Rocky Marciano’s Toughest Opponent

[greek1237]

they could have goten thsos Early weights wrong, No way would Marciano be 178 pounds vs Bob Jefferson, and be conisder a heavyweight fight. It was only 2 fights out of 49. No reason to make a deal out of it, if it was TRUE. I think Boxing Rec is wrong in these regard.

[raylawpc]

I understand the Saddler's were related.

Notwithstanding the difference in the way Dick Sadler and Sandy Saddler spelled their last names, they were cousins. At least, that's what Dick told me.

The drying out story regarding Foreman is a crock. Dick told a friend of mine (who repeated the story to me immediately after getting off the phone with Dick) that Foreman lost his legs in the bedroom training with women before the Ali fight. Foreman thought he was invincible going into that fight, he was 25-years-old, and gals over in Africa where throwing themselves at him. At least, that's what Dick said . . .

[raylawpc]

Yes, you do understand correctly.

Frank

Frank, have you ever heard of a heavyweight drying out for speed. I know some old turn-of-the-century trainers believed that, but are you aware of any modern trainers who believed that?

[hawk5ins]

I Think you meant to say 2 months vs. 2 weeks.

The fact that the bout was NOT signed until 2 mos before it took place, is indeed a fact.

I would think that seeing how Tyson was in the prime of his career, in his early 20's and had JUST had a fight with Tyrell Biggs in October of 1987 (making that 3 mos between Biggs and Holmes) where as Holmes was 38 years old, had Not had a FIGHT in 21 mos, and was OBVIOUSLY a good 6 years past his prime, that the Activity advantage, the Sharpness advantage, the Preparedness advantage, SLIGHTLY favored Mike Tyson.

Just Slightly.

Or is this commonsense approach I'm taking here, simply mythology?

Hawk

[TKO11]

The drying out story regarding Foreman is a crock. Dick told a friend of mine (who repeated the story to me immediately after getting off the phone with Dick) that Foreman lost his legs in the bedroom training with women before the Ali fight.

Since Foreman said this was ALL of his fights, not just the Ali fight, how does that affect your pronouncement of crockery? Was he lying for all his fights? Or just the Ali one? Please inform us.

[kikibalt]

Frank, have you ever heard of a heavyweight drying out for speed. I know some old turn-of-the-century trainers believed that, but are you aware of any modern trainers who believed that?

Hi Tom

I'm did not see any trainer do that with a heavyweight, I did not believe to much in drying out a fighter as you robbed him too much of his potassium.

Frank

[kikibalt]

Frank, was the Foreman camp 'thinking' common and known.. was the drying out for heavies, in your opinion, something you were aware of?

Hi Shark

No I don't think Foreman camp thinking was common, I only seen trainers dry out a fighter to make weight.

Frank

[raylawpc]

Hi TKO:

I went through this thread too hurriedly, for which I apologize to you and everyone else on this thread, and thought someone wrote that Dick Sadler made drying out an excuse for Foreman's loss (which I knew was different than what Dick was telling friends privately); hence, the "crock" comment.

However, I am saying that Dick Sadler said that Foreman left his legs in the bedroom before the fight with Ali. And, I am repeating what Dick told someone else in my presence (albeit via telephone) within a month following the fight.

[raylawpc]

Hi TKO:

Nope, I went through this thread too hurriedly, for which I apologize to you and everyone else on this thread, and thought someone wrote that Dick Sadler made drying out an excuse for Foreman's loss (which I knew was different than what Dick was telling friends privately); hence, the "crock" comment.

However, I am saying that Dick Sadler said that Foreman left his legs in the bedroom before the fight with Ali. And, I am repeating what Dick told someone else in my presence (albeit via telephone) within a month following the fight.

But this has started me thinking (which is admittedly a dangerous thing . . . ):

If drying out was the cause of the Ali loss - or at least a contributing factor - why didn't it hinder him in his previous 40 fights? Where did George make the comment about drying out? I'd like to read it. Did he say there something in particular about the conditions in Zaire that made this a bad strategy, or what?

[hagler04]

For Roberto and Elmer who don't think Rocky and Calzaghe are comparable in size, I understand that you might have a hard time accepting that idea, but...

Rocky weighed in at below 180 a few times after he was over 25 years old. Roberto, why would anyone dry out a heavyweight? If the old trainers thought water was bad for a fighter, why did they give them water between rounds, and why would they worry about how much water they had before a weigh in? That makes no sense.

Heavyweights have never had to make weight. Rocky weighed in at 178-79 because that is where his weight was at weigh in time. Rocky was not dehydrated at that weight. He was not sweating in a sauna to get down to below 180. Calzaghe weighs in at 168 the day before a fight because he is dried out and even then he has a difficult time making that weight. By fight time Calzaghe is going to be in the 180s.

Elmer, I can't refute that Marciano ran 12-15 miles a day and walked 20 more. He might have, but if he did he was killing himself training and probably could have been a much better fighter if he had cut back on the aerobic training. Most marathoners don't run that much and I suspect that Rocky didn't either. Rocky was human and humans who run/walk that much and who also spar and do gym work will quickly overtrain.

A lot of stories about Rocky, like any other legendary person are probably embellished. Rocky probably did train harder than most, but running 12-15 miles, walking 20 more, and then dehydrating himself? If he did that how would he have enough left to fight? Legends and legendary stories are okay, but don't be surprised when someone questions them.

I think a major flaw in your argument lies in the fact that weight doesn't equate to size. Both Benard Hopkins and Carlos Baldomir walk around in the 180s . . .does that mean Baldomir is as big as Hopkins? Is 6'1, 215 lb Chris Byrd the same size as 6'1 215 lb Sonny Liston? No, of course not. Size has to do with overall body frame and muscle.weight distribution. Nowadays anyone can take some creatine or take the James Toney Buffet and put on some weight. Is the 5'10, 230 lb Toney as big as the 230 lb Tua?

Calzaghe is pretty much a light HW. Over 200 lbs and he would look pudgy, just like Tarver did in the Rocky movie . . .you could tell Antonio, despite being 6'2, was no real 200 lber.

Marciano in the upper 180s was ripped to shit and could've easily been over 200 and not fat. Another thing . . .185 lb guys can punch! Ask Frank or Ron. The hardest hitter I've ever seen (and I've seen Brewster and some other known punchers up close) was an amateur cruiser who was about 5'11 and 180 in shape. The guy in sparring just battered some capable heavyweights. After seeing him and some others I never questioned that a Dempsey or Marciano could completely FLATTEN some of these NBA-sized fighters today.

[hawk5ins]

" As usual before fighting, I was thrirsty. Years before, Sadler had insised That I dry out before the weigh in and fight. Hungry to learn and determined to do what's right, i didn't question the wisdon, even though heavweights aren't disallowed for tipping the scales..........I fugured drying out was some secret Sadler weapon to build strenght, the way a marathon runners would load up on carbs before a race. Since Sadler had trained ohte heavyweight champs, I als figured he must know something."

Hawk

[kikibalt]

Dempsey, Marciano and Joe Louis could've ko any of today's 240 plus lbs. heavyweights.

Frank

[raylawpc]

" As usual before fighting, I was thrirsty. Years before, Sadler had insised That I dry out before the weigh in and fight. Hungry to learn and determined to do what's right, i didn't question the wisdon, even though heavweights aren't disallowed for tipping the scales..........I fugured drying out was some secret Sadler weapon to build strenght, the way a marathon runners would load up on carbs before a race. Since Sadler had trained ohte heavyweight champs, I als figured he must know something."

Hawk

Hawk: Thanks for the quote. I don't have the autobiography.

[rocky111]

In reference to the class of Rocky Marciano as a sportsman, I never said that class wins fights. But I mentioned Rocky's high standing as a sportsman and THAT is the reason he is held in such high esteem by his fans. Not because he is white and Italian. Tony Galento is white and Italian and he decked Joe Louis, but he isnt loved by Italian fans like Rocky is. Rocky delivered in the ring and out of the ring big time like few guys ever have. He never lost either place. Larry Holmes has made a fool out of himself as a sportsman many times....................
By the way Hatchetman Sheppard also thought the world of Marciano and picked him to beat Ali, although not Joe Louis.
Getting in the ring was a nitemare to all that faced Marciano and it showed in their battered bodies and faces. Holmes would have to deal with that nitemare and show us he could.
This big rating of Holmes kind of surprises me. I always think of him of facing limited opposition. His failing to take out Ken Norton surprised me. He also ducked the best opposition out there and failed to take on most of a generation of young heavies (Tubbs, Thomas, Dokes, Page, Coetzze) in favor of guys like Zanon, Rodriguez, Cobb, Frank, Jones, Evangelista, Spinks, and others. When I ask pals of mine if he could take Joe Frazier, well no one gives him a prayer. He was a good boxer with a decent chin and a championship heart, but I never saw greatness to compare with a Louis or Marciano, Frazier or Ali.
Another thing I take exception to is saying that Moore, Charles and Walcott would be lost as hitters and fighters to the current big guys. That is a joke. Moore could knock down a building and was a very very strong guy. Walcott also and Charles had no problem beating big guys. You look at Moores decking of Rocky as something to be ashamed of. Moore could knock down anybody if he hit them right. Ask old Hatchetman. He marveled at the strength of Moore. Nobody laughs at or disses Joe Louis for getting decked by rolly poly Tony Galento who knows boxing. Tony Galento was a beast in man form and strong as a ox.
Moore in his prime v Holyfield in his prime. I like the Mongoose.
Rocky's battle with Moore in which he stopped him was a great fight, a feather in Rockys cap, and one in which true boxing fans cherish.

[hawk5ins]

It's ONLY a NITEmare for Holmes in facing Rocky. He (Larry) would have to prove to us he could do it.

But apparently it's simply peaches and cream for Rocky getting in the ring with Holmes and Rocky wouldn't have to prove anything.

And who Holmes ducked in favor of who he actually faced.

I assume we wouldn't want to actually do a timeline to actually validate any of these claims now would we? I mean, it's rather easy to do. Just take Holmes reign and go year by year and justify who Holmes fought and who he SHOULD have fought and make your case for WHY he should have fought them.

Personally,I'd be very interested in seeing how you make your case for Larry Holmes avoiding Tony Tubbs.

And of course Rocky didn't avoid anyone. That was all management. Marciano apparently didn't have a say in any of this. Of course he WANTED to fight Valdes when he beat Charles. But what could Rocky do? Management wanted Charles.

And what does Class have to do with anything agian? Rocky's high standing had ONLY to do with his being a classy sportsman (Hitting an unconscious Walcott with a left to the head while Joe had his arm draped over a rope. How sportsmanlike! Christ, Barrera was demonized last month for doing roughly the same thing to Marquez when he dropped him.) and nothing to do with color or ethnicity correct?

Gotcha.

And re this line: "Another thing I take exception to is saying that Moore, Charles and Walcott would be lost as hitters and fighters to the current big guys. That is a joke."

Exactly WHERE did I say these guys would be lost as hitters agianst the current big guys? I said this?

What "I" said, was that Holmes was a superior puncher to Ezzard Charles. Specifically the version of CHarles that Rocky faced. And IMO a superior HEAVYWEIGHT puncher with Ezzard in his prime as well. Charles was an excpetional puncher at Lightheavyweight and more importantly, he was better PRIOR to the Sam Baroudi bout. Post Baroudi and especially at Heavyweight, Charles no longer was that type of puncher.

Archie Moore I think I was VERY specific about what I thought of him as a puncher.....at Lightheavyweight. WHere are the examples of Moore being anything remotely the puncher he was at 175. ANd let's ALSO be clear abour Moore's power at 175. He did NOT carry Bob Foster type power. His power was far more accumulative. Are we suggesting that He Holds the record for most KO's becuase he had the biggest shot of anyone else? I hope not.

Prime for prime in a pound for pound sense, I take Moore over Evander as well. At heavyweight, I'm taking Evander. Possibly by KO.

Walcott's power I don't think I dismissed or discredited anywhere. That said, I think Holmes right hand was slightly more powerful. If anything, i would say they had equivilant power.

I'm not sure how we get to Tony Galento or where I ever criticised him or if we want to state that I ever questioned his power. Please by all means though, cut and past anything I might ever have posted that was in anyway derogatory about Galento and his knocking down Joe Louis.

I'd be interested in what I said.

Hawk

[Juan C Ayllon]

Hey Guys and Gals,

While my memory may not be serving me correctly, I could have sworn Larry Holmes asserted that he had only two weeks to train for Tyson in that movie, Champions Forever.

Either way, prior to his first bout against Spinks, like Hagler before Leonard, he looked ripe for the taking. Whereas I thought that Michael Nunn would out-box Hagler at the time, I always thought Pinklon Thomas would end Holmes' reign. However, Spinks got to him first.

Regards,


Juan C. Ayllon

[hawk5ins]

Carl WIlliams almost got to Larry!

I don't doubt Holmes embelished his time to train for Tyson in the Forever vid. But the bout was signed in November. Still, a disadvantage in intself considering how active and in his Prime Tyson was.

As for Thomas beating Holmes. I thought even afte the Williams bout, that Holmes could take Pinky in a close struggle. Then he lost to Spinks and I was convinced I was wrong. Then Thomas lost to Berbick and I didn;t know what the hell to think.

Hawk

[raylawpc]

Hey Guys and Gals,

While my memory may not be serving me correctly, I could have sworn Larry Holmes asserted that he had only two weeks to train for Tyson in that movie, Champions Forever.

Either way, prior to his first bout against Spinks, like Hagler before Leonard, he looked ripe for the taking. Whereas I thought that Michael Nunn would out-box Hagler at the time, I always thought Pinklon Thomas would end Holmes' reign. However, Spinks got to him first.

Regards,


Juan C. Ayllon

Hi Juan. I remember the Holmes-Spinks fight with great fondness because I, like you, thought Holmes looked ready to be taken, and picked Spinks to beat Holmes by decision.

That pick tended to make up for my picking Hearns over Leonard in four rounds (a la Bob Foster and Mike Quarry) four years earlier.

[Juan C Ayllon]

I would think that seeing how Tyson was in the prime of his career, in his early 20's and had JUST had a fight with Tyrell Biggs in October of 1987 (making that 3 mos between Biggs and Holmes) where as Holmes was 38 years old, had Not had a FIGHT in 21 mos, and was OBVIOUSLY a good 6 years past his prime, that the Activity advantage, the Sharpness advantage, the Preparedness advantage, SLIGHTLY favored Mike Tyson.

Just Slightly.

Or is this commonsense approach I'm taking here, simply mythology?

Hawk

Hey Hawk,

What's up? Although this is a fun and games for me, I was actually around when Holmes, et al fought. I could pull up Holmes' record on boxrec.com and do a quick and competent statistical analysis and breakdown of Ho'mes' situation.

But what's the point? I'm taking a few minutes here and there to blow off some steam and get away from the stress and grind of work. Fact is, the more I'm getting paid for my work, the less inclined I am to do it for free. And, right now, my time's at a premium.

Please, cool it with the sarcasm.

Thanks,



Juan

[hawk5ins]

No Problem with me cooling the sarcasm down.

But I wasn't at all directing anything towards you other than the 2 weeks vs 2months portion. Which I just assumed was a typo and wasn't considering Larry's comments in the Champions Forever vid.

The "common sense-mythology" comment was in response to Roberto's accusation that it was a myth that Holmes was old, out of shape or ill prepared to face Tyson.

In re-reading my post now, i can see how it was misinterpretated.

My apologies.

Hawk

[Juan C Ayllon]

Thanks, Hawk!

For the record, I consider you one of the "good guys" on the board and appreciate your contributions.

Have a great day,



Juan

[rocky111]

Well some seem to think that Marciano faced limited opposition and that Moore, Charles, Walcott are not quite up to it as very very tuff opponents. I say Moore, Charles, Walcott are in the Hall of Fame at least in the eyes of boxing fans and delivered performances against Rock that qualify. Rock left them all battered and defeated. Larry Holmes life and death with Ken Norton ranks his best and that was his best foe. His other rivals dont match up with Moore, Charles and Walcott in my mind.
Marcianos hitting of Walcott when down doesnt take from his class as a sportsman and as a representive of the biggest title in sports. Every reader with a clear mind and no preconcieved notions when judging him would give him a A in the way he carried himself verbally and in public.
Nino Valdes? A former sparring partner of Rock's who got shook quite a few times with the big pillow gloves. Well he had a shot to get a shot and in the title shot eliminator he got beat in a close one by Archie Moore. Had he won that fight hed have got that shot. He was a good fighter, good puncher, witha fair chin. I wish he would have gotten that shot. My own feeling is that Moore was the much more dangerous guy for Rocky to face.
Did Holmes duck those young heavies who all held versions of the title in his time and looked to be the best in the divison as far as challangers go? At the time I figured he wanted easy money fighting those other guys as ABC made it easy for him in the paydays. Why risk getting beat by a in shape tuff as nails Pinky Thomas, or a motivated Greg Page, or a hard hitting Coetzze when you can fight lesser guys.
Im not judging Holmes either by the end of his career, the close Witherspoon fight or a fight im certain he lost to Williams. I am looking at the Holmes that fought Ali, Cooney, Norton.....I see nothing in those fights to suggest he could beat Marciano or Frazier. Liston? Comon now.....

[rocky111]

Well some seem to think that Marciano faced limited opposition and that Moore, Charles, Walcott are not quite up to it as very very tuff opponents. I say Moore, Charles, Walcott are in the Hall of Fame at least in the eyes of boxing fans and delivered performances against Rock that qualify. Rock left them all battered and defeated. Larry Holmes life and death with Ken Norton ranks his best and that was his best foe. His other rivals dont match up with Moore, Charles and Walcott in my mind.
Marcianos hitting of Walcott when down doesnt take from his class as a sportsman and as a representive of the biggest title in sports. Every reader with a clear mind and no preconcieved notions when judging him would give him a A in the way he carried himself verbally and in public.
Nino Valdes? A former sparring partner of Rock's who got shook quite a few times with the big pillow gloves. Well he had a shot to get a shot and in the title shot eliminator he got beat in a close one by Archie Moore. Had he won that fight hed have got that shot. He was a good fighter, good puncher, witha fair chin. I wish he would have gotten that shot. My own feeling is that Moore was the much more dangerous guy for Rocky to face.
Did Holmes duck those young heavies who all held versions of the title in his time and looked to be the best in the divison as far as challangers go? At the time I figured he wanted easy money fighting those other guys as ABC made it easy for him in the paydays. Why risk getting beat by a in shape tuff as nails Pinky Thomas, or a motivated Greg Page, or a hard hitting Coetzze when you can fight lesser guys.
Im not judging Holmes either by the end of his career, the close Witherspoon fight or a fight im certain he lost to Williams. I am looking at the Holmes that fought Ali, Cooney, Norton.....I see nothing in those fights to suggest he could beat Marciano or Frazier. Liston? Comon now.....

[HE Grant]

That's a spin on Holmes and his record. Like many fighters before him, once Holmes won the championship he fought the fights with the biggest money for the smallest risk. In addition, as he got older, he was even more selective. That bing said , well into his mid thirties he was fighting and defeating a prime Tim Witherspoon, Bonecrusher Smith and Carl Williams. Which of the great young heavies that Holmes ducked are you saying would have beaten him and when? I say straight through his victory over David Bey Holmes would clearly been able to handle the inconsistant Dokes, Tubbs, Thomas or Coetzee.


Charles and Moore are not in the Hall because of their achievements as heavyweights. Walcott participated in two of the most famous one punch KO's in history (one as the reciepent) and is equally famous for losing to an old Louis.

[Roberto Aqui]

That's a spin on Holmes and his record. Like many fighters before him, once Holmes won the championship he fought the fights with the biggest money for the smallest risk. In addition, as he got older, he was even more selective. That bing said , well into his mid thirties he was fighting and defeating a prime Tim Witherspoon, Bonecrusher Smith and Carl Williams.

15-0, 14-1, 16-0 respectively. Add on Marvis Frazier and David Bey, 10-0 and 14-0, and Holmes seems to have had a prediliction for robbing the professional cradle for his defenses.

[Dan1213]

Nino Valdes? A former sparring partner of Rock's who got shook quite a few times with the big pillow gloves. Well he had a shot to get a shot and in the title shot eliminator he got beat in a close one by Archie Moore. Had he won that fight hed have got that shot. He was a good fighter, good puncher, witha fair chin. I wish he would have gotten that shot. My own feeling is that Moore was the much more dangerous guy for Rocky to face.

Rocky, Nino had a chance to meet Rocky, but blew his chance by blowing a decision to Bob Baker in a fight neither was anxious to win.

[hawk5ins]

Valdes Defeated Ezzard Charles. Charles would lose his NEXT fight to Harold Johnson.

WHo got a Shot at Rocky in 1954?

Ezzard Charles.

Please guys.

As HE Just stated, Archie Moore is not in the HOF becuase of his work at Heavyweight and Ezzard Charles was NOT a HOF calibre opponent WHEN Rocky faced him.

Why the purposeful blurring of when and where fighters are in their career?

Jesus, Should Holmes go around trumpeting that he Knocked Out Muhammad Ali? Or would everyone and ther brother point out to Larry EXACTLY where Ali was in his career when this happened?

Based on what I'm reading here, WHEN and WHERE a fighter was in their career DOESN'T Matter. So Maybe Larry SHOULD start that clarion call.

I keep hearing that is doesn't matter for Marciano and who he beat and/or Tyson beating a 38 year old inactive Holmes, so WHY should it be any different for Larry?

Again, I would like a time line presented for Holmes career, pointing out WHO he fought and who He SHOULD have. Don't pull this nonsensical broad based fishing net. Be specific.

Hell, you mentioned Tony Tubbs. I want to know EXACTLY when Holmes was supposed to have faced him, what year it should be considered that Holmes was DUCKING Tubbs, and What Tubbs had done up to that point to deserve a shot at Holmes?

I just made it easy Rocky. I've narrowed this down to ONE fighter.

Can you provide ANYTHING here that would make the LEAST amount of sense to back your position that Larry Holmes Ducked Tony Tubbs?

Hawk

[greek1237]

I have the Charles Johnson fight, and that was CLEAR robbery. I had it 7 rounds to 3 for Charles.

[starlingstomp]

I have it too and i disagree.

It was a close fight, even with Charles being denied a legit knockdown in the late rounds.

Johnson stuck mainly to the jab and i thought gave Charles too much respect, considering Ezzard was aging and Harold was a very good puncher.

[HE Grant]

Funny though Roberto, Witherspoon was in the best shape of his career, one that he would never equal again and Holmes still out conditioned and outgutted him.

David Bey had just come off his biggest win, decisioning Page, and many considered him a very live underdog. Holmes diced him up.

Again, which of the crop are you saying would have beaten a 33 year old Holmes?