Ketchel vs Papke - high quality video !

What i'd do for a Ketchel-Sullivan vid.

Plus it's not like brawlers from any era look good. Mayorga, Foreman, Zale, etc. all look sloppy and cheap.

 

Swarmer, good points. I have to make this point clearly :
All the great writers of the past as Igoe, Tad Dorgan,Dumb Dan Morgan,Damon Runyon etc.saw Stanley Ketchel,and all the great middleweights of the past up to Robinson,and still proclaimed Ketchel, the greatest middleweight they had ever seen. Either they were all wrong or they knew what they had seen in Ketchel, notwithstanding his last
unimpressive fight with Papke in 1909 when he was on the downside by then.And suffered an injury to his right hand. One or the other.
One more point : As I have posted before. There are but TWO existing clips of Ketchel. One with Billy Papke,when he won a lackluster decision in 1909.
And against the great Jack Johnson,who outwighed Stanley by35 or so pounds. A travesty,that event was. Just those two films.Ketchel kod 49
guys in 64 bouts,including the LH great Phil Jack O'Brien. NONE of these films exist today so we could really see the real Michigan Assassin that was so highly regarded by all who had seen him, including the 15 pound
heavier Sam Langford...After all if 100 years from now ,the only 2 films we have of Ray Robinson fighting was against a Ralph Tiger Jones, or Randy Turpin in London, what would those fans ,100 years from now say about Sugar Ray ? "He wasn't that good ". Same with Stanley Ketchel...:hi:

 

Ketchel obviously had something wrong with his right hand. '

I love the old timers, they were great, but it is true boxing was different then, way more holding, and looking for one big shot. However, if they fought today, they would adapt IMO. In video they say Ketchel's win over Jack 'Brian came 4 weeks earlier. That is film I would love to see, doubt it exists though.

 

Yes H,Ketchel Flattened the 12 pound heavier great Phil Jack O'Brien in 3 rounds 4 weeks before he fought Papke to a 20 rd decision in which Stanley was fighting with only his left-hand,against Papke who he Kod before.
I believe the healthy Ketchel who kod the LH O'Brien,would have kod the MW Papke if he didn't hurt his right hand in an early round.
Yes you pace yourself differently for a 20 round bout, just as a mile runner
doesn't go all out as if he was running a 100 meter dash...

 

ketchel really did look like he was not happy to throw the right hand and the fight did look pretty bad , i must say though to wear boxing attire like papke did shows he was a good sport and a little mentally irregular

 

Mr.Butt, yes Billy Papke liked to show his Butt,as his fighting togs show. Other fighters at that time including James J Corbett, used abbreviated
boxing trunks too.
Incidentally, years later when he was retired Billy Papke killed his wife and committed suicide. Part of the curse of the middleweights...

 

much of his latter year troubles occurred in and around my hometown. not our proudest moment...

 

boxing had not yet evolved into the finese that it would later be noted for by the late 20s and 30s. A mojor evolutionary developement that would climax from the mid 30s to the late 60s and beyond.

there were rare exceptions though in this early period, i.e Joe Gans. But most the fighters then were hardened, tough, fit and durable fighters, which gave them the edge over the average man.

But craftsmen and slicksters they weren't and wouldn't be for about 20 more years!

 

I'd say that's false, honestly. Scientific styles of all kinds: slicker defensive styles, trapsmiths, and boxer-punchers were clearly present world level by this point. Not in the way you would think of them, but they were there.

Kilbane, Welsh, Attell, Fitzsimmons, Walsh, Dundee, Johnson, Jackson, Corbett, Philly Jack, Twin Sullivan, Dixon, Erne, Griffo, McAuliffe, Choynski, Ryan, McCoy, etc.

 

Great footage, with the long trunks, Ketchel was way ahead of his time.

With Papke's thong... ew.

 

yeah i think they were divorced at the time did he just knock on her door argue a bit then bang , i bet she was ribbing him about what he used to wear in the ring

 

Papke's later troubles, or his showing his ass?

 

There were a few factors. As others in thread already said, pace was factor. The going for one big shot style was way of fighting for many hard hitters, and combinations were not thrown as much. Benny Leonard was one fighter said to be an exception. They also fought so frequently it had to be tough to be 100% at all times.

Was this bout last, or was there one more decision between the two?

 

S,so true what you post above. your fighters above were just as scientific as the fighters in the 1920s and beyond.People today don't realize that there is probably less than 0.5% film available today of the thousands of fights that took place in the early 1900s. And of that, the quality and speed of the hand-cranked cameras,make those fighters appear to be part of a Charley Chaplin comedy. I can assure you my dad and grandpa, walked like we do ,ran like we do, and threw punches as we do today,with a helluva lot more ruggedness we display today...Cheers...

 

The lack of prime fight footage argument is really a very weak one. I mean, surely there would be atleast one piece of footage where they didnt look like ****. Just one, thats all im asking for, to sway my opinion