This content is protected 1. Ugh. The worst first I can recall. Even. 2. Henry landed a good left-right on Agramonte. A right uppercut, and a little later a right hand dropped Agramonte on his face; his mouthpiece was out. It reminded me of the Louis fight. In both (rematches btw), he was floored in the 2nd for a 9 count both times, by a right hand. In the same year. How crazy is that? Henry. 3. Agramonte. 4. Agramonte landed a good left hook. Henry went on to take control though, hurting Agramonte with a left hook, then wrestling Agramonte to the canvas, landing the left hook as Agramonte went down. Agramonte took the 9 count and got up, clinched, and finished the round, heading back to his corner rather fatigued. Henry. 6. Little occurring. Agramonte was a little busier than Henry, but nothin significant. Agramonte. 7. Nothing at all happened. Lots of clinching and Agramonte making the bigger man miss a lot. No offensive action taken by either man. The crowd at one point cheered, thinking Agramonte was hurt, but actually, Agramonte telegraphed a shot going in on Henry, who advanced at that exact time, not actually scoring on Agramonte with a punch, but a left elbow. I initially was unsure, but later found out in the fight that Henry was warned and penalized for using elbows, so I'm sure he did here. Agramonte looked staggered, but was only off balance by the elbow. Agramonte. 8. This was the round that the elbows cost Henry. The crowd was booing. I guess to satisfy them, Henry hurt Agramonte with 3 or 4 good hooks, and Agramonte, on the ropes, looked about ready to go down for the third KD, but cleverly slipped out of it. Henry. 9. Some solid punching by Agramonte (for once!), but it did no damage. Henry on the other hand was doing nothing at all. I think he was just plumb out of energy. Agramonte's best moment of the entire fight came near the end of the round, when he hit Henry with a good right, followed by a right uppercut, not long before the bell. Agramonte. 10. Agramonte was much more active than the tiring Henry. Agramonte started with a good right bolo, and the two put together a decent exchange, which Agramonte took. Agramonte. Final score of the 9/10: 5-2-1 for Agramonte. I just know that has to be wrong. I had a hard time getting into the fight, so I probably didn't pay attention the way I should have. I actually haven't seen this fight for like a month or more, although the scores are from then too. But I know, the scores are screwed up. There's no way Agramonte won, not with two KD's against him. However, Henry did tire badly in the last three rounds. And one note before the verdict. The commentator's numerous comparison of Agramonte to Walcott was offensive to me. It cheapens the very name and legend of JJW. How the hell could he think Agramonte resembled Walcott anyway? Verdict: An exceptionally slow and dull 10-round heavyweight bout. It was over a year of research of boxing matches before I ever discovered this one, and I see why I had not heard of it before then. Boring as hell.
"I just know that has to be wrong." It is more or less how I saw it also. I had it 4-2-3 of the rounds we were shown. If the 8th is the round missing, and I have to rewatch it to know which round is missing, I would also have Agramonte winning, despite the two knockdowns. Other than the knockdowns, Henry looked unimpressive to me. He was outjabbed. He missed by a mile a lot. Agramonte seemed to have the faster hands and was much quicker on his feet and with torso movement. (The big winner for me in this fight is Joe Louis. His performance against Agramonte looks far better after watching Henry stumble through most of this fight.) Because of the two knockdowns, and several close rounds, I can see giving this one to Henry on points, but the official scores seemed off to what I saw. It is no secret that Henry was mobbed up, and in fact I think he was later personally involved in fixing fights. I have my suspicions about the officials here. Dennis James mentions that Henry looked beat up and Agramonte didn't. No real surprise to me, as Henry didn't hit Agramonte much after the 4th while eating punches himself. The only reason to watch this is to judge Henry. He has those who consider him an uncrowned champion, but he didn't show much to me in this one. Agramonte was an athletic trial horse who could give a good fighter a good test.
Ok. Then I take this post as rock-solid confirmation then. And because of my impression of the fight, that's why I gave it a bad rap. It was unappealing. Henry looked slow and elementary and weak-stamina. The only thing that impressed was 2 KD's over Agramonte, but evidently he was easy to floor, and neither KD was really stunning. Agramonte was not really that impressive either. He was definitely a lot faster, a lot flashier, a lot busier, and probably more experienced, but he had nothing to show for it. I kind of viewed this as a pointless fight. I have to agree with you in that my sole reason for watching the fight was that it is one of the few fights of Clarence Henry's on film.
Good fight. The two guys seemed not to have a single fan between them. The noise of the crowd generated entirely by appreciation of the action. I think the comparison made between Agramante and Walcott was more to do with omilio having a slick, drawing the lead kind of style rather than sharing Walcott actual level. He did that walk about thing a couple of times to change the angle too. I think Agramante was the better fighter here. He was a bit flashy, dictated the action. Henry was a stalker, mostly following Agramante around and biding his time a little too much...even though he was the better puncher and literally knocked Agramante out twice here overall, it shows the advanced level these 185-190lb heavyweights were. Durable. Very competitive, good value performers..
While I can't agree that it was a good fight, I think you have valid points about Walcott and your last comment.
