I couldn't find much video on Gans, I did see the 1:47 of his fight with Battling Nelson and he was throwing wide punches, sometimes his back foot was off the floor like a baseball pitcher so his technique didn't look good in that fight. There were some highlight videos, but those are not good to gauge a fighter. Then there was the fight with Terry McGovern, a guy who walks straight in with his hands down and throws wide punches and Gans didn't do well in that one. Kownacki has a lot of video, he has fought some good people and although he looks overweight, his technique looks all right. In this fight he was fighting a tough heavyweight that I saw fight in a regional Golden Glove final (one of the best heavyweight fights I've seen). The guy is about 6-3, 230, with an 82" reach, had a decent amateur career, and Kownacki did well. So, to answer your question, there isn't really enough video on Gans to give him a fair evaluation, but Kownacki has good technique and fundamentals, to go along with surprisingly quick hands. From what I saw, I'd pick Kownacki's technique. This content is protected
You can see it this clip Pep holds his right to the side and somewhat back, not covering up properly. Terrible technique. https://streamable.com/qmm3t By contrast Kownacki has great technique because he beat Charles Martin.
Yes, I think we pretty much all get that! But how about if we put aside the kidding and sarcasm for just a minute? We're talking about one of the finest boxers, who ever walked the face of the earth! The "Old Master"... whose only rivals for greatest ever lightweight, are Benny Leonard and Duran. As fans who have found our way to a forum like this, we are obviously all aware of this - so we're not really looking at the films with unbiased eyes. We already KNOW, that he's a technical marvel… so when we watch him, we're seeking confirmation of this. Now let's pretend, we have never seen or heard of Gans before. How would we react to those old films? Would we be blown away by his magic skills - or would we be only moderately impressed (if even that!)? Just asking...
You mean a response that actually discusses their technique, as opposed to the usual predictable eye-rolling and generic statements about their greatness or cleverness or whatever?
He nitpicked his technique in the 17th then 35th round of a brawl when he was throwing bombs at an opponent he had hurt, and criticised him for losing to an ATG in a fight he's thought to have thrown. Ignoring the easy to find best footage online of Gans. Meanwhile Kownacki must have great technique because he beat someone that drew with Jarmal Woods.
I don't want to get into a name-calling argument... and I'm asking this in all seriousness, because I'm curious: When you look at footage of Gans, how does he look to you, compared to today's boxers? And I'm not talking about Kownacki… I mean boxers in general. Are you seeing skills, that would be too much for today's best to cope with? Or does he look less than sensational? What do you think?
Against Herman, quite workman like, and easilly in control. great speed when he needs it. Good angles, quick effecient footwork. Can be hard to see exactly what's going on at points, but he used a good mix of blocking (using arms due to the small gloves) and quick head movement, good counters, excellent infighting and grappling. How do you think he looks against Herman? There's actually more footage of him against Nelson than 1.5min, but it's poor quality This content is protected This content is protected It's hard to see exactly whats going on, but you can get an idea. His performance is even more impressive against Nelson because he had to turn up to the fight drained, weighing in at ringside so he couldn't even rehydrate. He also broke his right hand in round 33.
What's strikes me the most about the Herman fight, is that Gans has this huge reach advantage… yet seldom used an effective jab, with which he should have been able to control his shorter opponent. And when de does use it, it's more in the form of a push, rather than a punch with any snap to it. He obviously has a very good right, which he relies heavily on - both as a hook and uppercut. A left hook is rarely on display! We don't see a lot of exchanges from range - instead, as was the order of the day back then, after an offensive move (consisting of one or, at most, two punches) they invariably fall into a clinch, where we see the usual pushing/showing. Any body-punching would take place during this infighting - if you could get a hand free, that is! Not the kind of boxing I like to see... and not something that impresses me in the least. That being said… it's pretty clear, that Gans wasn't a bad boxer. Technically probably ahead of his time! And that final sequence, where he pulls back just a little, to avoid a wild swing, and then immediately counters with a perfect right to end the fight... now THAT was impressive!
But you can see him jabbing, 1-2ing, and moving very well earlier in the Nelson fight, suggesting he easilly had the ability to do it, and chose not to, probably just because it's not what the audience would want to see.
You can't tell much from this out of real speed video except that 1) Gans had freakishly long arms and 2) the counter right that put the white guy to sleep was sweet.
