even be the top fighter …?
Beware of the Risen People
0
Boxing GOATs (Heavyweights ) on 22:53 - Dec 19 with 722 views
Boxing GOATs (Heavyweights ) on 21:48 - Dec 19 by Kilkennyjack
Well if you ignore Iron Mike Tyson perhaps.
Mike Tyson might even be the top fighter …?
Lilly me ok mucker Not so Much s case of ignoring him Tyson basically intimidated to win The likes of Holyfield weren't When intimidation failed , he lost heart Dempsey and Marciano imo, had the biggest heart Try checking out Dempsey's goddam awful upbringing Good posts though Thanks to all
Boxing GOATs (Heavyweights ) on 20:58 - Dec 19 by Cleddau
Nat started by ranking the top six in all divisions in the 1953 edition of his annual Ring Record Book. He expanded it to a top ten in his 1958 book - “50 years at ringside”. They remained unchanged to his death. The 1968 Ring article reprinted those rankings.
Fleischer witnessed the whole of Ali's first reign and nine defences of the title before his exile. The part of Ali's career that is generally considered his peak. He also seen the first three fights of his comeback and was ringside for the first Frazier fight. He wrote an editorial in late 1971, addressing the issue of not including Ali in his top ten. One of the reasons given was what I mentioned earlier, he would have to drop Marciano to accommodate Ali and he considered Rocky the better fighter. His exact words - “Clay never could have beaten Marciano”. He stated he could see no reason to change his rankings from 1958. Another reason was the decisiveness of Frazier's victory over Ali, another fighter who Fleischer didn't include in his top ten.
Nat Fleischer's 1958 Ring Magazine top 10 ...
1 Jack Johnson
2 Jim Jeffries
3 Bob Fitzsimmons
4 Jack Dempsey
5 James Corbett
6 Joe Louis
7 Sam Langford
8 Gene Tunney
9 Max Schmeling
10 Rocky Marciano
Everyday above ground ... Is a good day! 😎
0
Boxing GOATs (Heavyweights ) on 18:31 - Dec 20 with 642 views
Boxing GOATs (Heavyweights ) on 18:32 - Dec 19 by SullutaCreturned
You could be right but we'll never know. Sport can be funny like that. Who would have bet on Swansea rugby beating the All Blacks or Hereford beating Arsenal. Del Potro v Federer, Leicester winning the EPL, Spinks v Ali.
Sport is full of upsets and as Marciano was known to have a good jaw and a really hard punch then maybe he could win. Not forgetting of course, if Marciano was around today he would have access to modern training and coaching.
Anything is possible.
Ok they do say it only takes one punch and in normal circumstances that holds true but what we are discussing here is that one punch being from a 13st man being able to put away an 18 st world champion and then having to do it to another 18 st contender in his next fight then another, honestly it really does defy logic it just would not and could not happen against the genuine world class big guys saying that if it was the someone like the joke figure Primo Carnera aka the Ampling Alp the 13st guy was fighting then they would have every chance lol
0
Boxing GOATs (Heavyweights ) on 18:42 - Dec 20 with 641 views
Boxing GOATs (Heavyweights ) on 23:00 - Dec 19 by onehunglow
Lilly me ok mucker Not so Much s case of ignoring him Tyson basically intimidated to win The likes of Holyfield weren't When intimidation failed , he lost heart Dempsey and Marciano imo, had the biggest heart Try checking out Dempsey's goddam awful upbringing Good posts though Thanks to all
A prime Tyson wipes out Dempsey within 3 rounds, the washed up and well passed his best Tyson who fought Holyfield then maybe Dempsey could have had more of a shout.
0
Boxing GOATs (Heavyweights ) on 18:44 - Dec 20 with 639 views
Boxing GOATs (Heavyweights ) on 18:31 - Dec 20 by shingle
Ok they do say it only takes one punch and in normal circumstances that holds true but what we are discussing here is that one punch being from a 13st man being able to put away an 18 st world champion and then having to do it to another 18 st contender in his next fight then another, honestly it really does defy logic it just would not and could not happen against the genuine world class big guys saying that if it was the someone like the joke figure Primo Carnera aka the Ampling Alp the 13st guy was fighting then they would have every chance lol
Again, if Marciano was around to fight these guys he may be mre than 13 stones, better training, better diet, better coaching too.
You cannot alter history then presume to know exactly what would happen.
0
Boxing GOATs (Heavyweights ) on 19:08 - Dec 20 with 636 views
Boxing GOATs (Heavyweights ) on 22:53 - Dec 19 by howenjack
Here's Ray Arcell's take - the man who trained Roberto Duran
When this guy and Eddie Futch where interviewed two years before his death they both rated Larry Holmes as the best pound for pound heavyweight they even insisted on joining up to train him, of course Holmes came along a lot later than 1958 i rest my case lol
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.