47 years ago today: John Anthony Conteh vs. Leonard "Stinger" Hutchins

This content is protected

This content is protected

Here is the last ever title defense of Conteh's professional incongruously thin-on-hardware career. It was defense number 3 in his one and only reign, with the WBC light heavyweight belt for which he was never bested in the ring.

The challenger, a Motor City amateur hero that served as part of the inspo and model for the Kronk style developed by Emanuel Steward, had tried for a world championship once before. He made it 12 rounds of a scheduled 15 in a grueling war with Argentinian armored tank Víctor Emilio "El Leopardo de Morón" Galíndez before retiring in a bout that some called "the 175 pound Foreman vs. Lyle", FWIW.

Britain has never since produced a more fragile-mitted pugilist save maybe Calzaghe, nor one more rabidly loved by their metropolitan borough save maybe Hatton. On the latter point, I'd say the Manc crowds were perhaps just louder through sheer edge in numbers - p4p the Liverpudlians roaring for their man a few decades prior were right there abreast in their full-throatedness.

Conteh possesses what may be the best jab in an Original Eight division that boasts many fine world class jabbers. Here, though, it's the left hook that both draws first blood (figuratively) and ultimately closes the show.

Conteh clips and hurts Hutchins with a surprise double left hook two minutes into the opening frame. This was both a tactic of terror, showing his true speed in a very sudden & violent manner - as well as upending the scouting report, which said to watch out for that star-crossed right hand. I think once Len ate those left hooks, he was dead in the water - regardless of what happened next.

Now, the head clash. I for one don't think it was an example of my username. Conteh momentum springing up and throwing a counter 1-2 past a ducked Hutchins jab carried him steadily inside, but Hutchins happened to slingshot himself forward again after pulling away from the jab thinking that's all there was. Unfortunate misread and accident, is all.

The next round was a brave bit of delaying the inevitable by Hutchins (as you might also consider his entire struggle with Galíndez to have been, after the fourth round - where, ironically, it was Hutchins that cut Galíndez with a headbutt, only to light a fuego beneath his culo). In with an opponent superior at pretty much everything, behind the proverbial eight ball from the bell to start the second as his team had to scramble to apply "coagulants" after spending the first half of the stool break complaining nonsensically about Conteh having butted him deliberately, and clearly bothered more and more by that laceration - he really had just fate in store.

The big kibosh. It came late in the third, with Hutchins left awkwardly hog-tied at the ankles by Conteh's dagger-steps in and out past his lead foot (seeds that had been subtly planted in the first two rounds).

A sweet finish, as the icing on a legacy that feels like it ought to have contained several more layers of cake (when taking into account the obvious talent of Conteh). Within a few years, both men would be retired from action - before yours truly was even born!

 

Goodness gracious, this NYT article!

https://www.nytimes.com/1977/03/06/archives/butt-helps-conteh-win-title-bout.html

Author clearly had it out for Conteh and decided his headbutt was intentional based on preconceived biases.

And this:

Grooms said: “Look, the ref warned him. He's supposed to stop the fight if a butt causes a cut and call into the ring two doctors. If the cut is too bad to continue, Hutchins should be awarded the fight.”

What the referee ruled is that after 1:06 of round three, Hutchins was too damaged to continue, and that's where it ended.

To readers that hadn't viewed the fight, this implies that it was stopped because of the cut and not, you know, Conteh drilling him through the canvas with a left hook he couldn't recover from.

Also the assertion of Grooms (that the New York Times' hack doesn't sound to disagree with) that Len Hutchins should have been awarded the contest (rather than going to a NC in the case of a cut from a butt rendering him unable to continue) is wild to me - indicating that Conteh should have been what, disqualified for a butt that saw him move forward behid a 1-2 in a steady and predictable manner while it was Hutchins' own bowshot momentum coming back inside that actually caused the impact?

 

Not sure about that but in this case the fight was stopped because Hutchins was KTFO, though - not on cuts.

The unified rules (with the "four rounds completed" threshold separating No Contests from Technical Decisions) have been in effect on both sides of the pond for as long as I can remember ...pretty sure my entire life. Suppose it's possible that in the late seventies they weren't yet but my guess would have been that it goes back longer still.