Could Fritzi Zivic @ his best

Well, as he was non-controversially stopped only three times against opponents he had the best of [winning his first three against Azteca before age and ring wear caught up to him in 1947's fourth meeting, ending Milt Aron's career via fifth round knockout in their rematch, and avenging his knockout by Laddie Tonielli with two knockout wins of his own], that means Floyd has no chance of stopping Fritzie if he was as self-defensively deficient as you believe him to be.

At mid and close range, Fritzie's going downstairs on Floyd, if Mayweather's head is indeed as elusive a target as I agree with you it should be. Otherwise, Floyd's going to be getting elbows, shoulders, hand heels, butts, and all other kinds of quick and subtle extracurricular tactics no referee will be able to enforce against. Neither of these guys is any kind of choir boy, but Fritzie was a master provocateur. In sports, it's not the initiator who usually gets penalized or disqualified, but the retaliator. If anybody gets tossed out for fouling, it will be Mayweather, by blowing his cool like Bummy Davis and Mike Tyson did [Mike of course in response to all Holyfield's butting. By the way, how many defeats did Evander sustain via head butt penalties anyways? Guess what? Holyfield BEAT Rahman with a head butt which sustained his career.]

Senya, Mills Lane [for Holyfield-Tyson II], Mitch Halpern [for Holyfield-Tyson I], and Tony Orlando [for Holyfield-Rahman] seem to have been every bit as blind to Evander's butting as you claim many referees of Fritzie's era were to dirty tactics. [By the way, in re-scrutinizing Fritzie's voluminous record yet again, I spotted how "blind" referee Ted Jamieson penalized Fritzie two rounds for low blows in a 1946 SD loss to Tommy Lemmon, so there are at least two late career instances where he did, in effect, lose via "DQ" due to a referee's citation of foul tactics. Joe Roman should have been so fortunate against Foreman in Tokyo.]

Regarding Fritzie's use of thumbs, Larry Holmes was about as blatant with that tactic as any prominent champion has been over the last 35 years. How often did anybody get penalized for something like that in any era? Larry's knockdown of LeDoux was with as flagrantly deliberate a thumb to the eye as exists on any footage. [To me, this was karmic payback for Scott's previous thumbing of the sportsmanlike Norton.] PBF shouldn't even think about taking Fritzie on unless thumb-less gloves are mandatory.

The very best at fouling get away with it through subtlety, quickness and clever maneuvering. Jack Dempsey famously told the Larruper after awarding the 20 round decision to the Basque Wood Chopper in Reno, "Paulino did a better job of fouling than you did, Max!" Archie Moore, in a matter of fact non complainant way, stated a couple decades later that Ali's continual neck yanking tactic is what specifically drained and weakened Foreman enough to be knocked out in Kinshasa. Muhammad and George were both filthy fighters, but Ali did the better job of it. The Mongoose tutored each of them, and called it honestly.

Useful to know where the referee is, so that whatever trickery is performed is shielded from the official's view. Also a skill is making deliberate illegal actions look incidental or accidental, as well as provoking an opponent into losing temper and composure by retaliating. Tyson was notoriously susceptible to this. Jack Sharkey quieted manager Johnny Buckley and his other seconds after losing to Dempsey by telling them to," shut up, it's all in the game" when they started complaining to reporters.

If at mid or close range, Floyd would have a lot more than legal punches to worry about, and those additional concerns would be stealth tactics, not flagrant violations. Also, I don't think he'd like PBF very much, and wouldn't be saying "Pardon me" when he did cross the line, purposely or accidentally. There are photographs actually showing the Croat Comet underneath the 5'5-1/2" Armstrong. Going mid and close range may be no more of a refuge for Floyd than it was for shorter heavyweights with Bowe.

Back to the original question. Could he, at his best, give PBF a tougher fight than any of Floyd's previous opponents? Well, Robinson expressly said it was Fritzie, NOT LaMotta, who was his toughest opponent. At his best, which may well have been Armstrong II, I'd like to know which of Mayweather's opponents would have been as tough!

 

Depends on the era in which he fights those 160 men.

There simply aren't that many good boxers today, so if he fought them in his own era, he would have to fight a lot of journeymen, to reach a number like that. So in this era, he would of course lose a few along the way - but probably not that many.

Now if he had that many fights in Zivic's era, he would obviously lose a lot more often - as the boxers back then were better and tougher (and there were lots more of them!) than today.

 

Well, the OP did specify "at his best," not on stasis, so I'd take that to mean Armstrong II.

I abandoned it a long time ago, so that's certainly my take.

I'd like to know what Floyd's record would look like today if he fought the best of the best for most of 18 years before retiring with over 230 fights on his professional record at age 35 like Zivic. [He's 36 now.]

Does he go 128-1-2 like Robby did before his second defeat to Turpin? Or 134-1-1 like Pep did before running into Saddler after his plane crash? [Fritzie himself was nearly killed by pneumonia in 1937. Is Floyd that tough to overcome things like that, or return from serious war wounds like Criqui and Lenny Mancini?]

 

No, I don't think he would be able to dublicate Robinson's 128-1-2 or Pep's 134-1-1. Those numbers are quite extraordinary, and belong to 2 of the absolute greatest boxers ever. Though very good, I don't believe Floyd quite belongs in that company.

However, I do believe that - best day vs best day - he's good enough to defeat Zivic.

 

All right. But let's reiterate BUDW's thread opening query, since who would win is not the question being posed here.

Could the Croat Comet of Armstrong II [or whenever you think Fritzie was at his best] give him a tougher fight than anybody he's faced so far?

 

I think Zivic would have been a tough fight for any welterweight in history. Would he give Floyd his toughest fight ever? Hard to tell really. He would certainly be no walkover - but, to be honest, I think Floyd would have outpointed him by a fairly wide margin.

 

How can anyone this side of Ray Charles and Stevie Wonder watch the existing footage on Zivic and pretend he wasnt clever... amazing.

 

burt, no one is saying that zivic isn't great i just think mayweather beats him. i can't see floyd stopping armstrong but i think the answer is yes to your other questions. understand as i say this, i am in no way a mayweather fan. i'd be rooting for all of the fighters you listed vs floyd.

 

Re: Zivic, referees, penalties
I didn't say he was never penalized at all. I said it was the case for many of his bouts.

All those modern examples of bad refereeing have no relevance. I stated specifically, a fair referee in the ring and Floyd outpoints Zivic by wide margin, rather easily. A less than fair and it may be troublesome for Floyd, but he still wins a decision.

I don't think Floyd would retaliate in a way that would cause him to be penalized, his temper in the ring doesn't seem to be like that.

Armstrong bouts may only be picked as examples of Zivic possibly being at his best physical shape, but they certainly have no relevance for this matchup as in how the fight goes. Armstrong and Mayweather were completely different boxers, stylewise.

Robinson on Zivic and LaMotta - I believe Zivic was usually more aggressive than LaMotta, pressing the fight more, even though he was more of a slugger than a swarmer.

 

my father knew Fritzie; they lived in the same area, and met in the army, where my father sparred with him. My father said that it was Fritzie's gravel voice, from being hit in the throat, that dissuaded him from pursuing professional boxing. My most prized possession is a Zivic autograph from 1940. So maybe I am biased...
I think that where people get confused about how good Mayweather really is, it is in his defensive ability. He looks like a wizard against the guys he fights, but throwing punches is not just throwing punches.
Canelo is pretty ****ing dum when it comes to hitting a guy that doesn't want to get hit. Zivic was real smart in the ring, all the time. Robinson, Conn, LaMotta, and Armstrong all said that Zivic was the smartest guy they fought, that he was like going to boxing college.
He fought Robinson real tight twice and Robinson was faster smarter taller and hit harder than Mayweather. He beat burley. He'd beat mayweather. And, given the wek competition Floyd has fought, he would take Mayweather to school.

 

Burley fight - some reporters thought Burley took Zivic to school that night, giving him a boxing lesson and winning by wide margin, but was robbed.

 

They fought three times, apparently they were close enough to sell rematches. And mayweather is far far from Burley.

 

First fight was close. The other two weren't close. Welterweight Mayweather was far better than that young version of Burley.

 

I don't think that I believe that. i think that a lot of how good Mayweather looks- and I don't deny that he is real good- is based on how weak his opposition is, when it comes to boxing knowledge.
Mayweather is real good at controlling distance; many fighters now just throw punches. but he controls distance. this was a common skill amongst top fighters of the Zivic era.
Zivic could fight at a distance- read about his fights and how many he controlled with his jab. His inside skills are without question. He could hit the body real well and had a strong right hand and left hook.
In short he was a consumate pro. he would be, by far the best fighter mayweather ever fought.

 

Which fights exactly did Zivic fight at a distance, a few examples. Against whom?
Zivic lost many fights where his opponents outfought and outpunched him at close range, some of them were worse than mediocre. I recall one of his opponents who outpointed him was called one of the most unskilled fighters in boxing at the time (Sheik Rangel if I remember correctly).
Zivic would be the most experienced fighter Floyd fought, but he wouldn't be among his 5 best opponents.