Just saw an article in one of my old ring magazines on Emile Griffith. May '66 issue says that Griffith, then the welterweight champ, had a April 25, shot at Dick Tiger's Middleweight title at Madison Square Garden signed, sealed, and delivered became pissed off when Joey Archer started crying about how he deserved the title shot against Tiger instead of Griffith. Griffith went to Garden management and demanded a fight with Archer with the winner getting the title shot. Actually risked his title shot to shut up Archer. Archer ok'd the fight, but then would up backing out and Griffith went on to win the title from Tiger (on a very controversial decision). Anyway, how badass is that? Can't imaging too many other fighters doing that. Emile was always pretty high on my list (very underrated) but he shot way up after I read that. Awesome!
I think he also wanted to hold and defend both the welterweight and middleweight belts, but the ABC boys wouldn't let him. Great fighter.
I think his victory over Tiger, though very close, was a remarkable performance. My favorite of Griffith's.
I also have a high regard for Emile Griffith from what I've seen and heard of him both inside and outside of the ring.
I saw Griffith on a late-night talk show - probably the Tonight Show - just after he won the middleweight title. He did say that he wanted to defend both titles, but the powers that be told him he could only keep one title. Interesting that after having lost the middleweight title, he challenged Jose Napoles for the welterweight title in 1969. He lost, as he did against Monzon in challenges for the middleweight title in 1971 and 1973. Although well past his best in '73 he made a close fight of it with Monzon. A great fighter and a real class guy.
For a natural welter to beat somebody like Tiger,IMO a great middle is a great achievement.At his own weight beat some really good fighters.Remember him coming to UK and completely outclassing Brian Curvis,a good boxer.Think he stopped Harry Scott,an achievement in itself.Probably just had the edge on Luis Rodriguez,who I think was just pure class.So was Napoles,but was Emile a bit past his best by then?
That is badass but I have two thoughts: 1.) Archer was right. He did deserve a title shot. He was the real deal, which underscores Griffith's courage for agreeing to face him. 2.) Something like 17 out of 20 ring side journalists had Tiger winning the fight. It was almost universally considered a robbery, not a close controversial decision but an outright robbery. Still, a guy as small as Griffith hanging tough with a demon like Tiger is something.
I dont think it was a robbery. It was a close fight. Very close, but Tiger spent a lot of the fight just watching Griffith and waiting. I dont have a problem with Griffith winning. Tiger could be downright passive if you didnt come right at him.
The 9th round kd by Griffith gave him the edge over Tiger...a close, controversial decision? Yes...robbery....no.
