Brilliant article on the original showman Ike "The Belfast Spider" Weir

I really like the sound of his style and his body (no homo) his nickname really seemed to have suited both.

From what I know on each fighter (albeit not alot) I think Griffo is slightly better/greater.

In what ways do people think he brought on the science of the game? He seems to have been quite unorthodox so how could this lead him to bringing on the game? I think his defensive arsenal may have been cutting edge though as the article did mention he was a brilliant blocker.

 

So interesting, especially the Murphy fight, not good

 

Yeh, seems a raw deal for Weir really. Afew of his fights were like that in that he fought too conservative, bust his guy up but then didnt finish it and only got a draw.

 

Yep, I get you there. I also having a feeling he was a great feinter and counter-puncher hence the 'Spider' moniker. And these things were very scientific for the time.

In terms of advancement how do you think he compares with Sullivan?

 

Sorry for the 100 questions Buija, just interested in the guy and you know more than me so I'm picking your brains.

 

I actually don't rate Corbett that highly and do not think he di dmuch to advance technique.

 

Well like you have said other fighters were practising what Corbett 'brought to the game' a decent amount of time before Corbett came onto the scene. Once Corbett was on the scene I do not think he was as advanced as some of the other boxers also practising the 'art of boxing' at the same time.

Although as Corbett was Heavyweight champion he brought more recognition to these skills than they otherwise got.

Basically, the techniques he practised were all ready in use and at a much more advanced level so to speak.

 

Extremely flattered at this debate, as I wrote and researched this article on Weir.

I rate Young Griffo as one of the top 5 greatest defensive fighters ever. The others are Willie Pep, Nicolino Locche, Wilfred Benitez and Pernell Whitaker(my opinion).

As to who was greater between Griffo and Weir, it's hard to say. Griffo is one of those fighters like Wilfred Benitez; an incredibly gifted natural talent who's full potential was never reached due to lax training habits. Griffo just didn't care all that much if he won or lost. He was more out to prove that you couldn't hit him than anything. His three bouts with George Dixon are classic Griffo: he came in fat and out of shape and was more intent on defense than offense. At times he made Dixon look silly, but making a fighter look silly is not the same as beating him, right? One of their 3 draws should have gone to Dixon, one to Griffo(who FINALLY decided to mount some OFFENSE!) and one was a genuine draw. That's what I've deduced from the write-ups anyway.

Back to Griffo-Weir. Ike had the superior offense and was the harder puncher. Griffo was stronger, had a slightly better defense and fought the greater opposition(Joe Gans, Jack McAuliffe and George "Kid" Lavigne), although Ike fought top flight opponents as well. Ike was a much more consistent battler too. If Griffo had taken his career more seriously I think he would be considered today to have been the hands-down greatest fighter of the 1800s. Yes, better than Fitzsimmons, Dixon, Gans, Walcott....ANY of them. He had that much talent. Just not the brains.

 

HA!
Obviously You've forgotten about Sugar Nikolai Valuev, the greatest defensive whiz of ALL TIME.

 

Thanks Bujia:good