Who is the greatest living boxing historian?

Is this for me?
No way would I aspire to be Janitor and I don't consider him a historian or a more than adequately informed poster. There are a few historians here , but I know two who don't fit that description !

 

Nobody asked you what you think of him, I don't think anybody cares.

I'm no boxing historian.
And you would be crazy to think that you are one.

If someone like Bert Sugar was caught on camera saying that Braddock knocked Louis down with a chest punch, ooh boy...
That'd be a wrap.

 

I've never suggested that I was a historian, I'm just a fan and an average poster,as I've reiterated many times .If your remark wasn't meant for me, who was it meant for? Sugar was caught on camera saying he was at MSG when he was in college training for the bar exam.

 

Neither did I, you're mumbling about nothing.
It was intended for you. I complimented janitor, it had nothing to do with you, but you felt the need to butt in.
Hey, that's better than getting one the most infamous knockdowns in one of the greatest fighters career wrong. Or at least it's pretty close.

 

Except you cant see where the punch lands ,I admitted I was wrong I recommend it to you!
You opened the ball if you want to continue do so ,otherwise shut the f*ck up kid!

 

[QUOTE="reznick, post: 18748155, member: 54206]

If someone like Bert Sugar was caught on camera saying that Braddock knocked Louis down with a chest punch, ooh boy...
That'd be a wrap.[/QUOTE]

Sugar has been caught worse than that. I remember him weaving an elaborate story about having all these fighters over to a film party in the 1950s to set himself up as a guy that had street cred and a deep history. The whole thing was a lie and predated his interest and involvement in the sport by about a decade. I could go on and on but the fact is that Sugar was a bull**** artist who thought nothing of historical accuracy or even lying to try to convince people he was something he wasnt, down to his stupid ****ing fedora that was nothing but a callback to the stereotypical press man that predated Sugar by a generation.

 

Bert Bienstock.

 

Sugar has been caught worse than that. I remember him weaving an elaborate story about having all these fighters over to a film party in the 1950s to set himself up as a guy that had street cred and a deep history. The whole thing was a lie and predated his interest and involvement in the sport by about a decade. I could go on and on but the fact is that Sugar was a bull**** artist who thought nothing of historical accuracy or even lying to try to convince people he was something he wasnt, down to his stupid ****ing fedora that was nothing but a callback to the stereotypical press man that predated Sugar by a generation.[/QUOTE]

If that's true, that is pretty messed up
Maybe I underestimate how much of a con he was.
If he was that bad, it wouldn't justify the good that he has done.

 

You can tell where it lands, the glove is where Louis chin is, and his head shakes violently.
Then again this is like trying to talk sense to trump supporters, no use.
They'll turn the sky red before admitting a simple a truth.

 

The quote from Braddock said he hit Louis in the chest with a resounding punch that could be heard ringside I assumed this was the punch that put him down I was wrong as Louis, in his autobiography confirms ,it was a punch that landed on his chin that dropped him.
Now you can knock yourself out and repeat this as many times as you want,the fact remains,when I am wrong I will always admit it ,I've made threads about it in the past!
You carry on my little man,I'm happy to confirm my mistake whenever necessary,oh BTW .I think Trump is an absolute c*nt, but hey! Your country voted for him!

 

I've always been dubious about boxing historians ever since learning that none of them really captured Ali the right way.

A lot of these guys claim they were closer than they really were, and will outright lie to make themselves seem a bigger part of the picture than they actually were.

Hopefully not always the case.

 

Atlas is up there but mike silver is probably the top historian....fantastic knowledge...check his books and interviews

 

I would agree. Hank was great and gave his collection away to the Brooklyn Library. His garage was a treasure trove full of boxing articles and memorabilia. Prior to his death, he felt Lennox Lewis was the best of them all. A fact that was known only to a select few.

In terms of historians, most of them chose to specialize on a time or few fighters.

Pre 1920, likely Tracy Callis is the best living.

 

How do you rate Mike Tyson as a boxing historian?

 

Springs Toledo