View Single Post
Old 08-24-2007, 04:33 PM   #29
East Side Guru
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 5,803
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Jerry Quarry vs. Vitali Klitschko

Originally Posted by ChrisPontius
I disagree with that decline. One fight does not prove an entire group of fighters being weaker. YI may just as well single out Tyson or Holyfield vs Holmes and say how he was dominated. You bring up Wepner but i will remind you that Wepner was a top10 ranked contender in the 70's.
Yes, but Mercer was the 1988 Olympic HW Gold Medalist, and that's the difference. Old Grandad was taking on he who was supposed to represent the very best of amateur boxing in 1988. What does that say for all the amateurs who did not win Olympic Gold, and became professional?
However, i don't think one particular era is stronger than another; there are always Wepners, Rodriguezes, Wilsons, and contenders and one, two or three greats.
Most of the great trainers are falling by the wayside, with very few exceptions left. We've never had a situation in boxing where so many geezers were prominent in competition. Assuming everybody is taking performance enhancing substances, the only reasonable conclusion to be drawn is that these old farts were better schooled than the currently youthful crop.
Carnera lacks the speed and skill to box Klitschko's ears off. Klitschko is way more athletic. Carnera came in a time when 6'6 was a huge exception. Today, that height is still high, but much less rare and as a consequence there's more talent for such big fighters as we've seen in Bowe, Lewis and both Klitschko's, during the last ten years.
Primo fought several rounds against Baer with a fractured ankle. He was plenty tough. He was also athletically active until diabetes got the best of him. Yes, he may well have had the slowest hands of any heavyweight champion, but he used his reach and jab extremely well. There is no footage of him tripping over his own feet. He was no clutz. And Klitschko lacks the endurance to outlast Primo.
I also don't see as much in Lyle as you do. He lost all his big fights: a badly aging Ali, against Foreman (a close one, i'll admit), to Quarry and twice befuddled by Young. He did beat Bonavena (who incidentally, also lost all of his big fights) Jimmy Ellis who was so badly past his prime that he lost to Kirkman.
He retired Buster Mathis (before The Empty Refrigerator turned 30), and Greg Peralta, scored a fine SD win over Bugner, came off the deck late in his career to decision a surging Scott LeDoux, and recorded a classic knockout win over Shavers. As for Bonavena, many would argue that he should have been awarded the decison in the first Frazier contest. He posted wins over Chuvalo, Peralta, was the last one to defeat Leotis Martin, Mildenberger (only Ali had managed that in the previous five years), and Zora Folley. If Charlie Goldman had remained healthy and active in his career, who knows what he might have done.
You speak of him being ahead after 10 against a prime experienced Ali. Ali prime experienced in 1975? He had to beat Frazier (who was also declined) a few months later on pure heart and determination instead of his great reflexes and speed. The reason Lyle was ahead was not because he was a good boxer but because Ali was addicted to the ropes after he beat Foreman, and was hoping for Lyle to just fall down after hitting him. Which didn't happen obviously. The fact that Lyle was out on his feet after a single punch from Ali speaks very bad for him. Ali has very little power compared to other heavyweights; in fact this is the only fight in his entire career that he turned around with a single punch (not counting the Liston rematch for obvious reasons).
No, you've forgotten the left hook he wrecked Bonavena with. His left hook knockdown of Folley also turned around a match where he'd lost two of the previous three rounds. Ali hardly looked addicted to the ropes against Wepner and Bugner. Ron boxed him smartly, having learned well from Muhammad's ambush of Foreman. Lyle withstood 46 unanswered punches when the referee stepped in, and he still protested the stoppage
Yes i saw Baer/Carnera, and he managed to lose a lot of the middle rounds and not finishing Carnera after several knockdowns. I also saw how very limited he was outside of his right hand.
Check out his jabbing against Schmeling, and also his left hook in the first round against Louis.
By the way, are we talking about the same Levinsky who lost to almost anyone with a pulse as well as many journeymen? He had two good wins in 1931 but outside of that, his record is that of a journeyman.
Yes, and Baer later destroyed him quickly in an exhibition after Levinski made him angry by playing rough with him. (A mad Baer is a deadly Baer. Fortunately, it didn't happen often.) The point here is that Maxie was able to go 20 rounds, and dominate from start to finish (winning boxing's last 20 round decision).
I know, you wouldn't have it any other way.
Thanks for indulging me.
Duodenum is offline  Top
Reply With Quote