Comparing the master boxing heavyweights from Corbett to Holmes

I dont think that it is unreasonable to think that a master boxer could loose a decision to a swarmer or another slickster.

I think that is what Johnson and Walcotts points losses generally are.

 

Fair enough, I don't think Johnson was a better boxer than any of the four you've picked. On another subject: 60 plus rounds? Damn, if that's not a testament to Corbett's stamina, I don't know what is. Wikipedia says it was declared a No Contest because Jackson and Corbett were both too tired to continue.

 

Take Ali out of the thread .ALI was NOT a master boxer.

He had great physical abilities but a relativelly poor defense and no body game.

 

I agree 100%. I made a similar list on the main forum I go to, just it was based on more things and I did the top ATG heavyweights, not just the master boxers.

 

how could you not consider jersey joe a master boxer? if you have ever stepped foot in the ring and had some boxing knowledge, one would realize watching him on film that he was a master boxer ring technision with great science. Eddie futch said "walcott was one of the finest master boxing ring technicions in the history of boxing.

If you look at his record you will also see he has also outboxed and outpointed some very fine fighters(louis I, murray, charles, Bivins, Ray, marciano 13)

overall all you need to do his watch the film to realize how great a master boxer walcott was. He excelled ring science to a higher level with his artistry of slick moves/ upper body feints.

I think walcott looks much better than corbett for instance.

 

I also think Floyd Patterson and Ezzard Charles should be on this list over gene tunney. too me on film patterson was one of the finest most skilled boxers i have ever seen, and charles was an exceptional textbook fluid master boxer.

 

Jack Johnson should be on this list.

 

no walcott? tunney better footwork than walcott? is that a joke?

 

tunney was only down once, but he didnt face anywhere near the level of competition charles, patterson, walcott faced. tunney also never fought any men over 200lb like the above 3 did. tunney the majority of his career fought men much smaller than him. Tunney didnt fight any black fighters, he ducked jack sharkey and george godfrey. Tunney also failed to fight many of the top punchers of his era

 

tunney didnt fight any where near the level of competition at heavyweight that walcott fought. tunney didnt fight big men, tunney didnt fight black fighters. tunney did not fight on 24 hr notice against top contenders with no training and with hardly any food in his stomach in the last 2 days like walcott did. tunney didnt fight out of his prime like walcott did. tunney didnt fight big punchers(outside of old jack).

 

On film, it appears Floyd Patterson and ezzard charles both looked like the better tutored and skilled boxers than gene tunney. for instance, tunney didnt even know how to hold a high guard, something that you learn your first day in the gym. tunney threw arm punches, something they teach you in the gym not to do.


Tunney had predictable unpolished footwork. charles at his peak danced and glided around like a polished dancer, with great rythm and unpredictablity in his footwork. i give charles the edge here.

 

Not in those days.

Tunney was revolutionary skilled in that he did things that most boxers only learnt from the 30's. If you look at a guy like Dempsey, who was still modern for that time, you'd think in the 1920's they had their testicles in their knees, the way he keeps his hands there. Product of the transition of bareknuckle boxing to gloved boxing. From the early 30's, gloved boxing was modern.