Marciano didn't "nurse" his '0' losses

[Master]

Being undefeated is no reason to be regarded as a great fighter just look at Sven Ottke for an example of that reasoning.

The fact that old Walcott an dropped and gave Rocky so much trouble in their first fight is not a sign of greatness but coming back from the jaws of defeat was.

Having the same trouble with lightheavy Ezzard Charles and old Moore was not a good sign either for a great champion.

Rocky didn't give a shit if you were young, old, light in the ass or just plain stupid he'd kick the shit out of you if you got in the ring with him. Like when Hopkins got in the ring with Kovalev or Floyd Patterson fought Pete Rademacher, it's about the money.

I accept he fought the best opposition at the time but I do not think they were fighters at their peak. Rocky title defences and reign as champion was not long enough to be considered a great fighter in anyone top 10.

[brocktonblockbust]

bullshit. 6 title defenses is pretty good.

[Master]

bullshit. 6 title defenses is pretty good.

Pathetic for a top 10 greatest heavyweight of all time.

[brocktonblockbust]

bullshit. 6 title defenses is pretty good.

Pathetic for a top 10 greatest heavyweight of all time.

Troll.

6 defenses is more than alot of Top 10 ATGs.

[Master]

bullshit. 6 title defenses is pretty good.

Pathetic for a top 10 greatest heavyweight of all time.

Troll.

6 defenses is more than alot of Top 10 ATGs.

Name 1 on your list.

[brocktonblockbust]

bullshit. 6 title defenses is pretty good.

Pathetic for a top 10 greatest heavyweight of all time.

Troll.

6 defenses is more than alot of Top 10 ATGs.

Name 1 on your list.

George Foreman

[Master]

bullshit. 6 title defenses is pretty good.

Pathetic for a top 10 greatest heavyweight of all time.

Troll.

6 defenses is more than alot of Top 10 ATGs.

Name 1 on your list.

George Foreman

There were exceptional reasons for that. The greatest heavyweight of all time beat him.

[Beanflicker]

I accept he fought the best opposition at the time but I do not think they were fighters at their peak. Rocky title defences and reign as champion was not long enough to be considered a great fighter in anyone top 10.

He was fortunate to fight in a not-so-great era, when the best guys were past their prime.

I don't think he would have been undefeated if he came 10 years later and had to fight the likes of Patterson, Liston or Ali.

[beenKOed]

Being undefeated is no reason to be regarded as a great fighter just look at Sven Ottke for an example of that reasoning.

The fact that old Walcott an dropped and gave Rocky so much trouble in their first fight is not a sign of greatness but coming back from the jaws of defeat was.

Having the same trouble with lightheavy Ezzard Charles and old Moore was not a good sign either for a great champion.

Rocky didn't give a shit if you were young, old, light in the ass or just plain stupid he'd kick the shit out of you if you got in the ring with him. Like when Hopkins got in the ring with Kovalev or Floyd Patterson fought Pete Rademacher, it's about the money.

I accept he fought the best opposition at the time but I do not think they were fighters at their peak. Rocky title defences and reign as champion was not long enough to be considered a great fighter in anyone top 10.

What's going on Master? Why are you trying to piss off your most loyal supporter? LOL