Max Baer in the post-Ali unification tournament

I’ll revisit some of his fights - but I did tell you he’s quite painful to watch. LOL.

Actually, I know what you’re saying but I don’t think he achieved the efficient and successful ends that Foreman’s physical manipulations were expressly intended for.

Max just looked like he rough housed without strategy due to his limited options to deal with his opposition otherwise.

As to rough housing and anything goes, Baer v Galento may well be the least skilled punch out in all of history of boxing.

 

For the record, I’ve got no problem with his opinion at all. To each his own and no matter what anyone thinks, we’re never going to know for sure.

 

I don't think Baer would beat Frazier, Joe is on another level. That said, saying that Baer didn't have left hand (watch him vs Levinsky or Foord), couldn't throw uppercut and had no idea how to beat swarmers (again, watch Levinsky, Galento and Schmeling) is plain wrong.

People always say that Baer look so bad on the tape that he wouldn't be even pro in the 1960s. Well, keep in mind that he looked bad compared to Schmeling, Farr, Schaff, Carnera and all pro boxers from the 1930s and yet he beat them. It's also not true that he had some kind of gigantic physical advanatge either - he often faced bigger and heavier boxers. Baer would be big fighter in the 1960s anyway - he was the size of Ali.

 

If you read my post I picked Frazier.

I just added the caveat that Frazier posed a massive stylistic threat, so we had to entertain the alternative scenario.

I consider this caveat to be eminently reasonable.

You fundamentally don't understand how this fight is going to play out.

Baer is not going to have to take everything that Frazier throws to do anything.

Frazier is going to have to take everything hat Baer throws, just to get in range to hit him.

If Frazier gets into range, then all Baer has to do is take a step back, or push him back.

The jab and the uppercut are two of the most basic punches in boxing, and if Baer needs to use them, then he will use them.

The most important punch for beating Frazier however, is a straight right.

 

I think that you will find that it holds true much more often than not.

You fundamentally misunderstand Baer as a fighter.

Sure his right hand was his best punch, but he had a pretty dangerous left as well.

The reason that he was so successful with his limited style, was that he had an uncanny ability to land a punch instinctively.

Do I really have to trawl through footage of Baer, to find a segment where he throws an uppercut, to convince you taht he knew one of the most basic punches in boxing?

Don't you think that I have better things to do with my time.

There are two flaws with this argument.

Firstly Baer clearly does use a jab in some fights, so the argument is moot anyway.

Secondly, I don't think that a slugger trying to smash Frazier coming in, would necessarily have to build their style around the jab.

A left hook would likely work as well.

 

I quickly re-watched the Levinsky fight - that’s not a jab, Baer just paws with it, at best it’s a range finder. Baer does land a few uppercuts though. Levinsky has no problem hitting Baer. Ultimately, Baer wins by way of a great chin, greater size and power. Not a lot of skill.

Barring Carnera, Baer was in fact taller and better reached than the fighters you mentioned. Galento weighed more but Baer had all the physical advantages otherwise.

What other notable HWs did Baer beat who were taller, better reached and heavier?

Sure, fair point, Baer would hold height and reach advantage over a number of the 60s HWs - however much he could make that count for him without it being backed by skills equitable to that of his opposition.

 

By your own admission it doesn't hold true all the time. So it's a lazy argument to simply plug in the swarmer and slugger in question into a formula whenever convenient. That was my point.

Will it be harder or easier for Frazier to dodge punches from Baer compared to sharp accurate fast blows from guys like Ali, Ellis, or Quarry?

Do you have proof he has an effective uppercut or not? Here are some simple litmus tests: did he ever score a knockdown with an uppercut? Did he ever win a fight by controlling the opponent with an uppercut? Did he ever stop an opponent in their tracks and force them to make adjustments with an uppercut? If the answer is no to all 3, then simply "knowing" how to throw one will not get him very far..

There is also a huge difference between knowing how to throw an uppercut and having the skill to land one on a bobbing and weaving opponent.

I didn't say Baer literally never used a jab. By your own admission he often neglected and didn't always use it to set up his other punches which is the primary discussion that you are avoiding.

Baer attempting to neutralize Frazier's hook with his own wild half assed hook would be suicide.

 

I was talking about this fight in terms of left hook and left uppercut, not a jab.

Hank Hankinson, Artur de Kuh, Jose Santa, Ben Foord (same size). Fighters like Heeney, Wright or Schaff were shorter but heavier than him as well.

 

I remind you that I picked Frazier in my original post, so I clearly don't think that the slugger vs swarmer argument is everything.

However it is not something that can simply be ignored in this context.

You are asking the wrong question here.

Swarmers have success against fighters like Ali, Ellis and Quarry, because they can afford to take their punches to press the action.

They are less successful against fighter like Baer and Foreman, because they cannot afford to take their punches to press the action.

Given that we don't have film of most of his fights, it would be very difficult to be certain whether he did or didn't do this.

I remember that he used his uppercut against Galento, whenever he went into a crouch.

He had adopted a more defensive approach by then, but it is probably reasonable to assume that he would have tried to used his uppercut to counter Frazier's crouch.

Either way, you are hanging a lot on trying to prove a negative here.

He has to consistently get in range to land it first.

That is going to be a pig problem.

 

Scchmeling wasn't a swarmer and neither was Galento really ,he liked to be at mid range and counter you with a hook.

 

Sure, but I wasn't ignoring the stylistic clash. I was simply saying Baer is so crude even by the standards of a slugger that Frazier would have many advantages.

I believe that generally speaking a slugger does well against a swarmer provided they are of similar level of ability. An A level swarmer brings a lot more to the table against a B level slugger to level the playing field.

You're right that a swarmer cannot afford to take as many punches from fighters like those.

The question that is very relevant is if Baer would be able to land anything with any regularity to begin with. Foreman was 3x more accurate than Baer and extremely effective at walking guys into his shots. Which is why I said this was a lazy argument because you're only focusing on very vague "style" labels and not analyzing individual ability and habits for each guy.

Baer is not KOing Frazier with 1 punch if Foreman could not do it after 6 knockdowns. If he wants to beat Frazier he is going to have land frequently and accurately with flush shots. So if Frazier was very good at dodging fast straight accurate shots with his head movement, I fail to see why he would struggle to evade Baer's wild punches when he isn't setting them up with a jab or using guard manipulation tactics the way Foreman did.

I am not attempting to prove a negative.

I am simply asking for proof that he had an effective uppercut. That's not asking for a lot when one of the keys to beating Frazier was an effective uppercut. If you're going to claim he has a stylistic advantage you should be able to provide evidence that he has tools that would be a problem for Frazier.

I'll rewatch the Galento clips when I get the chance to see if I can gather anything.

How is it going to be a problem getting in range when there is no jab, no uppercut, and no guard manipulation from an opponent who isn't even bothering to fight tall or use his feet or use his long arms to his advantage? And opponent who rarely threw more than 1-2 punches at a time?

 

Schmeling pressured Baer in their fight. Max fought various styles in his career, but he was a pressure fighter against Baer.

 

Even a B level slugger will perform better against an A level swarmer, than the respective levels of the fighters would suggest.

Given that Baer was an undisputed champion, it is hard to argue that the gulf in class is prohibitive.

Oh come off it, Baer was not some club fighter.

If Frazier is coming straight at him, he is going to be landing plenty on him.

Any world class fighter is.

It doesn't matter how many times you repeat the assertion that Baer had no jab and no uppercut, it doesn't make it true.

 

I believe we've had similar conversations about how not all rankings and not all championships are equal.

At one point, Chris Areola and Ken Norton were both the WBC #1 contender. Does the man who beat Areola have an equal resume with the man who beat Norton?

Claiming that there isn't a large gulf in class when Baer beat Carnera to become undisputed and Frazier beat Ali, this seems like a very shaky stance to take.

Not once in Frazier's career did he just come in a straight line towards his opponent.

You know this is a silly argument so you're downplaying Frazier's bobbing and weaving to bring him down to Baer's level.

I don't have to repeat anything.

You killed your own argument when you admitted Baer sometimes didn't bother to jab, and by failing to cite evidence that he had an effective uppercut. I never said he literally didn't know how to jab or throw an uppercut. What matters is if he used them on a regular basis against opponents worth a damn.

 

I'd have put money on Damiani giving him a total boxing lesson.