Bob Fitzsimmon vs. Jim Corbett (speed corrected / HD)

Discussion in 'Classic Boxing Forum' started by reznick, Feb 22, 2016.


  1. reznick

    reznick In the 7.2% Full Member

    15,903
    7,636
    Mar 17, 2010
  2. Reason123

    Reason123 Not here for the science fiction. Full Member

    1,113
    270
    Jul 27, 2015
    Great! Fitz throws his overhand right almost like Marciano.
     
  3. reznick

    reznick In the 7.2% Full Member

    15,903
    7,636
    Mar 17, 2010
    Yeah, I've heard some comparisons between Bob Foster and Bob Fitzsimmons in regards to moving up to HW.

    Fitz was a much better puncher, you can tell from this footage.

    And Corbett doesn't look like a fun person to fight. Sticking and moving with awkward feints and agility. No thanks.
     
    RockyJim likes this.
  4. lufcrazy

    lufcrazy requiescat in pace Full Member

    81,751
    22,001
    Sep 15, 2009
    Good work.

    Corbett looks better than previous. Seems to have a good solid jab and grab system going. Incredibly low punch output though.

    Ruby is supposedly an expert counter puncher but even with the magic you work, seeing his reflexes and fluidity is impossible. And whilst his stance was good for avoiding hooks and uppercuts, he's wide open to straight punches by standing square on and leaning back.

    I probably have to conclude that the best of Fitz isn't on worthwhile film but it's hard to deny what I do see with what we do have. I see someone who relies on parrying slow jabs and leaning back to evade hooks and uppercuts. Corbett couldn't miss with that jab. Two things he does have 1) incredible power, 2) very quickly gets himself in punching position without having to set himself, explains why he could turn defence into attack very quickly.

    The problem I have with Fitz, take someone like LaMotta who has a high output and can follow behind his jab, how does Fitz avoid a beating? He can't parry a triple jab and he certainly cant rely on leaning back to avoid it. Is he capable of weaving? Can he feint and sidestep consistently?

    What about a lower level of fighter, Winky Wright, watch the two on film and conclude Fitz had more talent. Aside from a punchers chance what does his filmed style present him with?

    It's much easier to be a defensive whizz when the opponent is throwing wild hooks or single jabs. Maybe there's better Fitz than what we see, but I see someone who is no better on film than Gerald or Julian.
     
  5. reznick

    reznick In the 7.2% Full Member

    15,903
    7,636
    Mar 17, 2010
    Fitz is quick on his toes. He's shuffling in and out of distance constantly.

    He's not bobbing and weaving, but he's moving his head a lot, especially when he attacks.

    And yes, this is just a one minute clip. You can watch entire fights of Joe Louis, and swear he can't move his head. And then you'll watch another fight, where he bobs and weaves 7 jabs in a row.
     
    BoB Box, louis54 and richdanahuff like this.
  6. LittleRed

    LittleRed Boxing Junkie Full Member

    8,850
    239
    Feb 19, 2012
    I imagine the low punch output was about the rounds, rather than a stylistic choice.
     
  7. lufcrazy

    lufcrazy requiescat in pace Full Member

    81,751
    22,001
    Sep 15, 2009
    Better example is Dempsey. Literally chooses to walk through Firpo and Carpentier without a passing thought of defence, but against Willard and Tunney displays some of the best defence on film of any fighter.

    Stylistically this is the perfect opponent for Fitz to excel against defensively as he has low output and isn't as quick. Shame we can't see him paste Dempsey.

    Yes Fitz relies a lot on jumping back out of range or leaning back out of range, although the Corbett knockdown was a sidestep body counter. But can we see Fitz make his opponents miss and then make them pay? No we can't and that's the worst thing.

    Without the proof of defence ad technique it's hard giving him any more credit than a Julian Jackson.
     
    louis54 likes this.
  8. reznick

    reznick In the 7.2% Full Member

    15,903
    7,636
    Mar 17, 2010
    Great point on Dempsey being an example of adjusting the style for different opponents.

    There is a point towards the end of this clip that Fitz is facing the camera, and rushes into Corbett. And even with this film quality, it looks quite scary..Tyson esque.

    There is a bit more of this footage I can slice up. I'll do that later tonight, and we can see if we can learn more about Fitz and Corbett.
     
    louis54 likes this.
  9. Reason123

    Reason123 Not here for the science fiction. Full Member

    1,113
    270
    Jul 27, 2015
    Fitz is older here at 33 years old. Which was pretty old for back then. According to boxrec this is Fitz's 80th fight!
     
    louis54 likes this.
  10. janitor

    janitor VIP Member Full Member

    71,599
    27,272
    Feb 15, 2006
    What I see here, is two David Haye type fighters, feeling each other out.
     
  11. Seamus

    Seamus Proud Kulak Full Member

    61,792
    46,500
    Feb 11, 2005
    You didn't do them any favors.
     
    Pat M likes this.
  12. klompton2

    klompton2 Boxing Junkie banned Full Member

    10,974
    5,433
    Feb 10, 2013
    This isn't HD. If someone here could tell me what format youtube likes that retains the highest quality I will upload a round of the Fitz-Corbett I worked on and a round of the Gans-Nelson 1 fight I worked on.

    On HD: Simply having a fight in slightly better quality doesn't make it HD. Taking a fight that's in poor quality or SD at best and transferring it to an HD format does not make it HD. HD is when the original film has been transferred 1 to 1 in a high definition format retaining all of the detail and quality of the original source material. With a real HD transfer you should be able to zoom into the image and still retain near photographic quality.

    Here are two examples of a 1 to 1 HD transfer. These aren't perfect examples because I used a quick and dirty screen grab from VLC which itself doesn't retain all of the original quality but its good enough for this example:

    http://i1184.photobucket.com/albums/z335/klompton/vlcsnap-2016-02-22-22h38m56s604_zpscwihmptu.png
    http://i1184.photobucket.com/albums/z335/klompton/vlcsnap-2016-02-22-22h39m20s809_zpsagbaomwe.png

    and

    http://i1184.photobucket.com/albums/z335/klompton/vlcsnap-2016-02-22-22h37m27s916_zpslub3rmxk.png
    http://i1184.photobucket.com/albums/z335/klompton/vlcsnap-2016-02-22-22h37m47s476_zpsdfqwz1qt.png
     
  13. reznick

    reznick In the 7.2% Full Member

    15,903
    7,636
    Mar 17, 2010

    Yeah, what you're describing is true HD. Upscaled SD isn't true HD, but it does increase the overall quality of the picture.

    There is debate about ProRes vs. H.264 as the best upload format. In my experience ProRes is better, but barely noticeable. And with ProRes you'll be dealing with insanely large files and even larger upload times. I recommend H264.

    That would be a treat to see this in even better quality. Thank you for offering. If you need any help, let me know!
     
  14. Tippy

    Tippy Member Full Member

    393
    118
    Dec 27, 2015
    That would be awesome
     
  15. klompton2

    klompton2 Boxing Junkie banned Full Member

    10,974
    5,433
    Feb 10, 2013
    Will youtube accept prores or h264? Everytime ive tried to upload an HD file it wont accept it. I dont care about file size or upload time as long as it accepts it.