Boxing  

Forum Home Boxing Forum European British Classic Aussie MMA Training
Go Back   Boxing News 24 Forum > Boxing > Classic Boxing Forum


Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 12-05-2007, 05:33 PM   #31
mattdonnellon
Belt holder
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,906
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Bob Fitzsimmons is to this day a top 20 all time heavyweight.

This need for film footage is much nonsense IMO. The written and eye-witness reports of fights and fighters that are on film generally coincides with with what we see on film-provided we are at least in the post 1930 eras. Most film prior to this is of such quality that the best fighters of the era appear of such poor quality that they wouldnt win a novice amature boxing contest!
Personally i much prefer to see a fight LIVE than on any film, the force of the blows, speed, blocks i read much easier than on a film or tv. Of course we would all love good film of the old greats-the fact that it doesnt exist doesnt mean they didnt exist.
mattdonnellon is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old 12-05-2007, 05:35 PM   #32
Dempsey1238
Champion
East Side Guru
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 5,015
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Bob Fitzsimmons is to this day a top 20 all time heavyweight.

Yep guys, rember Henry Pearce was a REAL fighter, and in his prime could give any atg hell.
Dempsey1238 is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2007, 06:39 PM   #33
PowerPuncher
P4P King
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 20,610
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Bob Fitzsimmons is to this day a top 20 all time heavyweight.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mendoza
1. I think it is. Those guys were best known for upset wins. Fitzsimmons has several wins over hall of fmae fighters. There's your difference.

2. Smaller? Yes. Less skills? Maybe. Novices fighting for titles? Not in Fitz case. Fitz claimed to have 300 fights, and likely had a least 50 before fighting Corbett for the title.
Are Douglas/McCall/Rahman 1 hit wonders? Well sort of but they had decent wins outside of there BIG 1s that put them above Fitz at HW for me (P4P is a different story)

1. Douglas beat 3 champs - Tyson, McCall, Tucker. All would have beat the semi-retired Corbett

McCall beat Lennox Lewis, OLD Holmes, Maskeev, Akiwande. Again all 4 could have taken a semi-retired Corbett

Rahman beats LEnnox, Prime Sanders, Tua on his record - all would beat semi-retired Corbett.

2. Yes Fitz was an exception to the rule of a novice fighting for a title. In those days 5-10 wins over journeymen and you were fighting for a world title.

It seems very unlikely the talent pool was particularly deep. For this reason I don't rate Pre-1900s fighters very highly at all and start my HW all time list from Jeffries onwards

As for the skills boxing has developed as a sport and skill and performance hit a plateu around the 1950s for the main part.
PowerPuncher is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2007, 06:48 PM   #34
PowerPuncher
P4P King
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 20,610
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Bob Fitzsimmons is to this day a top 20 all time heavyweight.

[quote=janitor]
Quote:
Originally Posted by PowerPuncher
1. The talent pool was far larger than at any point in the postwar era and

2. the best fighters were every bit as skilled as the best today. Just skilled at fighting under a diferent rule set.

3. Novices fighting for the world title?

4. Dont know what you mean there.
1. Based on what? Fighters becoming top5 contenders in their first 5 fights? Its impossible there was a deep talent pool. It seems likely the talent pool was TINY

2. Based on what? Were there anyone as defensively skilled as Mayweather? No Anyone nearly as offensively capable as Tyson/Lennox Lewis ofcourse not. Anyone as strong as these fighters? Not half as strong. Anyone with the workrate of Holyfield/Hatton? No

So no there skills weren't near. And what was the between rounds performance enhancer they used - Whisky
PowerPuncher is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2007, 06:51 PM   #35
Dempsey1238
Champion
East Side Guru
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 5,015
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Bob Fitzsimmons is to this day a top 20 all time heavyweight.

If its just Jeff On Wards, should Fitz get some benefit?? Since he as a middleweight, fought well with Jeff?? I cant think we should write off Fitz vs the likes of Douglas and co. Sure the 12 rounds would favor These guys, but in Fitz's 25 round days, I give Fitz a great shot, and may even make him the favor over the like of Douglas, Rahman and others of that nature. Other ATGs are a differnt matter though.
Dempsey1238 is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2007, 06:55 PM   #36
Dempsey1238
Champion
East Side Guru
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 5,015
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Bob Fitzsimmons is to this day a top 20 all time heavyweight.

[quote=PowerPuncher]
Quote:
Originally Posted by janitor

1. Based on what? Fighters becoming top5 contenders in their first 5 fights? Its impossible there was a deep talent pool. It seems likely the talent pool was TINY

2. Based on what? Were there anyone as defensively skilled as Mayweather? No Anyone nearly as offensively capable as Tyson/Lennox Lewis ofcourse not. Anyone as strong as these fighters? Not half as strong. Anyone with the workrate of Holyfield/Hatton? No

So no there skills weren't near. And what was the between rounds performance enhancer they used - Whisky
Mayweather, I think Gans and Dixion would teach him a thing or 2 in skill.

Tyson Lewis, Battling Nelson and Ad Wolgast would better offensicely fighters imo.

Work rate of Hatton and Holyfiled pale in comparrsion to Nelson though. Nelson was a Henry Armstrong type of fighter. You relly are underated this older group.
Dempsey1238 is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2007, 09:36 PM   #37
Mendoza
Dominating a decade
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 14,104
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Bob Fitzsimmons is to this day a top 20 all time heavyweight.

Quote:
PowerPuncherAre Douglas/McCall/Rahman 1 hit wonders? Well sort of but they had decent wins outside of there BIG 1s that put them above Fitz at HW for me (P4P is a different story)

1. Douglas beat 3 champs - Tyson, McCall, Tucker. All would have beat the semi-retired Corbett
Douglas did not beat Tucker. Buster went out like a chump vs Holyfield, and lost to the likes of Saverese ( TKO1 ) , Ferguson, White ( TKO9 ), and Bey ( TKO 2 ). I do not think Douglas beats Corbett. Buster was just not that good. He had one magical night vs Tyson, and never looked as good before or since.

Quote:
McCall beat Lennox Lewis, OLD Holmes, Maskeev, Akiwande. Again all 4 could have taken a semi-retired Corbett
I think Corbett UD's the Holmes who fought McCall, and UD's the novice Maskeav who lost to McCall as well. Akinwande was nothing special. Corbett was better than him too. McCall did land a good punch to upset Lewis. It was a great upset. I do not think Corbett would defeat Leiws

Quote:
Rahman beats Lennox, Prime Sanders, Tua on his record - all would beat semi-retired Corbett.
But Rhaman lost too many matches to non-elite level guys. Tua TKO'd him, and so did Lewis. Tua can't box a lick. Corbett runs circles around him as easily as Byrd did. Sanders is dangerous early, but I beleive Corbett could get out of the way and out box him over the course of the fight.

Have you ever seen Corbett as an older retired fighter sparring with Kid McCoy for W.W. I Bonds? The film is clear and up close. Corbett is very quick, and skilled. I recommend watching it sometime, and then imagine how good he was 20 years ago when he was in his prime. In the 1920ís a very good modern type of fighter in Tunney was in awe of how good Corbett was. That one was filmed too.

Quote:
2. Yes Fitz was an exception to the rule of a novice fighting for a title. In those days 5-10 wins over journeymen and you were fighting for a world title.
Are you aware Sullivan had 50+ combat matches before losing to Corbett, and Corbett in turn had 60+ matches before losing to Fitzsimmons? Novices you say? I think you just aren't familiar with the fighters. Like I said, Fitz claimed he had 300 fights!

Quote:
It seems very unlikely the talent pool was particularly deep. For this reason I don't rate Pre-1900s fighters very highly at all and start my HW all time list from Jeffries onwards
How do you know this? It is estimated that box rec recorded has less than 5% of all fights per W.W I

Quote:
As for the skills boxing has developed as a sport and skill and performance hit a plateu around the 1950s for the main part.
Different era require different set of skills. Stamina, in-fighting, feinting, and body punching were at their peak pre 1950. The skills as you see today is somewhat better , but lacks some of the stuff the fighters had before. Rate the man. Do not confine him to an era.
Mendoza is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 12-06-2007, 12:30 PM   #38
godking
Contender
ESB Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 561
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Bob Fitzsimmons is to this day a top 20 all time heavyweight.

Quote:
Originally Posted by janitor
Evidence for what exactly?

I think that I am justified in saying that he was the best finisher of the heavyweight champions between John L Sullivan and Jack Dempsey. You would be verry hard put to argue otherwise.

I am also justified in saying that he was verry dominant against the best heavyweights of his day. That much is written in black and white.
Its based on eye witness accounts

I dont put much stock in eye witness account from a 100 + years ago

eye witness accounts vary based on personal opinions and experiences what someone thinks is amazing 100 years ago it nothing special today.

evidence on film >>>>> 100 year old witness accounts.
godking is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 12-06-2007, 01:05 PM   #39
McGrain
Diamond Dog
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 37,076
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Bob Fitzsimmons is to this day a top 20 all time heavyweight.

20 Heavyweights I'd Make Favourite Over Bob

Jim Jeffries
Jack Johnson
Muhammad Ali
Joe Louis
Sonny Liston
Lennox Lewis
Joe Frazier
Evander Hollyfield
Larry Holmes
Mike Tyson
Harry Wills
Sam Langford
Riddick Bowe
Jack Dempsey
George Foreman
Rocky Marciano
Sam McVey
Jersey Joe Walcott
Max Schmeling
Peter Jackson


Just a thought. And of course, Bob could beat some of them with that power. But I would make all of these guys favourite.

Last edited by McGrain; 12-06-2007 at 02:12 PM.
McGrain is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 12-06-2007, 01:45 PM   #40
OLD FOGEY
Belt holder
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 3,835
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Bob Fitzsimmons is to this day a top 20 all time heavyweight.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dempsey1238
Yep guys, rember Henry Pearce was a REAL fighter, and in his prime could give any atg hell.
Except Tom Cribb would have squashed the Chicken, but that is another arguement for another thread.
OLD FOGEY is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 12-06-2007, 01:56 PM   #41
mr. magoo
Undisputed Champion
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Chicago, Illinois USA
Posts: 13,420
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Bob Fitzsimmons is to this day a top 20 all time heavyweight.

Quote:
Originally Posted by I Am Legend
$100 janitor buys a harley davidson because of this ad.
Yes, but it would have to be a model made pre-1930, as they were made better in the ol' days.
mr. magoo is online now  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 12-06-2007, 02:01 PM   #42
mr. magoo
Undisputed Champion
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Chicago, Illinois USA
Posts: 13,420
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Bob Fitzsimmons is to this day a top 20 all time heavyweight.

Quote:
Originally Posted by janitor
Much of it is missing due to the shabby records of the period but the following points stand out-

Of the elite heavyweights of the period he fought Peter Maher 2X, Tom Sharkey 2X Jim Corbett, Gus Ruhlin and Jim Jeffries 2X. Apart from the two Jeffries fights he won all these fights by knockout (should have won the first Sharkey fight by KO). Indeed verry suden carefully timed knockouuts as far as the newspapers suggest.

In adition to this he beat a lot of second teir heavyweights of the period such as Ed Dunkhorst verry convincingly.

It is also woorth comparing the way he beat certain fighters to the way other top heavyweights of the period beat them. What is obvious is that there was no better finisher at heavyweight in that era.
With all respect to Fitsimmons, this doesn't look like quite enough to warrant giving him a top 20 slot. I'm not saying that he doesn't deserve it, and in all honesty I'm not very schooled on Fitz's career. I will say, however that his resume sounds a bit scetchy at first glance. Ad in the fact, that we have no realy footage of him, and only some very old newspaper clippings, and I find it difficult to make a case for him. The information here is very limited.
mr. magoo is online now  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 12-06-2007, 03:04 PM   #43
Dempsey1238
Champion
East Side Guru
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 5,015
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Bob Fitzsimmons is to this day a top 20 all time heavyweight.

I say we do have some great footage of Fitz, the Corbett fight.
Dempsey1238 is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 12-06-2007, 04:08 PM   #44
mattdonnellon
Belt holder
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,906
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Bob Fitzsimmons is to this day a top 20 all time heavyweight.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mr. magoo
With all respect to Fitsimmons, this doesn't look like quite enough to warrant giving him a top 20 slot. I'm not saying that he doesn't deserve it, and in all honesty I'm not very schooled on Fitz's career. I will say, however that his resume sounds a bit scetchy at first glance. Ad in the fact, that we have no realy footage of him, and only some very old newspaper clippings, and I find it difficult to make a case for him. The information here is very limited.
What kind of newspaper clippings did you expect...?
As for his sketchy resume from 1890 to 1905 he lost legit to only one fighter who was 13 years younger and considered the best of his time. He bested Sharkey, Corbett, Maher, Choynsky and Ruhlin considered the best contenders of the mid to late 1890's.
mattdonnellon is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2007, 05:46 AM   #45
janitor
P4P King
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 21,080
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Bob Fitzsimmons is to this day a top 20 all time heavyweight.

[quote]
[quote=PowerPuncher]
Quote:
Originally Posted by janitor

1. Based on what? Fighters becoming top5 contenders in their first 5 fights? Its impossible there was a deep talent pool. It seems likely the talent pool was TINY
Just because sombody has 5 fights on boxrec dose not mean they only had 5 fights. You could get to the level of British champuion without even registering on boxrec in those days.

While it is hard to say exactly how many fighters there were in a given era the number of active boxuing gyms and the number of scheduled boxing shows suggest that numbers peaked in the 20s.

Quote:
2. Based on what? Were there anyone as defensively skilled as Mayweather?
Absolutely yes if you define defense as the ability not to get hit then Young Griffo was as good as anybody in history.

Quote:
No Anyone nearly as offensively capable as Tyson/Lennox Lewis ofcourse not.
I could argue that Terry McGovern was as ofensivley adept as any swarmer in history.

Quote:
Anyone with the workrate of Holyfield/Hatton?
Mate there were guys who matched the workrate of Hatton and Holyfield over 45 rounds!!!!!!!!!!

Quote:
And what was the between rounds performance enhancer they used - Whisky
That one has been used well into the postwar era in some cases.
janitor is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Reply

Boxing News 24 Forum > Boxing > Classic Boxing Forum

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump





All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:23 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Boxing News 24 Forum 2013