BUFFALOTONE Posted December 26, 2006 Posted December 26, 2006 MARCIANO hands down. The guy never lost a bout and never got knocked down. Ali was a great fighter but Marciano was the best.
X. Benedict Posted December 26, 2006 Posted December 26, 2006 That Marvelous Marvin Hearns was a baad mofo as well. 878528[/snapback] I would put him ahead of Marvin Hagler, Marvin the Martian, and St. Martin of Tours. He was much more marvelous. He was even better than Thomas Boom Boom Mancini.
R. Rich Posted December 27, 2006 Posted December 27, 2006 MARCIANO hands down. The guy never lost a bout and never got knocked down. Ali was a great fighter but Marciano was the best. Hard to get knocked down by 82 year old Joe Walcott or 52 year old Joe Louis.
Alaska Darin Posted December 27, 2006 Posted December 27, 2006 Hard to get knocked down by 82 year old Joe Walcott or 52 year old Joe Louis. Marciano's fight record makes Tyson's look like he actually beat someone. There are 4 "names" on the list and all of them are literally from the previous generation. Archie Moore, Ezzard Charles, Walcott, and Louis. Charles was 33 (and like Marciano not a true heavyweight), Louis was 37, Walcott was 38, and Moore was 42. Marciano beat everyone who was around, unfortunately that doesn't really amount to much.
R. Rich Posted December 27, 2006 Posted December 27, 2006 Exactly. Marciano was a victim of the times, because there just wasn't much top flight competition during his career. Much like today, the heavyweight division sucked then. The state of the division @ the time is a major reason why many boxing experts decline to put Marciano ahead of Ali. Well, that, and the fact that Ali is the greatest heavyweight fighter of all time.
ExiledInIllinois Posted December 27, 2006 Posted December 27, 2006 Exactly. Marciano was a victim of the times, because there just wasn't much top flight competition during his career. Much like today, the heavyweight division sucked then. The state of the division @ the time is a major reason why many boxing experts decline to put Marciano ahead of Ali. Well, that, and the fact that Ali is the greatest heavyweight fighter of all time. Wasn't there a "computer fight"... Punch by punch years ago that pitted RM v. Ali? I forget how that comparison came out... Or was "crunched". ?
Alaska Darin Posted December 27, 2006 Posted December 27, 2006 Exactly. Marciano was a victim of the times, because there just wasn't much top flight competition during his career. Much like today, the heavyweight division sucked then. The state of the division @ the time is a major reason why many boxing experts decline to put Marciano ahead of Ali. Well, that, and the fact that Ali is the greatest heavyweight fighter of all time. I love you man, but Louis is/was better. Dude was a lion.
Dante Posted December 27, 2006 Posted December 27, 2006 I love you man, but Louis is/was better. Dude was a lion. Even Joe Louis could'nt beat the IRS though. They are the real bad ass mofo's of our time. I think Marvin found a way to beat them though. Did'nt he end up moving to Italy or something?
R. Rich Posted December 27, 2006 Posted December 27, 2006 I love you man... Freak. ...but Louis is/was better. Dude was a lion. Lion? Yes. Better? No. I give both a ton of respect as the best of all time (along w/ Jack Johnson and a select few others), but I still believe Ali was the best heavyweight of them all.
TheMadCap Posted December 27, 2006 Posted December 27, 2006 You guys are all wrong. Everyone knows it's Bald Bull. Duh!!!!!
slothrop Posted December 27, 2006 Posted December 27, 2006 Some of the best boxing pundits settle the issue of the best fighter ever in this clip:
Fan in San Diego Posted December 29, 2006 Posted December 29, 2006 I think Ali is the greatest. the judge of a true professional is how easy you make it look. Ali made it look easy because he was that good. Toying with the best of his peers.
Recommended Posts