I think the unfairness of the fights between Joe Walcott and Kid Lavigne has really been overstated. The first contest (at which point Lavigne wasn't world champion), was a handicap contest with the conditions favourable to Lavigne. It wasn't anything that unusual, Walcott was the larger fighter with the bigger reputation at that point, though Lavigne was claiming the Lightweight championship of America. The conditions for the second contest, which was for the world title, seem to have been pretty fair. Walcott was hampered with the 135Ib weight limit, but a perfectly fair condition for a Lightweight world title contest.
Another might be the generally-held perception that Gavilan deserved to lose the decisions to both Basilio and Graham. I had him the narrow winner both times.
If you read the contemporary accounts of his training schedule, his regimen is pretty underwhelming. Lots of naps and handball, a little bag work, 5 miles a day roadwork... And more napping. It was comprehensive and he was isolated and focussed but hardly exhaustive.
Marciano's training/conditioning isn't a myth. He stayed in great shape between fights, did his running and walking throughout his career, as champion, even while boxing only twice a year. Kept a clean diet and off the alcohol. A lot of fighters don't.
That Sugar Ray Leonard was dominated by Duran in the first fight, and that the fight was only close because Duran took his pedal off the medal in the closing frames. SRL was definitely hurt in the second and Duran won a few of the following rounds quite emphatically, but Leonard did well in the fifth, pretty clearly won the sixth and was ultra-competitive with Duran up until the closing stretch, banking his share of rounds in the process. Then he won the final three against a Duran who was definitely throwing back to make the right really close on my card.
I grew up on boxing reading about the Jack Britton v Benny Leonard bout for Britton's welterweight title. Every piece I ever saw said the same thing (obviously a story passed on by writers who didn't have the resources we have or were too lazy to really research this). It was always written that, "Leonard was far ahead on points and in the 13th he dropped Britton to one knee. But while the referee was counting him out, Leonard rushed in and clipped Britton while he was down. Purposely fouling out because he didn't want the title." Now that was what I read over and over in the old boxing mags. It never made much sense to me because, I thought, "Well, why sign for the fight in the first place if you didn't want it?" A few years ago, with better resources, I looked this up and found that it was actually Britton that was far ahead on points and there was a bit of controversy as to whether or not it was even a legal body blow that dropped Britton in the first place. Leonard did rush in and clip Britton while he was on a knee. Articles I read did not describe Britton in any kind of distress, so the foul-out is still a bit strange, but enough to suggest Britton was not going to be counted out and the decision was going to go against Leonard if it went the distance. So, did he prefer to lose by foul rather than actually lose a fight? Not sure, but Leonard was not dominating this fight and he was losing.
Hello there,Sweetsci - I never realised that George was the underdog in his second fight with Joe. I recall Boxing News predicting that Foreman would end it early just as he did their first bout.
I dont believe Roberto Duran ever said the words 'no mas', he simply waved his glove and turned away. definitely still a quit job, but I dont think those famous words were ever actually said
Apparently they were said by a ringside photographer who paraphrazed Duran. Duran actually said:No quiero pelear con el payaso(I dont want to fight with this clown).