If Rocky Marciano fought in the 60's & 70's?

I guess it all depends on which side of the fence you're standing on. I find proof that some boxing scribes consider Liston a great puncher, and you find a way to make it look like you know better. Some of us are content to discuss boxing, some have the need to act superior.

flapanther2001 wrote:I guess it all depends on which side of the fence you're standing on. I find proof that some boxing scribes consider Liston a great puncher, and you find a way to make it look like you know better. Some of us are content to discuss boxing, some have the need to act superior.

..stop being childish.by no means do i attempt to be a elitist or a superior being.yes some the key word is some folks think liston was a great puncher.myself boxinglawyer and some others dont think so.but you used ring mags list of there thoughts as a point to prove your side correct but that sourse as disgussed is highly unrealiable or accurate in its thinking as a infalible sourse that all should bow down to.examples were given that perhaps even you would disagree strongly with ring.so yes we are here to talk boxing.i along with boxing lawyer and frank have given our thoughts.if you dont like them fine.i think we gave solid reasons on our thoughts.you use ring magazine as one to guide your thoughts.thats ok to if original thought at times is difficult for you.but if you enjoy insulting folks thoughts after they give them with either facts or decent reasoning fine but thats not talking boxing.perhaps with that in mind you may think about a espn forum or someplace that realy under the mask of talking boxing add spice to there thoughts with insults instead of intelligent factual points or resonable points of disagreement.
again look whos listed as number 8...and that number 8 has been described by ring mag several times of having a powerfull upper body in size.blacksmith type arms a thick chest and powerfull sholders.in fact fitz had puny arms boney sholders and a thin chest and no powerfull looking upper body.that fact is examined by hundreds of photos of fitz plus actual film footage of him.
one if fact the other shear hpye and myth thats far from reality.no one isnt saying liston was not a good fighter nor a good puncher.he was.a great one well i gave examples of some that i feel fall in that category.liston wasnt one of them.if you dont like mine or boxing lawyers or franks response.toooo bad.

just to clarify some that disagreed on a point.boxing lawyers thoughts on harry greb he said was a mixed bag and pointed out a very early ko greb suffered and the stiffs he fought as part of the record.i disagreed since lawyer got his facts mixed up that it was greb who weighed about 140 the other guy 160 not the other way around.i also said as a example grebs year of 1919 had 43 or so fights without a loss0.yep you fight weekly you will have several stiffs on the list but also that year were several hall of famers as well as top HW contenders.lawyer must of said that sounds resonable since he didnt rebutt...no where did i ever no will i ever accuse lawyer as a fraud.questioing if indeed is he a real boxing lawyer or not.questioning several times who he realy is like hes making stuff up to feel important.no would i question his intelligence like you did and went to imply BL was a elitist fraud.if i disagree with him and i have a few times it will be with facts sound reasoning in my thoughts.he may still disagree but at least he will understand why i disagree.by questining lawyers thoughts with are you for real.who are you.your realy a phoney that has no inside tract.etc etc isnt talking boxing with points of view that are differnt.is it.thoses are my elitist thoughts from a superior thinking attitude as you described me.

dmar5143 wrote:just to clarify some that disagreed on a point.boxing lawyers thoughts on harry greb he said was a mixed bag and pointed out a very early ko greb suffered and the stiffs he fought as part of the record.i disagreed since lawyer got his facts mixed up that it was greb who weighed about 140 the other guy 160 not the other way around.i also said as a example grebs year of 1919 had 43 or so fights without a loss0.yep you fight weekly you will have several stiffs on the list but also that year were several hall of famers as well as top HW contenders.lawyer must of said that sounds resonable since he didnt rebutt...no where did i ever no will i ever accuse lawyer as a fraud.questioing if indeed is he a real boxing lawyer or not.questioning several times who he realy is like hes making stuff up to feel important.no would i question his intelligence like you did and went to imply BL was a elitist fraud.if i disagree with him and i have a few times it will be with facts sound reasoning in my thoughts.he may still disagree but at least he will understand why i disagree.by questining lawyers thoughts with are you for real.who are you.your realy a phoney that has no inside tract.etc etc isnt talking boxing with points of view that are differnt.is it.thoses are my elitist thoughts from a superior thinking attitude as you described me.

What I said about BL was true, and I presented facts to back it up, not just opinions.

post deleated by dmar

panther i see you deleated one of your posts.thank you for doing that.i realy mean that.i did the same.

dmar5143 wrote:panther i see you deleated one of your posts.thank you for doing that.i realy mean that.i did the same.

I didn't delete anything.

I guess my post was Nazied.

dmar5143 wrote:just to clarify some that disagreed on a point.boxing lawyers thoughts on harry greb he said was a mixed bag and pointed out a very early ko greb suffered and the stiffs he fought as part of the record.i disagreed since lawyer got his facts mixed up that it was greb who weighed about 140 the other guy 160 not the other way around.i also said as a example grebs year of 1919 had 43 or so fights without a loss0.yep you fight weekly you will have several stiffs on the list but also that year were several hall of famers as well as top HW contenders.lawyer must of said that sounds resonable since he didnt rebutt...no where did i ever no will i ever accuse lawyer as a fraud.questioing if indeed is he a real boxing lawyer or not.questioning several times who he realy is like hes making stuff up to feel important.no would i question his intelligence like you did and went to imply BL was a elitist fraud.if i disagree with him and i have a few times it will be with facts sound reasoning in my thoughts.he may still disagree but at least he will understand why i disagree.by questining lawyers thoughts with are you for real.who are you.your realy a phoney that has no inside tract.etc etc isnt talking boxing with points of view that are differnt.is it.thoses are my elitist thoughts from a superior thinking attitude as you described me.

Dmar, No need to defend me from anything Panther says, he has been on my ignore list since he stooped to ESPN level cursing and juvenile insults instead of thoughtful or relevant facts. I dont even see his posts unless someone quotes him. He has the dubious distinction of being the first and only poster I have ever wiped from existence in my world.

boxinglawyer wrote:

dmar5143 wrote:just to clarify some that disagreed on a point.boxing lawyers thoughts on harry greb he said was a mixed bag and pointed out a very early ko greb suffered and the stiffs he fought as part of the record.i disagreed since lawyer got his facts mixed up that it was greb who weighed about 140 the other guy 160 not the other way around.i also said as a example grebs year of 1919 had 43 or so fights without a loss0.yep you fight weekly you will have several stiffs on the list but also that year were several hall of famers as well as top HW contenders.lawyer must of said that sounds resonable since he didnt rebutt...no where did i ever no will i ever accuse lawyer as a fraud.questioing if indeed is he a real boxing lawyer or not.questioning several times who he realy is like hes making stuff up to feel important.no would i question his intelligence like you did and went to imply BL was a elitist fraud.if i disagree with him and i have a few times it will be with facts sound reasoning in my thoughts.he may still disagree but at least he will understand why i disagree.by questining lawyers thoughts with are you for real.who are you.your realy a phoney that has no inside tract.etc etc isnt talking boxing with points of view that are differnt.is it.thoses are my elitist thoughts from a superior thinking attitude as you described me.

Dmar, No need to defend me from anything Panther says, he has been on my ignore list since he stooped to ESPN level cursing and juvenile insults instead of thoughtful or relevant facts. I dont even see his posts unless someone quotes him. He has the dubious distinction of being the first and only poster I have ever wiped from existence in my world.

OMG....my world is crumbling around me. What shall I do? Dubious distinction!!!! That's beautiful.

flapanther2001 wrote:I guess my post was Nazied.

Fuck them. Post it again.

SlickMoney wrote:

flapanther2001 wrote:I guess my post was Nazied.

Fuck them. Post it again.

It's too late now, just me defending myself from the aristocracy, with a go F* yourself thrown in. Gotta love the way BL & dmar band together. A lot of nut hugging I guess. I'm guessing my days as a boxing fan are over, now that BL has me on double secret probation.
[Melting...melting...what a world..........]

why are posts ever deleted? i seriously think that no post should be deleted. if somebody is that upset then either just stop the conversation or if you are too immature to do that and want to fight back then thats your choice. i know that i few people have left the board over dumb arguments but i think that its a good thing. i would rather only have people on this board that are willing to argue a point and not be offended.

powerpuncher wrote:why are posts ever deleted? i seriously think that no post should be deleted. if somebody is that upset then either just stop the conversation or if you are too immature to do that and want to fight back then thats your choice. i know that i few people have left the board over dumb arguments but i think that its a good thing. i would rather only have people on this board that are willing to argue a point and not be offended.

I think the only time they should be deleted is if people make it personal and attack family or religion or something like that.

freakzilla wrote:

powerpuncher wrote:why are posts ever deleted? i seriously think that no post should be deleted. if somebody is that upset then either just stop the conversation or if you are too immature to do that and want to fight back then thats your choice. i know that i few people have left the board over dumb arguments but i think that its a good thing. i would rather only have people on this board that are willing to argue a point and not be offended.

I think the only time they should be deleted is if people make it personal and attack family or religion or something like that.

i guess i could agree with that.

Usually you'll just see me joke around if shit gets silly, but I do take offense when anyone that talks down to anyone else. I don't appreciate it when I see things like "You don't know what your talking about." We're all here to discuss boxing & we all have opinions, especially when it comes to mythical match ups. The other thing that pisses me off is trying to bullshit others on this board to make yourself appear superior. That's why I went off on BL. I called him out on facts & facts alone, no opinions, facts. If these guys want to pull my posts for defending myself, so be it. I can't really do much about it now, can I?

freakzilla wrote:

powerpuncher wrote:why are posts ever deleted? i seriously think that no post should be deleted. if somebody is that upset then either just stop the conversation or if you are too immature to do that and want to fight back then thats your choice. i know that i few people have left the board over dumb arguments but i think that its a good thing. i would rather only have people on this board that are willing to argue a point and not be offended.

I think the only time they should be deleted is if people make it personal and attack family or religion or something like that.

I deleted the post. In my view it was nothing more than a personal attack. Its not like I and everyone here hasnt insulted someone on the board and had their post deleted. Its not a big deal. Just keep the arguments civil. Remember the way you read something might not be the way they wanted to say it. If you have an issue with something they posted just man up and ask them about it. They might not have meant it the way you think. Just like Panther thought I was getting angry or whatever but I wasnt. Thanks guys.

Soonermark890 wrote:

freakzilla wrote:

powerpuncher wrote:why are posts ever deleted? i seriously think that no post should be deleted. if somebody is that upset then either just stop the conversation or if you are too immature to do that and want to fight back then thats your choice. i know that i few people have left the board over dumb arguments but i think that its a good thing. i would rather only have people on this board that are willing to argue a point and not be offended.

I think the only time they should be deleted is if people make it personal and attack family or religion or something like that.

I deleted the post. In my view it was nothing more than a personal attack. Its not like I and everyone here hasnt insulted someone on the board and had their post deleted. Its not a big deal. Just keep the arguments civil. Remember the way you read something might not be the way they wanted to say it. If you have an issue with something they posted just man up and ask them about it. They might not have meant it the way you think. Just like Panther thought I was getting angry or whatever but I wasnt. Thanks guys.

I never thought you were angry Sooner....we, (you & I) were debating, that's all.

flapanther2001 wrote:

Soonermark890 wrote:

freakzilla wrote:

powerpuncher wrote:why are posts ever deleted? i seriously think that no post should be deleted. if somebody is that upset then either just stop the conversation or if you are too immature to do that and want to fight back then thats your choice. i know that i few people have left the board over dumb arguments but i think that its a good thing. i would rather only have people on this board that are willing to argue a point and not be offended.

I think the only time they should be deleted is if people make it personal and attack family or religion or something like that.

I deleted the post. In my view it was nothing more than a personal attack. Its not like I and everyone here hasnt insulted someone on the board and had their post deleted. Its not a big deal. Just keep the arguments civil. Remember the way you read something might not be the way they wanted to say it. If you have an issue with something they posted just man up and ask them about it. They might not have meant it the way you think. Just like Panther thought I was getting angry or whatever but I wasnt. Thanks guys.

I never thought you were angry Sooner....we, (you & I) were debating, that's all.

See how easy it is to read things wrong LOL

Dmar mistook my comment on here as me being very naive and plain stupid about every top 10 fighter beating the Rock and about him beating up an old Louis. Instead of insulting me he just messaged me and we were able to clear up my comments as me being sarcastic and referencing the movie Coming to America. Next time instead of getting personal and insulting each other try messaging each other to clear up any misunderstandings that way these post are not filled with juvenile back and forth! just my thoughts?

nano212 wrote:Dmar mistook my comment on here as me being very naive and plain stupid about every top 10 fighter beating the Rock and about him beating up an old Louis. Instead of insulting me he just messaged me and we were able to clear up my comments as me being sarcastic and referencing the movie Coming to America. Next time instead of getting personal and insulting each other try messaging each other to clear up any misunderstandings that way these post are not filled with juvenile back and forth! just my thoughts?

Yep. But hell I am as guilty as anyone of it in the past.

Soonermark890 wrote:

flapanther2001 wrote:

Soonermark890 wrote:

freakzilla wrote:

powerpuncher wrote:why are posts ever deleted? i seriously think that no post should be deleted. if somebody is that upset then either just stop the conversation or if you are too immature to do that and want to fight back then thats your choice. i know that i few people have left the board over dumb arguments but i think that its a good thing. i would rather only have people on this board that are willing to argue a point and not be offended.

I think the only time they should be deleted is if people make it personal and attack family or religion or something like that.

I deleted the post. In my view it was nothing more than a personal attack. Its not like I and everyone here hasnt insulted someone on the board and had their post deleted. Its not a big deal. Just keep the arguments civil. Remember the way you read something might not be the way they wanted to say it. If you have an issue with something they posted just man up and ask them about it. They might not have meant it the way you think. Just like Panther thought I was getting angry or whatever but I wasnt. Thanks guys.

I never thought you were angry Sooner....we, (you & I) were debating, that's all.

See how easy it is to read things wrong LOL

Please my brother....let me know which part I read wrong.....

yep ive sceen rocky fight.easy to hit.not realy.ask louis or moore or ali they will tell you differnt.yep he was knocked down twice.did you ever see or understand how or what.what do you actualy see in a fight or watch.do you actualy pay attention to detail cause from what your saying you dont.and if you dont then you dont know what your talking about.if you look at the moore knockdown you will see a rare mistake by rocky which is whem coming foward he picked up his right leg instead of his usual shuffle.while that leg was in the air or foot i should say he got hit with a hard right.balance cause the knockdown since rocky was standing on one foot only..the walcott fight rocky had his body and feet squared off a easy position to get knocked down.walcott hit him with 2 left hooks that were harder then the one he kaoed charles with.thats per walcott.rock wasnt fazed.he looked over to his corner and got up fast..

flapanther2001 wrote:

Soonermark890 wrote:

flapanther2001 wrote:

Soonermark890 wrote:

freakzilla wrote:

powerpuncher wrote:why are posts ever deleted? i seriously think that no post should be deleted. if somebody is that upset then either just stop the conversation or if you are too immature to do that and want to fight back then thats your choice. i know that i few people have left the board over dumb arguments but i think that its a good thing. i would rather only have people on this board that are willing to argue a point and not be offended.

I think the only time they should be deleted is if people make it personal and attack family or religion or something like that.

I deleted the post. In my view it was nothing more than a personal attack. Its not like I and everyone here hasnt insulted someone on the board and had their post deleted. Its not a big deal. Just keep the arguments civil. Remember the way you read something might not be the way they wanted to say it. If you have an issue with something they posted just man up and ask them about it. They might not have meant it the way you think. Just like Panther thought I was getting angry or whatever but I wasnt. Thanks guys.

I never thought you were angry Sooner....we, (you & I) were debating, that's all.

See how easy it is to read things wrong LOL

Please my brother....let me know which part I read wrong.....

yep ive sceen rocky fight.easy to hit.not realy.ask louis or moore or ali they will tell you differnt.yep he was knocked down twice.did you ever see or understand how or what.what do you actualy see in a fight or watch.do you actualy pay attention to detail cause from what your saying you dont.and if you dont then you dont know what your talking about.if you look at the moore knockdown you will see a rare mistake by rocky which is whem coming foward he picked up his right leg instead of his usual shuffle.while that leg was in the air or foot i should say he got hit with a hard right.balance cause the knockdown since rocky was standing on one foot only..the walcott fight rocky had his body and feet squared off a easy position to get knocked down.walcott hit him with 2 left hooks that were harder then the one he kaoed charles with.thats per walcott.rock wasnt fazed.he looked over to his corner and got up fast..

He said IF. But he did say thats not what he was trying to say in a later post. Either way hopefully its over and we can get back to talking about the most important fight coming up. Grant vs Price.

i hate you all. dont take that the wrong way though.

powerpuncher wrote:i hate you all. dont take that the wrong way though.

How sweet.