bert sugar

Bert Sugar has never told a story I have not heard before and heard told better. He is a caricature and nothing more. I would not pay one penny for his pithy and tired insights.

 

Bert Sugar is an expert at keeping his bald head covered up!

 

So that's why he always wears a hat? That is a good thing. At least the glare won't damage our eyes.

 

I like his books and I listen to his stories.

 

thats a great top 5 IMO. i don't agree with dempsey being so high. i think he overates the old timers a bit but apart from JD there is noting there that i would disagree too much with him

 

he was asked about cottos chin before the judah fight and his repsonse was "well it's more about judahs chin. as he is of a majority that have knocked down twice with one punch"

yeah but we asked your opinions about cotto not about judahs chin....and in that why are you telling us this it doesnt make a difference. zoo was a compltely different fighter to cotto also he used ranged shots to get to his........ oh forget it, tell your stories about how everything in brown and grey is far more impressive.

he made the carpentier-dempsey fight a clash of the titans...even tho a nice story...it was a bit of a let down. it was clear carpentier was too small and when he did throw a combination (that did stun dempsey a bit) it was quickly muffled over and usual service recommensed.




i personally belive that we have way way way better story tellers,knowledicians and librairians on esb than those guys at the press conferences. why the hell dont we start a esb tv show. hell we could prolly get some unlit cigars and a panama hats and a failed basball writer career with it to.

anyone with me

 

He completely overrates some, and underrates others. Having guys like Frazier, Holyfield, and Foreman in the top 40, but having Holmes and Hagler between 45-50 is bad. Also Tyson at 100 is underrating him. He's a great story teller (sounds better in person) and I find him entertaining.

 

The above statement is dead on and sums up Sugar to a "T"

 

Imo Sugar is a great story teller and clearly has a genuine passion for the sport, but in terms of his lists and analysing greatness and legacy he's not too good, and biased he is also,

 

The Ring had one of it's best periods when Sugar was the editor during the early 80's. I have all of the 83 and 84 issues, also some from 82.

 

His list is ****in' dreadful.


(He's a non-smoker).

 

The book is a good one. I think Sugar had some aid writing the book. As for his choices, Sugar has his favorites for sure. Tyson at 100 was a throw in for marketing reasons by Sugar.

I agree, Sugar tells a good story. Sometimes he's a little out there, but I hope he sticks around for many years.

 

Joe Louis should not be in the top five, definitely not ahead of Benny Leonard.

 

...............A better book of Sugar's is "The Great Fights" written in 1981. Covers the ins and outs of such fights as Johnson-Jeffries, Armstrong-Ross, Louis-Schmeling II, Robinson-Lamotta VI, Basilio-Robinson I, Moore-Durelle I, Ali-Frazier III, Saad-LOpez II, and Leonard-Hearns I. His writing style tends to be a bit heavy on the usual jokes told a million times and he leans a bit heavily on historic rather than truly "great fights" but it's worth looking at.