Rocky was great in his time, but he's not beating any modern day great HW in a mythical matchup such as Lewis because size differential would be too much. Hell he doesn't even fill the CW limit!
Printable View
Rocky was great in his time, but he's not beating any modern day great HW in a mythical matchup such as Lewis because size differential would be too much. Hell he doesn't even fill the CW limit!
In his professional prime, Rocky was about 30. And nobody hit Rocky easily: Moore Charles, Walcott, Louis, LaStarza all said, before the fight, that he was easy to hit. After, each of them said he was a defensively good fighter.
I know that nobody believes me, but being 9' taller than a guy that fights out of a pronounced crouch, leaning away from the jab/right hand ike Marciano did would not be a walk in the park. Jabbing down wil get you hit over the top, as will reaching: you have to get low like Foster did against Dick Tiger. And you don't want to get to reaching with the right hand. Marciano would also be decidedly faster and fight at a much faster pace.
aybe that size advantage would be too much, but that same size advantage could also be a liability. And size alone is no guarantee of victory.
Its ridiculous to imagine Marciano fighting guys 1 foot taller than he was, weighing 40 pounds more than he weighed, and having 15 inches reach advantage.
That's not a fair fight. Compared to Rocky, those guys are Super Heavyweights.
First of all i don't know a guy that hit Rocky easy ;) Guys that were being able to land a shot on him were real virtuos in boxing and they weren't able to land the shots with autority! We are talking about the guys like Ezzard Charles, Joe Walcot and Joe Louis. No matter of their age they were aways dangerous and as in the situation with Walcott, he got evan better.
Second i don't compare them in primes, after primes and so on. I compare them by boxing skills and physical atributes. I've picked Solis only because he was the only more notable and short boxer that Vitali has faced. In this fight you can see his abilities as boxer. You can see his technik and mistakes (which don't have to do anything with the age!)
Dark Lord Al i have some question for you. What are the advantages of taller boxer and if any how he utalize them? What are the disadvantages?
greynotsoold you are right.
5'10 with a reach of 67" vs 6'6 and a reach of 81"....that's the boxing version of the Falklands right there.
As for Rocky "not getting hit easily" Walcott tore him up in round 12 to the point where the ref was going to stop the fight the next round regardless of what Rocky did. And Joe Louis....I will tell you this, Joe Louis is HANDS DOWN the Greatest Heavyweight of All-Time....he reigned the longest in years, he defended the title the most times successfully, he's the greatest. Rocky being undefeated puts him 2nd in my book.
I'll let Al answer you, but it's not about 'height', it's about 'Size' a 185-190 guy getting hit by a 250 pound guy (and a very good 250 pound guy!!). Look at all the technical aspects as much as you like, but when he gets hit he is staying hit!Quote:
Originally Posted by nikola_ganchev
Watch Lennox Lewis Box David Tua , thats how a bigger better boxer wins a fight.Quote:
Originally Posted by nikola_ganchev
and if u think small guys have an advantage then i guess the world top ten is littered with guys under 6 foot and are 186 lbs ? is that wot u r saying ?
BIG H what you say makes absolutly no sence. From one weight up almost all guys can KO an oder guy with a single punch and this does not exclude Rocky! I will ask you something. Why big George boxed at only 99,7kg or 220 lbs? For me this is the guy with the most solid structure that i have ever seen! He can get really easy 200kg if he wishes(he was actually near this weight ;) ) Joe Louis boxed at 207 really ripped and was far from "smal" guy. The so called hardest hitting boxer Shavers boxed at 211 and he was far from the condition of Louis. He could have lost some more weight! I think you get the picture. There is no need to be gigantish in order to punch hard. Being so big like the sisters destroys the stamina no mater of the conditioning! This means unnecessery bulking is bad! You can look cool but it's not a bodybuilding competition! Rocky could have been 110/120 kg no problem with this stocky italian build, but is it neccessery? Would have this helped him punching harder or take punch better? NO! Would have this imobilized him and destoyed his working rate? YES! As i said it's not about punching power anymore, but effective punching and consistancy!
Dark Lord Al i think you haven't watch the fight in details... In this fight you see why the smal guys are not to be underrestemated! All the power punches which were landed were from Tuas side. The only thing that Lewis did was destroying Tuas frisure and clinching! It was all Tuas fout that he loosed the fight, but this is an oder subject!
What i want to say is that the skills, condition and style are playing much more bigger role than the size and after some dimentions the size don't help, but exactly the oposite is true!
I agree size doesnt make you a skillful fighter , however fighters can be both big and skillful.Quote:
Originally Posted by nikola_ganchev
So i really dont see your point.
Selecting Tua/Lewis as an example only proves the point: Tua walked straight in standing straight up, maximizing his lack of ht and reach, allowing Lewis to use his jab to establish distance fairly easily. Same thing in the Botha fight, for example. Lewis was able to set the distance with that long left hand by keeping it between them.
But if the short guy makes himself shorter, a smaller target, then it is harder to keep that left hand between the two. Bob Foster did it by getting low and jabbing straight to Tiger's chest- keeping him at a difference. This is because jabbing down at a crouching opponent doesn't keep him away nearly so much as it brings him closer and gives him a better chance to punch over the top or to get inside.
Tyson's career proves this. At his peak he came in low and fast, using missed punches to create punching lanes. Against Douglas, when he got countered trying to get past the jab he started standing straight up...and eating jabs. As his career went on he stayed straight up and was just a short guy that hit harde, if he got the chance.
Personally, I have a suspicion that the huge height disparity would make for a dull fight and there would probably be few clean punches landed unless somebody got tired or frustrated and then sloppy. And certainly Marciano would feel the punches of the heavier man.
But just because a guy has a significant size advantage it does not necessarily follow that he will win, especially if the other guy knows how to use what he has as well as Marciano (or Dempsey) did. And, no the world is not littered with super talented 186 pound heavy weights, or super talented fighters in any size shape or form, because there are no longer guys like Charlie Goldman around to teach them to be smart.
As aways everything has pluses and minuses and my point here is that being smal and skillfull like Joe Louis is better than being big and skillfull like Klit. We are still peoples and for 2 generations we can't change! Being so big reduces alot of oder skills! The sisters gain some reach advantage, but what are the disadvantages? Clumsiness, no mobility, less speed, biger target and warse conditioning to name a few. And because of this my point is that Klitschkos like are in disadvantage against some one like Louis or Marciano!
greynotsoold, I am slow as ever :)
Rocky would be a cruiserweight now and he would batter all of them now and ever in the history of the division. Only Holyfiel;d stood a chance and even then I think he gets beat by Rocky.
How many of rockys opponents were fall guys and were scared of the mob? Mafia affliction was in full swing during those periods and because he wasunderfeated he can now suddenly beat the likes of lewis holyfield and the klits!? Rocky would not last 3 rounds with a prime tyson. Undefeated means nothing if your opponents are all 70%