Could Fritzi Zivic @ his best

Perhaps, but it also bears mentioning that Fritzie's reported to have inflicted that injury legally, in nearly closing that left eye with a series of hard "vicious" rights in that fifth round upon coming on strong, then maintaining a fast pace.

My inclination therefore is to give Fritzie full credit for knocking Eddie from the unbeaten ranks. Booker was no neophyte at that stage, and Fritzie could hit.

Again, like many fighters in that era, he wore the cuffs...a lot. And many of his decision losses did not sit well with the audiences viewing them. A number of his SD wins likely should have been unanimously in his favor. [Of course the reverse was true in other instances.

Fritzie is the taller individual in both these clips [the first one alternatively labeled as against Angott or one of the Cochran bouts]:

www.youtube.co/watch?v=WEt8aoV0Y00

Angott admitted to Bert Taggart of the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette that Fritzie "was too big and strong, and a little too rough...I haven't any alibi. I was just up against a bigger and stronger opponent." [For the record, Fritzie weighed 143 to Sammy's 137, and a 70 inch reach to Fritzie's 71 inches, so Angott was taller and with a longer reach than Armstrong. But Hank had proved he could dominate WWs while under the LW limit, and Fritzie could also compete with bigger guys like LaMotta and Conn. [Billy said it was like going to college for five years. Robinson stated he learned more in 20 rounds with Fritzie than in all his other bouts combined. Reports strongly indicate SRR-Fritzie II was stopped prematurely, while some claims are that Robby-Fritzie I could have been scored a draw, although most of what I gather is that Ray UDed him cleanly.]

No doubt that this following clip is of Fritzie, as WW champion, in a non-title ten rounder against Tony Marteliano:

www.youtube.com/watch?v=CZ7j5888EEc

 

The Conn bout was the other way around, compared to Booker bout, and it wasn't about Zivic's skills or cleverness which gave still not very experienced Conn trouble, but his constant aggressiveness. If that young version of Conn, after typically warming up (he was a slow starter, as we all know) could find a way to neutralize Zivic by simple jabbing, and made him miss most of his punches, and young, inexperienced Burley did the same (despite the controversial decision against him the 1st time, and despite having a bad eye from mid-rounds same as Booker), I don't see why Floyd wouldn't be able to make him miss and pay for it, he'd be able if not by jabbing, but by footwork create the space necessary between them and avoid getting smothered by Zivic's very dirty fighting, and throw to the body, that'll get Fritzie's respect. Now, if they had the same referees that worked for many of Zivic's bouts, who at best gave him a verbal warning, without penalizing him in any way, it might get troublesome for Floyd. But get a fair referee in there, and Zivic will be like a beached fish in there.

 

Senya, Zivic was never penalized for dirty fighting in over 150 bouts...Those days fighters were allowed to fight inside...They mastered this skill...It was a much rougher age, and fighters fought more often under those rules...I
guarantee that no Mayweather fighting every 2 or 3 weeks against a division with 5 more times the amount of pro boxers than today, with more top contenders, would not be unbeaten in those harsher days. I would have loved to see a Mayweather in at 130 pounds, against a Sandy Saddler or a Henry Armstrong...

 

absolutely, Fritzie came with a bag of tricks that Floyd has never seen

 

Don't forget that Fritzie changed Conn's career by forcing him to adapt by shifting from a crowd pleasing style to winning by optimizing his height, reach and mobility. [I'm not sure how tall Billy really was, but in the inaugural 1990 IBHOF induction class photograph, standing in the back row, he looks to be around the same height as Ali and Bob Foster, towering over everybody else standing. Even making allowances for wearing Richlee Elevator Shoes and cowboy boots, it's a striking contrast.]

PBF is 5'8" with a 72 inch reach. Lew Jenkins and Mike Kaplan did prove it was possible to defeat Fritzie with those dimensions during his WW reign, but they were both highly experienced pros. Jenkins was the reigning LW champion with over 65 bouts, and 50 fight veteran Kaplan had tangled with Fritzie before. Right now, Floyd has exactly 45 fights under his belt, none over the championship distance, and he'd be dealing with a peak veteran of around 130 bouts against the toughest competition. Fritzie was 27 years old when he stopped Armstrong in their rematch. That was match 132 for him. PBF had 37 bouts at that age. That intangible of experience would be a crucial deficit to overcome. [Fritzie might have tutored Champ Thomas, whose instructional manuals should be regarded as pugilistic pornography NOT to be viewed by aspiring boxers under age 21 or maybe 25.]

Who would be a fair referee? Joe Cortez? Arthur Donovan? Red Robinson? Because the latter two called bouts for and against Fritzie, and Robinson's penalizing of a round in which Fritzie hit Reuben Shank after the bell ending round six probably cost Fritzie the win in their 1945 rubber match.

Billy Conn had 36 fights under his belt when he squared off with Fritzie, younger and less experienced, but also the heavier and taller man. Prodigy Robinson led up to Fritzie with wins over Angott, Shapiro and Servo, and was probably already the best in the world at 135 and 147. Robby looked more like Hearns at WW in his earlier days at the lower weights. We see a tall predatory mantid stalker against Angott, more carnivore than sweet tooth. That isn't Floyd, who simply wouldn't have had the height for it.

Nobody in this era has the kind of prime professional experience Fritzie possessed by his late 20s. Simply by virtue of the championship distance having been abolished, Floyd never would have had the opportunity to acquire it. Professional athletes in Fritzie's era either made a living in boxing or baseball in the US. PBF is already guaranteed to be remembered for who he didn't fight, while Fritzie's remembered in part for who he did fight, in some cases repeatedly. Armstrong I & II are monstrous. He routinely fought and defeated veterans with well over 100 professional bouts behind them, some in Canastota, and others who will be [like Booker].

 

burt bienstock
I'm able to read the fight reports by writers from THAT time, and they thought he fought very dirty.

Anubis
The experience thing is overrated. Like I said, both Conn and Burley were still not very experienced when they faced Zivic.

I said that I'm not really expecting Floyd to fight at long range and win by jabbing, I'm expecting him to utilize his footwork, coupled with upper body movement, to create the distance for his punches even with Zivic up close to him, which would be short hooks to the body and head. Burley made Zivic very tentative by going to the body in the 2nd bout. Aggressiveness and dirty fighting might give Floyd some trouble, due to him being a naturally smaller man here, but not to the point he wouldn't be able to adjust to and find a way to win.

Fight with Robinson I'm not really considering, because Ray wasn't very good at infighting, it was noted many many times by contemporary writers that fighters who were able to get in close to him gave him a lot of troubles, not just Zivic. Floyd is excellent at both long and short range.

 

Please Senya, you can criticize my knowledge of the boxers of the 1940s, but to compare the 2 or 3 times a year fighter Mayweather with the prime Ray Robinson is sacrilege...Mayweather had no way to hurt Ray,who was taller, just as fast, with the greatest arsenal of weapons a welterweight ever possessed...I saw this Ray Robinson several times ringside, and Floyd Mayweather was no Ray Robinson for dang sure...

 

It wasn't something Ray needed to do with the height and reach advantages he held early on, but he certainly ravaged Bobby Dykes with his early infighting a decade later, and he was competent enough at it when rarely dealing with taller but lighter opponents like Bobby.

Again, smaller men could compete with Fritzie at his best, but Mayweather would have to move into his punching range to score. The footage shows somebody with a good stance, mobility and a tight defense. He's not a formless brawler in that 1940s footage, but somebody with solid fundamentals.

Looking quickly at Floyd's record, it appears at first glance that a 34 year old DLH has been his tallest opponent, and the only one matching Fritzie's stature. A 27 year old WW champion Fritzie is a different proposition from a 34 year old DLH approaching the end [yet pushed PBF to a split decision]. For Floyd the 5'10" stature of a prime Zivic would see to create entirely new challenges to deal with, as opposed to the 5'7" and 5'8" guys he's dealt with in his career.

 

Diego Corrales and Phillip Ndou were of comparable height to Oscar.

 

Re: fight with Robinson
This was about evaluating the way Robinson-Zivic bouts went, stylewise, not matching up Floyd with Ray.

footage
Not much can be seen in it. And not that I care, considering its very poor quality. From all reports I've read I have an impression that Zivic wasn't very skilled (in classical sense, not in the sense of dirty tricks) or clever. It also doesn't mean anything, what height Zivic is. The fight will be at mid and close range, as I see it, where Zivic's height is not relevant. Floyd is quicker, faster, more compact punching by far, much tighter defense, better body movement, better timing, excellent countering skills vs not particularly accurate or well-timed offense and rather average (read, getting hit a lot) defense.

 

Zivic is polarizing this thread almost as well as he did his opponents from their game plans.

I consider Floyd to be a very good welterweight who would have done well against most welterweights in history. But Armstrong, Robinson, Hearns (especially Hearns) Duran, and yes, Zivic, are among those who have either stopped him cold or in the case of the last two, mangled him.

Zivic cannot be dismissed a mediocre cheater. He was vastly experienced --vastly. Mayweather is a neophyte next to him, let's be honest. 45 fights? Really? Zivic had 45 fights by the time he was 22. Sure the man was a villain in the ring but he was wise how he did it -as a matter of a fact, he was brilliant. How many fighters do you know that could make an opponent head-butt himself? Zivic could and did.

His biggest problem was inconsistency. He could be beaten by talented guys with speed and serious power like Robinson and Burley, but at his best, he was masterful. You don't beat guys like Booker, Burley, and LaMotta if you don't know what you're doing very well. Armstrong's peak? It ended with Zivic. Zivic mauled and brutalized Armstrong. There is nothing telling me he wouldn't or couldn't do the same to a pot-shotting, relatively inexperienced defensive specialist like Floyd Mayweather.

 

As I said already, neither Conn nor Burley were very experienced when they met Zivic. Neither was Robinson, if people still want to mention him. His experience was only good enough to make it difficult for them to defeat him, but defeated him they did. Welterweight Mayweather was by very far more experienced than any of those three.

 

I am a great fan of Mayweather, for this day and age, but NO, he doesn't beat Zivic.

And quite frankly it is absurd to think he would beat Leonard, Duran, or Tommy Hearns, never mind Ray Robinson.

He is a great fighter, in these times, but that is all.

 

Wow... today's best p4p boxer can't beat a man who was outpointed 61 times 3/4 of a century ago?

I had no idea it was this bad, but modern boxing sure must suck!

 

Assuming Floyd had both the inclination, and the time to fight almost 160 times, how many do you think he would lose?