I've seen a few people debate how good Gans looks on film, so I thought I'd dedicate a thread to it. What are your thoughts? Do you think he looks good, or dated? Why do you think it? This content is protected This content is protected
If you know what it takes to make ancient tools, you'll know that you can be contextually primitive and a genius.
People tend to concentrate on the lower hands fighters held back then so the older fighters get discredited but he looks to have good footwork and he knew how to control distance in a fight.
Genius. Footwork. Right hand leads. Fighting off axis. A full repertoire of uppercuts. Great understanding and control of distance.
People don't know what to look for. Majority of boxing fans eye test consists of judging aesthetics and proximity to the boxers they hold in high regard (not a bad measure per se). Gans was a great, great fighter. Dedicated to the development of fighting science.
People who are dismissive of the old timers based on footage, are typically albeit not always, poor at analyzing fight films. If you ask them what they wee looking at, they probably missed most of what was important.
Hard to say judging by the few minutes avaliable. He does not look fast for a lightweight, but not primitive in any sense of his technique. Looks like a smart and crafty guy to fight against, I'm sure he had many tricks that guys today don't even realize that can be done.
I was just about to type E = MC2. Same difference. You beat me to it again and took all the glory. I hate you.
Well now you’re just showing off - trying to play Tesla to my Einstein. If anyone asks me what it’s like to be smartest man live, believe me, I won’t be responding with “Don’t ask me, ask Boxed Ears.” Nah nah. I’m the King of the Castle, you’re the dirty rascal.
