Rocky Marciano or Floyd Mayweather Jr. - Who had the better career?

Who had the better career?

  • Total voters
    115
KAZSoliloquy said:
prime castillo twice, prime marquez, judah, mosley, cotto, pacquiao, canelo, de la hoya, hatton, corrales. no losses.

that’s one of the most impressive resumés we will ever see. very few can stack up against that.
Click to expand...
ya, its pretty awesome.
some of those were close decisions (and Castillo 1 is really arguable), whereas Marciano finished most of his.

However, that is the nature of being a heavyweight to some degree, and he was losing at least one of those before the KO bailed him out.

I dont have a pick in this, btw, just commenting. Both records are basically perfect.

Actually, i guess i lean towards Floyd’s, as Marciano only really got into the deep part of contenders at the end of his career.

side note - i wish they were both 49-0, because Mcgregor was a joke fight. Marciano didnt get to beat up Helio Gracie at the end of his career.
 
DeJulez said:
Most ppl say he should've lost the first Charles fight and the first La Starza fight.
And Walcott was almost 40 with 70 fights under his belt.
Click to expand...

But then he dominated in rematches that followed close to the first fight. Settled all doubt. Anyway, when you are fighting at the top, you are going to have close fights. Anyone Marciano could fight he did. He really has no misses for his era. Only Patterson was slowly starting to emerge and Rocky opted to retire (can't fault him for knowing when to quit; we often do the reverse and fault a fighter for hanging on too long). I commented on a bunch of the names above so I won't reiterate.
 
KAZSoliloquy said:
prime castillo twice, prime marquez, judah, mosley, cotto, pacquiao, canelo, de la hoya, hatton, corrales. no losses.

that’s one of the most impressive resumés we will ever see. very few can stack up against that.
Click to expand...

Lots of great names there, and I won't argue the name. But if people are pulling Rocky down for some of his opponents, the same comment can be made about the timing of some--not all--of his fights. Pacquiao was 5 to 6 years past Pacquiao's peak. Marquez was coming up two weight classes with no tune up. Castillo 1 and ODLH (past his prime) were very close fights. See how these conversations go? Round and round and round.

I honestly don't have an argument or preference for one or the other. I am finding myself defending Rocky more because people are worse than neophytes with their history, but I honestly have NO pick. This is just how these things go. People--usually--nitpick according to bias so their favourite can win. Both have good cases.
 
deucesarewild said:
But then he dominated in rematches that followed close to the first fight. Settled all doubt. Anyway, when you are fighting at the top, you are going to have close fights. Anyone Marciano could fight he did. He really has no misses for his era. Only Patterson was slowly starting to emerge and Rocky opted to retire (can't fault him for knowing when to quit; we often do the reverse and fault a fighter for hanging on too long). I commented on a bunch of the names above so I won't reiterate.
Click to expand...
Ezzard Charles was a better fighter and should've gotten the nod making it 1-1. But p4p Charles is above Rocky
 
KAZSoliloquy said:
prime castillo twice, prime marquez, judah, mosley, cotto, pacquiao, canelo, de la hoya, hatton, corrales. no losses.

that’s one of the most impressive resumés we will ever see. very few can stack up against that.
Click to expand...
Not really, the only one's without asterix' are Hatton and Coralles in ATG talk.
 
Hagler said:
Not to diss Marciano, but Floyd, and it's not really close. Countless championship wins against world titlists from 130 to 154. There's more depth and density in his resume.
Click to expand...
im not saying you are wrong, but there are so many more champions and belts both nowadays and at the lighter, apart by 5lbs divisions. Its just worth noting.
 
DeJulez said:
Ezzard Charles was a better fighter and should've gotten the nod making it 1-1. But p4p Charles is above Rocky
Click to expand...
Ezzard Charles, who weighed the same and sometimes more than Marciano, lost to him twice, was bettered by walcott twice, and lost many other fights...... is better pound for pound than a man the same size who went undefeated all at a higher weightclass?
 
deucesarewild said:
Lots of great names there, and I won't argue the name. But if people are pulling Rocky down for some of his opponents, the same comment can be made about the timing of some--not all--of his fights. Pacquiao was 5 to 6 years past Pacquiao's peak. Marquez was coming up two weight classes with no tune up. Castillo 1 and ODLH (past his prime) were very close fights. See how these conversations go? Round and round and round.

I honestly don't have an argument or preference for one or the other. I am finding myself defending Rocky more because people are worse than neophytes with their history, but I honestly have NO pick. This is just how these things go. People--usually--nitpick according to bias so their favourite can win. Both have good cases.
Click to expand...
floyd was also past his prime for those wins though. that’s why that doesn’t hold any weight. floyd had been fighting for over 15 years himself when he beat manny.
 
Ultra O’Dia said:
Ezzard Charles, who weighed the same and sometimes more than Marciano, lost to him twice, was bettered by walcott twice, and lost many other fights...... is better pound for pound than a man the same size who went undefeated all at a higher weightclass?
Click to expand...
Everybody seems to hate rocky about these parts. His style doesn't match up to their five minutes of amateur boxing training...
 
Ultra O’Dia said:
im not saying you are wrong, but there are so many more champions and belts both nowadays and at the lighter, apart by 5lbs divisions. Its just worth noting.
Click to expand...

That’s true. So is the fact that boxing wasn’t as global in Marciano’s days, and WW2 had narrowed the talent pool - even if boxing was very popular.
 
KAZSoliloquy said:
charles went up in weight and had success while also dominating light heavyweight. marciano picked on smaller fighters and 40 year olds during his prime.
Click to expand...
the guy who fought at heavyweigt was the one picking on smaller fighters.
huh
i woulda picked the one cutting weight to fight smaller fighters as that guy, if i did it at all.
 
Hagler said:
That’s true. So is the fact that boxing wasn’t as global in Marciano’s days, and WW2 had narrowed the talent pool - even if boxing was very popular.
Click to expand...
ya, thats a good point, too. It works less in boxing than in most other sports, but it still works.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,237,663
Messages
55,508,154
Members
174,800
Latest member
kechan123

Share this page

Back
Top