rocky marciano vs bernard hopkins

[TheGreatA]

It depends, Hopkins wasn't supposed to keep up with the 100 punch per round Pavlik ether.

Pavlik hasn't beaten the likes of Walcott, Charles and Archie Moore though.

As I said the big difference between Pavlik and Marciano (among other things, stylistically they're very different in my opinion) is that Marciano never gets discouraged. Pavlik was also the smaller man (not shorter) and felt Hopkins' strength much more than Marciano would.

Rocky would keep throwing punches if he were to get hit by Hopkins' counter punches like Calzaghe did, even after being knocked down in the first round.

Moore, Walcott and Charles landed a ton of punches on Marciano but he kept coming at them and gradually wore them down over the 15 round distance. All three of them were hard punchers and clever boxers.

[j.razor]

Pavlik hasn't beaten the likes of Walcott, Charles and Archie Moore though.

As I said the big difference between Pavlik and Marciano (among other things, stylistically they're very different in my opinion) is that Marciano never gets discouraged. Pavlik was also the smaller man (not shorter) and felt Hopkins' strength much more than Marciano would.

Rocky would keep throwing punches if he were to get hit by Hopkins' counter punches like Calzaghe did, even after being knocked down in the first round.

Moore, Walcott and Charles landed a ton of punches on Marciano but he kept coming at them and gradually wore them down over the 15 round distance. All three of them were hard punchers and clever boxers.

that was the best you could do with cal-slappy..lol now do 1 with Hopkins, i bet it looks WAY better than that...

[slicksouthpaw16]

Well your not going to get official credit for losing to Louis, Charles, and Marciano and that is just the way it is and I won't try to argue otherwise. I will point out that long title reigns and defining wins are not why Walcott is so highly regarded by writers, trainers, and other boxers. He is a fighter you just have to watch but in all fariness I understand why others would disagree. In the ring, I think he's just as great if not better than Hopkins P4P but he certainly can't match his overall resume.

You switched on me but i see what you're saying. At first, you said that achievement wise, you feel that Walcott was as achieved or even more achived than Hopkins, and i couldn't see how that is possible considering all of Bernard's accomplishments, pound for pound ratings, titles and consistency. Walcott was brilliant inside the ring though, and its debatable who was the better fighter and many will prefer Hopkins better defense and boxing brain. Walcott made him himself more vulnerable by opening up more where as Bernard focuses more on the defensive, his foot work and dictating.

You lost me. That argument is neither here nor there. My point was that I can't see Hopkins bringing anything to new to the table against Marciano. If middleweight Hopkins from say the Trindad fight magically came in at 200 lbs it would certainly be an interesting fight I guess....., but Light Heavy Hopkins doesn't stand anymore of a chance than Rockys' three most famous Hall of Fame victims.

I thought you said that Hopkins wouldn't bring anything that Moore, Charles or Walcott hadn't seen before( as if you were matching them together), i must have misread. Well as i have stated, i don't feel Rocky has fought anyone with the boxing brain of Hopkins, but as i have stated earlier this match is pretty moot since Hopkins didn't move up until he was 42, and a 42 year old Hopkins vs Marciano in his prime is not that hard to figure out.

[TheGreatA]

that was the best you could do with cal-slappy..lol now do 1 with Hopkins, i bet it looks WAY better than that...

That's the only footage I could find of the Calzaghe-Hopkins fight, everything else has been taken off youtube.

I tried to post a video of the later rounds of the fight in which Hopkins gave away a lot of rounds after running out of stamina.

[them_apples]

That's the only footage I could find of the Calzaghe-Hopkins fight, everything else has been taken off youtube.

I tried to post a video of the later rounds of the fight in which Hopkins gave away a lot of rounds after running out of stamina.

Pavlik didn't beat the same names as Marciano, but his resume was just starting to build up. Wooping on Jermain Taylor and Miranda, anyone that stood in front of him usually lost. That's the same case as with Marciano (by no means am I saying Pavlik is in the same catagory as Rocky). Nobody fought Rocky and moved for 12 rounds, Walcott did a bit, but he liked to brawl to.

[PLATE]

Well as i have stated, i don't feel Rocky has fought anyone with the boxing brain of Hopkins

This is my candidate for Most Innane Post In BoxingScene History.

[them_apples]

This is my candidate for Most Innane Post In BoxingScene History.

what was so insane about it, not many people have run into someone who was as technically brilliant as Hopkins. He's 44 years old and just dismantled the undefeated middleweight king.

[MEX1K4N]

i bet marciano had a nice huge big **** 4 me to suk on

[Thunder Lips]

"You switched on me but i see what you're saying. At first, you said that achievement wise, you feel that Walcott was as achieved or even more achived than Hopkins, and i couldn't see how that is possible considering all of Bernard's accomplishments, pound for pound ratings, titles and consistency. Walcott was brilliant inside the ring though, and its debatable who was the better fighter and many will prefer Hopkins better defense and boxing brain. Walcott made him himself more vulnerable by opening up more where as Bernard focuses more on the defensive, his foot work and dictating."

Nah, I just don't think I used the best wording originally and should have better explained. You see what I'm saying now though so its all good; really just that Walcott faced absurdly strong opposition and proved more in defeat than most did in victory. Still, the Charles knockout is nothing to sneeze at mind you. You don't have to agree but that's the common perception of him and I think it is very fair.

Sorry, I have to completely disagree with you about your observations on Walcott. He was as cautious if not more cautious than Hopkins. Him and Bernard even faced similiar criticisms in their heyday such as holding too much, being too cautious, boooring style,..etc. Same goes for Charles during the majority of his title run after he killed Sam Baroudi, though he gradually developed a mean streak after the loss to Walcott. Outside of his calculated attack in the first round of the Marciano fight Walcott wasn't much of an aggressor as he prefered to confuse his opponets and pick them apart with punishing counters. I hope your not considering Them Apples claims of Walcott liking to brawl, do yourself a favor and just watch the man. Your smater than that.

Really Charles, Walcott, Hopkins, and Moore were all brilliant boxing minds and defensive masters and you'd just be splitting hairs to argue one over the other in that regard. Certainly a close call on all fronts. Walcott and Hopkins were the most similar in style, hence the comparision. Hopkins fought some tough fighters but nothing like the competition they faced night in and out. I think Satterfield and Johnson would even be an interesting challenge for Hopkins at Light Heavy, certainly better than Tarver and Pavlik.



Satterfield destroying the skilled 214 lb Bob Baker.




Harold Johnson in action.

[slicksouthpaw16]

Sorry, I have to completely disagree with you about your observations on Walcott. He was as cautious if not more cautious than Hopkins. Him and Bernard even faced similiar criticisms in their heyday such as holding too much, being too cautious, boooring style,..etc. Same goes for Charles during the majority of his title run after he killed Sam Baroudi, though he gradually developed a mean streak after the loss to Walcott. Outside of his calculated attack in the first round of the Marciano fight Walcott wasn't much of an aggressor as he prefered to confuse his opponets and pick them apart with punishing counters. I hope your not considering Them Apples claims of Walcott liking to brawl, do yourself a favor and just watch the man. Your smater than that.

I own all three Charles/Walcott fights, both his fights with Louis and both of his fights against Marciano, so i know his style pretty well. Trust me, I'm not the type that posts about a fighter and never seen him fight before. You make some valid points, but i can't agree at all with Joe being as or even close to as cautious as Hopkins. Now, take the first Marciano/Walcott fight for example. Early in that fight, you see an aggressive Walcott that came out and traded with a big puncher and completely abandoning his defense.

I also remember him being hit a lot in his first fight with Charles. Since when has Hopkins traded punches with a puncher and fought with him on the inside taking punches? I personally have never seen it before. Hopkins in his prime became a cautious, crafty defensive minded counter puncher who we rarely see even touched to the head or body. In fact, have you ever even see him with any kind of bruises? I can't imagine him being caught in the kind of exchange that Joe was caught in against Rocky. The only time i have ever seen Hopkins hit much was in his first fight with Jones, and you don't see that type of speed every day and it hadn't happened since. I can count on one finger how many times Bernard was hit in his fights Trinidad, Pavlik, Tarver, Taylor or even Calzaghe( not the slaps, significant punches).

Even in his fights with Louis, Joe was hit quite a bit. I think you are letting his foot work( which was indeed one of the best) allow you to think that his defense was better than what it actually was. His knockout losses should not be overlooked.

Really Charles, Walcott, Hopkins, and Moore were all brilliant boxing minds and defensive masters and you'd just be splitting hairs to argue one over the other in that regard. Certainly a close call on all fronts. Walcott and Hopkins were the most similar in style, hence the comparision. Hopkins fought some tough fighters but nothing like the competition they faced night in and out. I think Satterfield and Johnson would even be an interesting challenge for Hopkins at Light Heavy, certainly better than Tarver and Pavlik.



Satterfield destroying the skilled 214 lb Bob Baker.




Harold Johnson in action.

Agreed.