Ketchel vs. LaMotta

Discussion in 'Classic Boxing Forum' started by Mendoza, Jul 16, 2012.


Page 4 of 4
  1. turbotime

    turbotime Hall Of Famer Full Member

    42,532
    3,733
    May 4, 2012
    Compared to Lamotta ? Ray would have gotten Ketchel out of there in about 10 rounds or so. Different class of fighter. I bet Olsen would have even given Ketchel a run. Ketchel getting his ass beaten to a pulp by BP not whithstanding, just means he would have hit the cocaine pipe a lot sooner once Ray had put him through the grinder.

    I have a very hard time seeing Lamotta get beaten that badly against BP, I really do.
     
    turbotime, Jul 20, 2012
    turbotime, Jul 20, 2012
    #46
  2. McGrain

    McGrain Diamond Dog Staff Member

    112,734
    47,523
    Mar 21, 2007
    LaMotta's chin is going to be as good/better than Ketchel's, it's fair to say, the guy was just a brute. But. LaMotta was never beaten up like Ketchel was and LaMotta never PROVED himself as durable as Ketchel. That's just a fact. LaMotta wold have been stopped by the referee long,, long before his condition declined to the extent that Ketchel did versus Papke, in his era. Could he have survived longer taking that terrible beating? Unknown. What we know is that Ketchel very likely proved himself capable of taking the worse beating.

    If boxing has evolved since Ketchel's time and Ketchel is a differnt kind of fighter all together and they fight under Robinson's rules, not impossible.

    If that is not the case, no. Ketchel was stopped twice. Once by one of the worst beatings in boxing history, once by one of the great heavyweights. There is no reason to suspect that he lacks durability, at all, and the suggestion that he is "fragile" is ludicrous.

    Hell yes he wuold, Olsen was an excellent fighter.

    But for the record, Ketchel was dominant over the best division of his era, and one of the best MW divisions of any era.

    It depends on how you see evolution in boxing, in my opinion.
     
    McGrain, Jul 20, 2012
    McGrain, Jul 20, 2012
    #47
  3. PowerPuncher

    PowerPuncher Loyal Member Full Member

    42,723
    264
    Jul 22, 2004
    That sort of damage is partly down to the much smaller gloves. Smaller gloves give more site impact damage but don't give more concussive damage, perhaps less. Look at Resto-Collins Jr and the damage Collins suffered due to having the padding removed from the gloves

    This content is protected


    So while he may have taken a hell of a beating, facial damage doesn't mean he had the best punch resistance or chin ever in my view. There have been fighters who took terrific facial damage but have been ko'd in other fights
     
    PowerPuncher, Jul 20, 2012
    PowerPuncher, Jul 20, 2012
    #48
  4. McGrain

    McGrain Diamond Dog Staff Member

    112,734
    47,523
    Mar 21, 2007
    Aye, you can sew it up if you like, but forget the facial damage if you prefer.

    He got thrashed, shipping multiple flush power punches, to one of the best punchers of his era. He got savagely beaten in every single round and by the MUCH more brutal standards of the day it was regarded as one of the worst beatings there was.

    It was a hum-dinger, whatever you know about gloves.


    In the eighth, Ketchel was brutalised horribly, shipping multiple flush headshots, blood now pouring from his nose. The 1900’s crowd began to call for the fight’s end, a rarity for the era. Both men were smothered in Ketchel’s blood. By the ninth both of Ketchel’s eyes were shut and he staggered blindly about the ring as Papke thrashed him. In the tenth, The San Fransisco Call describes Ketchel’s face as “barely human looking.” Ketchel prepared himself for the eleventh by trying to scrape the blood from his eyes.


    Jeffries described Ketchel as "the gamest man I have ever seen."
     
    McGrain, Jul 20, 2012
    McGrain, Jul 20, 2012
    #49
  5. Senya13

    Senya13 Boxing Junkie Full Member

    12,932
    2,395
    Jul 11, 2005
    X=Nonpareil Jack Dempsey
    Y=Bob Fitzsimmons
    My version.
     
    Senya13, Jul 20, 2012
    Senya13, Jul 20, 2012
    #50
  6. McGrain

    McGrain Diamond Dog Staff Member

    112,734
    47,523
    Mar 21, 2007
    Definitely, definitely fair.

    Do you think that Fitzsimmons came on as a puncher after Dempsey?
     
    McGrain, Jul 20, 2012
    McGrain, Jul 20, 2012
    #51
  7. TheGreatA

    TheGreatA Boxing Junkie Full Member

    14,241
    152
    Mar 4, 2009
    Ketchel was thrashed gloriously but I don't think a KO loss proves a fighter's durability much. In the end he was stopped well inside the distance of his time.

    As bad a beating as it was, he was able to avenge the loss only 2 months later, so the injuries must not have been too severe (much like the speculated Dempsey-Willard injuries).
     
    TheGreatA, Jul 20, 2012
    TheGreatA, Jul 20, 2012
    #52
  8. McGrain

    McGrain Diamond Dog Staff Member

    112,734
    47,523
    Mar 21, 2007
    No enduring dozens upon dozens of huge flush punches from a noted puncher proves durability.

    As for your speculation about Ketchel, it's just that - he might have fought that fight with a broken nose and six broken ribs, or he may have been fine. Different times.

    Look, the beating was remarked upon by most eye witnesses as being exceptional for the most brutal era in boxing history. If that isn't proof of durability, durability has never been proven.
     
    McGrain, Jul 20, 2012
    McGrain, Jul 20, 2012
    #53
  9. TheGreatA

    TheGreatA Boxing Junkie Full Member

    14,241
    152
    Mar 4, 2009
    It's only that there have been brutal beatings involving fighters that weren't necessarily the most durable of all time, they just somehow happened to stand up to the punishment while barely conscious. I think true durability is more about how much punishment you can ship while still staying in the fight.

    Based on footage that I've actually witnessed, LaMotta also took one of the worst beatings against Robinson in the last few rounds of their sixth fight. Of course in a match-up like this it's not so much about how bad of a beating you can take, but more about how bad of a beating you can give. It's the fellow giving the beatdown that's going to win here.
     
    TheGreatA, Jul 20, 2012
    TheGreatA, Jul 20, 2012
    #54
  10. McGrain

    McGrain Diamond Dog Staff Member

    112,734
    47,523
    Mar 21, 2007
    But that's the point. The beating that LaMotta took at the end of that fight is akin to the beating that Papke - a harder if not a better puncher - laid on Ketchel for twelve rounds. And Ketchel was, very desperately, trying to fight back until the 11th.

    I don't know what to say really, I think he proved his durability as much as any fighter ever but in this thread it's arguable and he's even "fragile".
     
    McGrain, Jul 20, 2012
    McGrain, Jul 20, 2012
    #55
  11. TheGreatA

    TheGreatA Boxing Junkie Full Member

    14,241
    152
    Mar 4, 2009
    It's difficult to say based on mere newspaper reports. The fight could've been a beating comparable to the one LaMotta took from Robinson, or it could've been a beating comparable to the one Jeffries took from Jack Johnson. Definitely a beating, but more of a steady pummeling typical of the era than the high-paced slaughter LaMotta absorbed from Robinson.

    Then again it could've been another Wolgast-Nelson, but sadly the only footage we have on Papke and Ketchel is far from high-paced action.

    Certainly the round-by-round reports indicate that Ketchel showed amazing toughness in the fight battling through blood but as far as his ability to take a punch, he was downed in the early rounds and knocked out cold twice during the fight. It seems to speak more about his sheer toughness and will than anything. Floyd Patterson could've been the toughest boxer for all we know, it just doesn't always translate to taking a great punch.
     
    TheGreatA, Jul 20, 2012
    TheGreatA, Jul 20, 2012
    #56
  12. psychoshane

    psychoshane Active Member Full Member

    557
    0
    Nov 16, 2010
    Didn't Ketchel beat Papke up so badly Billys own wife didn't recognize him in their third fight? He must have fought a whole different fight than he did in their previous meeting.
     
    psychoshane, Jul 20, 2012
    psychoshane, Jul 20, 2012
    #57
  13. greynotsoold

    greynotsoold Boxing Addict

    5,437
    6,887
    Aug 17, 2011
    So there is an argument going as to whether Ketchel was "fragile"? He lived in Butte, Montana, and was a bouncer in some of the toughest dives in what was then considered one of the 3 roughest places in the US (with the wharf area in San Francisco, and a similar area in New Orleans), when he was 15. He was later run out of town, after having 41 fights here, for having no visible means of support. (It is generally thought that he was a pimp.)
    Would he beat LaMotta? A junior middle against a light heavy, both of whom liked to stand and trade? Probably not.
     
    greynotsoold, Jul 20, 2012
    greynotsoold, Jul 20, 2012
    #58
  14. burt bienstock

    burt bienstock Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    18,285
    395
    Jan 22, 2010
    Ketchel the "jr middleweight" flattened TWICE the great LH champion Phil Jack O'Brien.Both bouts ended with O'Brien out cold...Ketchel flattened strong middleweights Mike and Jack [Twin Sullivan}, Hugo Kelly, Billy Papke, kod tough Joe Thomas in the 32nd round at the tender age of 21...
    No MW ever was any tougher or as brutal a puncher than Stanley Ketchel...
    It took cocaine and a bullet in the back to defeat the Michigan Assassin...
     
    burt bienstock, Jul 20, 2012
    burt bienstock, Jul 20, 2012
    #59
Page 4 of 4