Don Dunphy & HBO

I liked Tompkins better than Lampley. He was laid back. Lampley has always been too enthusiastic and excitable. Some of his banter with Foreman and Roy was funny though.

 

At the risk of incurring the ire of some purists, I find Dunphy overrated. He calls a fight at times much more like radio than TV, as if he doesn’t think we see things right in front of us, and offers little in the way of either analysis or color.

I get that at one time he was Mr. Boxing as far as broadcasters go, but he’s not my cup of tea. And by the time color television and more dynamic broadcast booths became fashionable (starting mostly with the beginning of Monday Night Football, which was as much personality-driven as game-driven) … Don became a dinosaur.

 

When I run across a fight that he did, I like Dunphy's style.
I am not a big fan of having 3 guys doing a fight because all 3 of them feel the need to talk constantly. I don't need a color guy; I can see the fight. The analysis mostly falls victim to the need to be talking constantly; 90% of what is said is gibberish. Emmanuel Steward did analysis well because he only spoke when he needed to. Most of these guys end up sounding foolish because they have a need to never shut up.
In my opinion, personality based commentary has no place in boxing. The fight is the event- or should be, if we ever get back to professional, not manipulative, matchmaking- not the jackass feeding his ego at ringside.

 

Dunphy did radio commentary for years so it’s likely some of that style bled into his TV commentary. He was, as mentioned, also used to commentating solo.

I really enjoyed Barry Tompkins’ style - dynamic but not over-the-top. Jim Lampley could get a little overexcitable but he also communicated the drama of a fight well.

This may sound odd, but Ray Leonard seems more articulate now than when he was commentating. He always had this slight drawl when he was speaking, which he doesn’t seem to have now. But his reading of a fight was usually on-point. You could see the value he brought to the commentary with his own (big) fight expsrience.

I think, as mentioned, Emmanuel Steward was probably the best overall analyst on the team and he, Lampley and Merchant were a good combo that seemed to complement each over. Roy was pretty good too.

I never thought much of George Foreman’s analysis - obviously he has more knowledge about boxing in his little finger than I do in my whole body but he just didn’t seem to communicate it that well. I often found myself wondering what point he was making. It often felt like Lampley and Merchant were thinking the same as me too.

Anyway, that was a bit of a ramble…

 

Saw Dunphy mentioned in another thread and did a search to see how much he’d been discussed on this forum and the answer is ‘not much.’

But I read your reply to me and while I respect your tastes (everybody likes who and what they like), I just found Dunphy to be much more of a radio guy ‘a-left-and-a-right-and-a-left’ kind of style.

As for color commentators and analysis, I think in general I agree with you to a point — three is usually too many, unless they really have chemistry and a rhythm and everyone knows when to jump in with their point.

But I’ll take a commentary team with Tim Ryan and Gil Clancy (with Angelo Dundee joining on occasion) or Alex Wallau and Dan Dierdorf over Dunphy or others of his age. They made the fights more lively.

As ‘solo artists,’ give me Chris Schenkel or even Howard Cosell, who at least made the event feel bigger and had some historic calls (no one will ever top ‘down goes Frazier, down goes Frazier) to capture the moment and the excitement. ABC’s lesser-used third man, football announcing great Keith Jackson, also wasn’t bad on boxing.

But to each his own.

 

No at all, I don't like Dunphy's work in the least. Nasally tone, and always had a sort of bewildered sound to his voice, as if he were trying to make sense of the action through a thick fog.

 

The legendary Don Dunphy was a great boxing commentator, called some very great historical matches.

 

He definitely called some great historical matches, but what made him a great boxing commentator to you? I just don’t see any insight from him, more ‘Fighter A hit Fighter B with a right,’ which we all could see with our own eyes. What do you see in him that I do not?

 

He was boring, too.

 

Won’t be popular but I have always enjoyed Lampley. Articulate & what others see as overwrought I perceive as genuine love for the sport.

But first & foremost I’m a huge Bob Sheridan fan. The Colonel was so intense without ever feeling forced. As a comparison, watch the Douglas-Tyson KO as it’s called by Lampley (who I’m defending) & Merchant, then listen to Sheridan’s call. It’s night & day for thrills.

 

Bob Sheridan had a great voice and he loved boxing.

 

Col. Bob would get so excited during a good contest that it was palpable to the viewer. I always enjoyed his calling of a fight

 

Not sure anyone called more big fights than he did, and he did it well. Heck, I’m not sure anyone called more fights than him, period.