hhascup

Who you beat is much more important then an unbeaten record. If you fought against a couple of dozen top 10 contenders and was still unbeaten, then that would be something.

You are right when you say that his 49-0 record should help him in boxing history, BUT it shouldn't be the only thing you go by.

Teddy Atlas once said that Rocky was the most overrated Heavyweight Champion because of his undefeated record, and he was also the most underrated Heavyweight Champion because people say he beat fighters that were way past their primes.

RoccoMarciano

Why does going 49-0-0 in the HW division cause a fighter to become overrated... that's nonsense!

hhascup

Because of the class of boxers he beat.

Of the 49 fights, he only fought 13 different boxers a total of 16 times that were rated in the Top 10 at one time or another. He also fought only 8 fighters a total of 11 times while they were rate in the Top 10.

Also, Rocky's average opponent record was 29.7 – 10.2 – 1.8

Here's some facts:

Ali fought 38 different opponents 49 times in 61 bouts that were rated at one time or another in the top 10 in the World. - 80.3279%

Louis fought 43 different Opponents 54 times in 71 (or 72) bouts that were rated at one time or another in the top 10 in the World. - 76.056%

Rocky fought 13 different Opponents 16 times in 49 bouts that were rated at one time or another in the top 10 in the World. - 32.653%

Ali fought 38 out of 61 opponents while they were in the top 10. He beat 33 of them 54.098%

Louis fought 34 out of 71 opponents while they were rated in the top 10. He beat 31 of them 43.662%

Rocky fought 11 out of 49 opponents while they were rated in the top 10. He beat all 11 of them 22.44898%

Ali fought boxers that had an average pro record of 33-5-1 when he fought them.

Louis fought boxers that had an average pro record of 38-10-2.5 when he fought them.

Rocky fought boxers that had an average pro record of 29.7-10.16-1.78 when he fought them.

Just compare the list of Opponents that each fought, you can't tell me that Ali didn't box the better opponents.

Ali beat Foreman, Frazier 2 out of 3 times, Liston twice, Norton 2 out of 3 times, Patterson twice, Quarry twice, Bonavena, Ellis, Folley, Terrell, Chuvalo twice, Lyle & Shavers. I can go on, BUT I think you know what I mean.

Louis beat Greats like Baer, Schmeling, Walcott twice, Conn twice, Braddock, Carnera & Sharkey.

Compare them at the time they fought Ali or Louis, not just their overall record, and you will see what I am talking about.

Lets compare the boxers that went against Ali that he beat to those who went against Rocky. When you do, compare them at the time they fought Ali or Rocky. The records of each boxer is the record they had coming into the fight.

1. Foreman 40-0-0 vs. Walcott 51-16-2 & 51-17-2
2. Frazier 30-1-0 & 32-2-0 vs. Charles 80-10-1 & 80-11-1
3. Liston 35-1-0 & 35-2-0 vs. Moore 148-19-9
4. Norton 30-1-0 & 37-3-0 vs. LaStarza 37-0-0 & 53-3-0
5. Patterson 43-4-0 & 55-7-1 vs. Cockell 66-11-1
6. Quarry 37-4-4 & 43-5-4 vs. Matthews 81-3-5
7. Bonavena 46-6-1 vs. Louis 69-2-0
8. Ellis 30-6-0 vs. Layne 34-1-2
9. Folley 74-7-4 vs. Savold 93-39-3
10. Terrell 38-4-0 vs. Muscato 56-20-0
11. Chuvalo 34-11-2 & 66-17-2 vs. Shkor 29-18-2
12. Lyle 30-2-1 vs.
13. Shavers 54-5-1 vs.
14. Bugner 43-4-1 & 51-6-1 vs.
15. Bob Foster 49-5-0 vs.
16. Mac Foster 28-1-0 vs.
17. Mildenberger 49-2-3
18. Moore 184-22-11
19. Young 17-4-2
20. Williams 65-5-1
21. Jones 21-3-1
22. Cooper 27-8-1 & 33-11-1
23. L. Spinks 7-0-1

RoccoMarciano

Must have been a pretty tough HW division in Rocky's day!

hhascup

Most boxing experts and historians would say that his era was one of the weakest, and that is why he is not rated as high as some people think he should be.

RoccoMarciano

Sure were an awful lot of losses amongst most fighters for it being such a "weak" era

hhascup

You said it right, they were pretty weak, BUT you can't blame Rocky for that. If Ali, Holmes, Louis, Tyson, Liston, Foreman or Frazier fought in that era, they too would of had a perfect record.

RoccoMarciano

Pretty bold statement... with ZERO facts to back it up!

bill1234

You'll notice that most of the guys Marciano fought had more fights though (Charles, Walcott, Louis and Moore were the best). With a lot of fights usually comes for defeats. Also, much like Holmes, it took Marciano a lot longer to get to the top because he did not have the luxury of being an Olympic gold medalist. Those two truly earned their way up.

__________________
MEMBER OF BOXINGFORUM.COM HALL OF FAME-JANUARY, 2008

bill1234

But the thing is, they weren't. You are basing it on what could of happened, but didn't. Thats like rating Tyson in the top 3 like he could have, but blew. Potential in Tyson's case is only as good as almost, which counts next to nothing.

__________________
MEMBER OF BOXINGFORUM.COM HALL OF FAME-JANUARY, 2008