Four Kings - George Kimball

Thanks my man! Good luck with Jo! If you don't make your move soon then I will have to. In the meantime I will continue my fruitless search for Hearns v Atkins.

 

Fine read.

Great gift. :good Give your girl an extra snog for that one.

http://www.eastsideboxing.com/forum/showthread.php?t=198713

 

That didn't come across to me at all. :blood

 

Having been too young to remember all of the fights, I enjoyed the book tremendously. I didn't feel that it was biased heavily in any direction, but if you followed one of them more closely or have your own memories of the times, I'm sure there will be some things you disagree with.

Some of the best material involves Hagler, since IIRC that's the camp Kimball was closest to.

 

The video doc is pretty good.

 

That's "The Fabulous Four."

 

Four Kings also came out not too long after Giudice's Hands of Stone. Kimball comes right out and says that he didn't want to completely rehash Duran's bio so soon after one had just been published.

 

...now that could explain it.

It's an old beef I have -while it is true that Duran at times is overrated out here in this little alternative reality we all enjoy, he is often remembered as Ray Leonard's straight man in the 'establishment'.

 

this was a very good book. The only complaint I have is that it should have included Benitez as the fifth king. But he never fought Hagler. Just for history's sake , he should have fought Hagler. But he would have lost miserably to Marvin at middleweight. His last great weight was 154.

 

Wow, I guess it's time to point this out. Benitez does not belong in the category of the other four. He might have been as talented (if not more), but he never followed through like Leonard, Hearns, Duran, or Hagler. He defeated an uninspired Duran. Something Kirkland Laing can attest to (and never measured up to in terms of potential). If anything compared to the four; Benitez is a contender amongst champions. Talented marvel, yes. Without a doubt. As an athlete you are measured by what you do, not what you could potentially do.

 

uninspired Duran is just an opinion. Duran was not inspired to win a world title? When Duran saw the kind of fighter Benitez was in front of him, yeah he got uninspired. Kirkland was not a world champion. Duran had no right to be uninspired against Benitez-fighting for a world champion against a guy who was an ATG who could have elevated Duran to new heights. Just the fact people buy that excuse is amazing. No other fighters is given those considerations. That is an excuse, and the type we always see from Duran. That makes no sense at all.
the greater the fighter, the more he will take a challenge and win when he has to. And Benitez does compare to the fab 4. youngest guy to win a title. Beating Cervantes and then beating Duran and winning 3 titles. Probably the youngest man to win the 3 titles. Hearns and Leonard both moved up and were inspired when fighting for a world title. Can you imagine Hearns losing to Virgil Hill and saying later he was uninspired? No one would believe it or buy it. People would say, he lost to Virgil because he was not good enough and that is an excuse. But Tommy won a unanimous decision 30 pounds above his starting title weight. Facts are there.

 

This thread is making me itch to re-read it.

Kimball's underlying thesis - that the 4 kings era was the last time boxing was truly great - is hard to dispute when you really stop and reflect.

Those of you who were old enough to fully appreciate these rivalries when they happened are very fortunate. :good

 

Ken Atkins? The fight Tommy had in Hawaii before the Virgil Hill fight in April of 1991? I do not have that one either, and I have most. Usually I followed all of Tommy's fights, but that fight I found out about a week after it happened. I didn't even know it was happening. They did not advertise it at all, and I am not sure it was even on television. Tommy won by TKO in round 3 when Atkins was cut I think. I heard Atkins was a tough fighter for a little while when they fought. Atkins actually had a pretty good record at one time, but he lost when he fought good guys.

 

I felt the same way for a long time, but the one who changed my mind to a degree was no other than (drumroll) Sugar Ray Leonard.

His commentary on the Benitez-Duran fight is very enlightening. He thinks that Duran looks weak and sluggish, and believes this to be because he came down to 154 too early during training. He basically believes Duran overtrained, I guess.

During that fight Leonard also says that Duran was immensely strong in Montreal, but considerably weaker in New Orleans. On other occassions he has also said that he wanted, and got, a quick rematch with Duran because he knew he wouldn't be ready in time.

So Leonard has actually validated two of the most common excuses Duran's fan boys make for him.