Henry Armstrong nuthugging thread - why he was the greatest fighter of all time

The problem with Saddler is he had a lovely habit of slicing your face up. It's feasable that he could deal the oncoming Hank with some serious cuts to he point of no return!

 

im not his chin was up in the air to be hit i do think he was hard to catch clean because of his movement and the fatc he got inside that negates most fighters power. He also had a sturdy chin. But Saddler carried his power well inclose which is very surprising for a tall man.

 

Agreed.

One of the reasons he was able to handle Garcia all the way up at MW is because he was able to weave his way around a lot of his big punches and at least partially pick off his bolo uppercuts.

 

One would imagine that Ceferino Garcia should actually be a very difficult match-up for Armstrong, being bigger, physical, very strong with uppercuts that could take your head off. Sound familiar?

Only the best boxers of the era such as Barney Ross could outpoint him. Armstrong on the other hand went right at Garcia and outfought him for the most part.

 

Him and Saddler would have been something to see.

 

Very enlightening thread! Especially for someone who had no idea how his opponents were regarded at the time!

I wouldn't say he's the goat. But top 5 certainly. Damn who to drop from my previous top 5?

I had fitz, louis, robinson, langford, greb. One has to go for armstrong!

 

If one has to go (and i dont necessarily think they do), i think Robinson is probably that fighter.

 

For what it's worth ,I saw both an older Henry Armstrong and a prime sandy saddler at MSG. If Armstrong and Saddler ever hooked up at 126pounds, I am convinced that Henry batters and kos Saddler. Boxing is a matter of styles and Saddler though tall,rough and a cruel puncher was EASY to hit,and when Armstrong assaulted you with volleys and volleys of punches,it would spell doom for the lanky Saddler. I also think that Alexis Arguello
would have tkod the in your face Saddler also...And the Armstrong that went through the featherweight division, like Sherman through Georgia, licks Willie Pep at their best.
Most boxing people during Pep's great reign, would have agreed....

 

Yeah I love me some Henry Armstrong and not just because we're both black/native american. He was very exciting and very hard to to hit flush. His jab may be better than most give it credit for too.

 

Saddler would stand to cause Armstrong some serious problems, make no mistake.

The Amstrong-pro reasoning cannot stem solely from his rich career. Saddler; the cruel, rib-denting, cheek-slicing foul machine of the late 40's must rank as one of the best anti-Armstrong devices one can muster.

Of course, the 126lbs incarnation of Amrstrong was a power-packed lawnmower, but nonetheless, who else would you back to blast Boxing's artful dodger in just 4 rounds?

 

Don't listen to this schmuck. Louis is clearly the guy to go.

 

What would you think would happen in a fantasy match up against Pernell Whitaker ?

 

louis is arguably the most dominant champ in history.

robinson is arguably the most complete fighter in history and, unlike the vast majority of greats, didn't lose to anyone he shouldn't do (until yeaaaaaaars past his best)

fitz is a lock for me, i'm just amazed at what he could do.

the choice, for me, has to be between langford and greb i'm afraid.

 

A princely sum ("For which I will gladly pay you Tuesday!"-sorry, seen too many Popeye cartoons with Wimpy!)

Thanks for that valuable eyewitness assessment.

Burt, this is why it always pisses me off and makes me want to scream when posters ignorantly stereotype you as always favoring the old timers. It's not true, and you've repeatedly given more recent greats like Arguello their props.

Armstrong was insistent after you watched Robinson defeat him that he never could have beaten SRR even at Hank's very best, and this well before Ray reportedly hit his peak. But to me, the question to be asked is this:

Was Armstrong a greater featherweight than Robinson was a welterweight?

It's lingered in my mind ever since that the tiniest cast of any fist I saw on display in Canastota was that of Armstrong. He chugged gallons of beer in training for Ross to gain weight, yet still failed to exceed the lightweight limit for his first eight welterweight title fights. Even in his last year of competition (1945), he barely reached 140 pounds. What if he maintained his concentration on keeping his weight down? Even as he went past 30, could he have remained in the featherweight ranks, and if so, how long might he have held that title? (It might also bear keeping in mind that he might have had it locked up for the duration of WW II as so many reigning American champions did after Pearl Harbor.) I'm not convinced Armstrong was ever truly more than a natural featherweight as a professional. Even for his middleweight draw with Ceferino, he only scaled 142. 124 for Sarron was a comfortable two pound margin, and he would have been physically mature at the brink of turning 25.

 

atsch

Thank you D, a check will soon be arriving in the mail to you. :happy
A few points : Henry Armstrong in a book of boxing interveiews by either Heller or Fried,claimed that Robinson was running away from Henry Armstrong and Robinson shouldn't have gotten the decision..,Armstrong was easily whipped and was trying to save face...All who saw that fight,myself included in 1943 were convinced that Robinson took it "easy' on his aging idol...
I,too believe that Henry Armstrong had a greater reign as featherweight champion, than Ray Robinson did at Welterweight. Ol Henry was a terror at 126lbs. But I also think that Robinson ,because of his height and style would always beat Henry Armstrong. But Armstrong did better overall against bigger fighters ,than Robinson. They were both amazing fighters. Mutt and Jeff...
I try to be objective when i compare boxers, regardless of when they fought
in boxing history. I just happen to believe that certain era's breed overall better boxers because of the great amount of fights they fought,against a very deep and rich pool of competition,think the 1940s. These guys usually fought
15-20 fights a year, honing their skills...In NYC alone there was a fight EVERY night a week in various fight clubs [sans Sunday]. My dad would take me
two or more times a week to fight clubs culminating with Friday night at 50th St and eighth Ave, MSG...I was in heaven...Cheers D...