RoccoMarciano said:And that's exactly how history records it. Seems a little dense to bring up crap that never happened... in other words a pro loss. Seems plausible Marciano stepped up the pace in pro fights.
RoccoMarciano said:Still lost 5, or so, as a pro... not that Clay has one iota to do with the title of the thread.
hhascup said:Your 100% correct, BUT what some people are saying is that he turned Pro and then lost to Wallace in an Amateur bout. If he used his own him instead of Rocky Mack when he fought as a Pro, someone would have picked that up and he wouldn't have been aloud to go back to the Amateurs like he did. Once you turn Pro, you can't box Amateur.
Sorry, I missed that portion of the thread. I've never heard Clay fought as an amateur after turning pro.hhascup said:The only reason I brought him into it is that someone stated that Ali went back to the Amateurs after turning Pro as Rocky did, and that just isn't true.
Again your 100% correct as far as I know.RoccoMarciano said:Simple fact is Rocky never lost a professional fight, Henry. That's not going to change regardless of how one skews the data.
If he would have went 49-1 as a pro, I wouldn't think any less of him. The fact he never lost as a pro seems to point to the fact that his own will wouldn't allow him to lose at that level.hhascup said:Again your 100% correct as far as I know.
The reason people keep saying what they do is that some people think that Rocky fought more then just 1 bout as a Pro using a different name, such as Rocky Mack. Back then record keeping wasn't the best either.
RoccoMarciano said:If he would have went 49-1 as a pro, I wouldn't think any less of him. The fact he never lost as a pro seems to point to the fact that his own will wouldn't allow him to lose at that level.
I'm curious regarding the Lowry fight you mention, Henry. Seems you almost came out and stated Rocky may have lost that one.
Hard for me to argue with anything that is so "hush-hush"hhascup said:I met Ted Lowry a couple of years ago, he was a pretty nice guy, BUT he was very small for a Heavyweight. They list him at 5'10", BUT when I met him he was less then that, BUT he was still in Great shape for his age. Most people at the fight thought Ted won, even the newspaper writers that were their thought he won. I was also told a lot more BUT I really can't say because I give my word that I wouldn't.
I wish everything was on the up and up BUT the more I get involved with boxing people the more I learn.RoccoMarciano said:Hard for me to argue with anything that is so "hush-hush"
I'm not doubting you as an expert, Henry. I just think you are a little harder on Marciano than need be at times.hhascup said:I wish everything was on the up and up BUT the more I get involved with boxing people the more I learn.
Last week when I saw Bert Sugar, he said, Henry I read what you said about Walcott in the New York Times, very good.
He also said that the Times called him up and he said, Henry said it all and I have nothing to add.
This was about a Monument of Jersey Joe Walcott we put up in Camden New Jersey and I was the guest speaker.
I honestly don't mean to be. As you might know when they had the unveiling of the Rocky Marciano Stamp several years ago, the Marciano family asked me to be the MC. I brought up his perfect 49-0 record with 43 KO's, I brought up the Computer bouts, 1st on the radio and then the one he had with Ali, which he won both.RoccoMarciano said:I'm not doubting you as an expert, Henry. I just think you are a little harder on Marciano than need be at times.
Frazier would have beaten them all, just as Rocky did. One of the best fights in history would have been between Marciano and Frazier. Anybody's guess who would have won between those two. I tend towards Marciano because he could hit very hard with both hands... still a toss up in my book though.hhascup said:If Frazier fought the same 49 bouts as Rocky did, I honestly can't see him losing to any of them, can you.
I still rate him just inside my Top 10 and that is more then I can say for some people.
I'll always think he is one of the best!RoccoMarciano said:Frazier would have beaten them all, just as Rocky did. One of the best fights in history would have been between Marciano and Frazier. Anybody's guess who would have won between those two. I tend towards Marciano because he could hit very hard with both hands... still a toss up in my book though.
One of my main flaws is thinking swarmers are always best - not always the case, but it is the style I prefer. Ali would have had a very hard time against Marciano, just as he did against Frazier. Frazier and Marciano were just of the ilk Ali had a hard time fighting against, IMO. So I think Ali is a bit overrated at times, but then again, Ali did have the ability to take on various styles - something that Marciano and Frazier may lack.
Anyway, Henry, thanks for reminding me about the other stuff you've stated about the Rock
PrettyBoyFloyd said:Mike Tyson would have his way with Marciano. I watched a Marciano fight last night on Classic, and I couldn't believe how open he was to straight shots. His punches were basically all hooks, and they were the wide, looping type. Mike Tyson would have eaten his lunch by the 5th round. I was watching last night trying to figure out how people honestly think Marciano would beat the Fraziers, Tysons, and even Foremans of later years.
The sport has evolved and the information is much more advanced. It is the same in all sports. If you watch the older basketball or football champions, they would be destroyed by the smarter guys of today. There is just so much more little thigns and nuances that boxers are taught these days that were missed back then. The guys are just all around better. I would bet my house on Tyson, Frazier, or Foreman giving little Marciano one hell of a beat down. He is extremely overrated. If you can't see it from his fights, I feel sorry for your misconceptions.
Like I said, there some people that are harder on Rocky then I am. This is just one of them.RoccoMarciano said:I'm not doubting you as an expert, Henry. I just think you are a little harder on Marciano than need be at times.
Tell that to the guys that fought him. LaStarza said he's a lot harder to hit than he looks, and its true. If you watch on high def real close, over and over (like I have) a lot of punches miss only by an inch. Again, qualty of film has a lot to do with it. If they had the same quality film as they do now, unfortunately, modern boxing would be destroyed.PrettyBoyFloyd said:Mike Tyson would have his way with Marciano. I watched a Marciano fight last night on Classic, and I couldn't believe how open he was to straight shots. His punches were basically all hooks, and they were the wide, looping type. Mike Tyson would have eaten his lunch by the 5th round. I was watching last night trying to figure out how people honestly think Marciano would beat the Fraziers, Tysons, and even Foremans of later years.
The sport has evolved and the information is much more advanced. It is the same in all sports. If you watch the older basketball or football champions, they would be destroyed by the smarter guys of today. There is just so much more little thigns and nuances that boxers are taught these days that were missed back then. The guys are just all around better. I would bet my house on Tyson, Frazier, or Foreman giving little Marciano one hell of a beat down. He is extremely overrated. If you can't see it from his fights, I feel sorry for your misconceptions.
Here's what one opponent had to say about Rocky:bill1234 said:Tell that to the guys that fought him. LaStarza said he's a lot harder to hit than he looks, and its true. If you watch on high def real close, over and over (like I have) a lot of punches miss only by an inch. Again, qualty of film has a lot to do with it. If they had the same quality film as they do now, unfortunately, modern boxing would be destroyed.
Did I say anything about LaStarza? No.bill1234 said:Tell that to the guys that fought him. LaStarza said he's a lot harder to hit than he looks, and its true. If you watch on high def real close, over and over (like I have) a lot of punches miss only by an inch. Again, qualty of film has a lot to do with it. If they had the same quality film as they do now, unfortunately, modern boxing would be destroyed.
From a guy that lost to Marciano.. twice! What would you expect?hhascup said:Here's what one opponent had to say about Rocky:
An Interview with Roland LaStarza the Former Golden Gloves champ and heavyweight contender
On fighting Rocky Marciano: "I won the first fight. Everyone thought I won the first fight except the referee. One judge scored it for me, the ref and the other judge gave it to Marciano. All the newspaper guys gave me the decision. "The second fight, ruined me. It was easy at first. Then in maybe the sixth round I blocked a punch with my left arm and my left was gone. I blocked one of his right hands and that was it. I hurt that arm in training and when I blocked that punch I damaged blood vessels in my arm. I stood there and took a beating until the 11th. "If I had one word to describe Rocky it would be relentless. I would throw a right hand, he would throw a right hand. But the difference was Rocky would throw 10. He didn't hit me the hardest, but he hit me the most often. Don't get me wrong, Rocky was a great fighter. He was tough and he never stopped throwing punches."
