Georges "The Orchid Man" Carpentier

Yeah we wont rehash that one but even to lose a close fight to a peak Jeannette would be beyond all but a handful of the fighters of that decade.

 

On one of the threads where i was tracking who beat who with notional ratings, I noticed that Carpentier came into the rankings with a win over one of the top contenders very early in his career (cant remember who it was that he actually beat). Interestingly, he did so much sooner than many of the other fighters of the time, who are often considered to have been outstanding heavyweights. What was interesting though, was that Carpentier had actually had about three years off, soon after this. I hadnt previously realised this, but surely if this is the case, then his abilities would have been greatly effected, just like such a break affected Ali, Louis, and any other fighter who has had to take it. When you consider that he did again raise to the top after the break, and get a Dempsey fight, it surely does suggest that he might have been a pretty decent fighter, even if somewhat overated by some.

What effect do you think that the break had on his fighting abilities? And incidentally, what was it for, i assume it was something to do with the war although i dont have the dates of the break handy.

 

The war was where Carpentier lost three years. When France and Germany went to war Carpentier enlisted to serve his country. Its hard to say how the war affected his ability. He did lose some of his prime years, there is no denying that but Im not sure his career was altered dramatically beyond that.

At HW he was never going to beat Willard (who was far to big and strong), Dempsey, or Wills and there were several other I doubt he would have beaten as well: Johnson and Langford to name a couple. Im not convinced by his win over Gunboat Smith and doubt he would have been able to repeat and Im not convinced that he somehow deserved to beat Jeannette or could have done so in a second attempt. McVey would have knocked his head clean off. He may not have even been able to beat Big Bill Brennan who was a heck of a puncher and could box as well and was a big, strong guy. Brennan showed enough savvy, strength, and power against Dempsey to think he would have handled Carpentiers one dimensional 1-2-clinch style. Carp might have had a chance against Fulton based on Fulton's weak chin but Fulton wasnt exactly a total pushover either, in addition to that he was friggin huge and probably would have creamed Carpentier with his first punch because Fulton had a heck of a punch and the size to be able to deliver it to Carp first.

At LHW he was never going to beat Greb, Kid Norfolk, Tommy Gibbons, and as stated in some of my previous posts Im not even sure he beat Levinsky legitimately. I would give him no better than a 50/50 chance of beating Miske (who I think is a bit overrated today). Throw in Jack Dillon who didnt really start fading until about 1917 when his defeat at the hands of Greb signalled his descent and Greb's rise and you have a pretty formidible group of guys that Carpentier would have had to have beaten (without a fix) to prove he was the best.

You can add at least a handful of talented middleweights that even giving away weight to Carp could have probably beaten him.

So you see, his situation in terms of his standing was unlikely to have altered much because at any given time during his career when he was active there were at least a handfull of fighters in every division from MW to HW who were at least capable of beating him going in if not overwhelming favorites (and of the guys who would be "capable" of beating him most would have been big favorites).


I just think Carpentier was pigeonholed by his style which was very one dimensional and predictable and the fact that he was often fighting with deck stacked in his favor. That, more than the war, hampered his development and that ******ation of his development began very early and had really been ingrained long before the war.

Carpentier's development as a fighter coincides with one of the most interesting periods in boxing history, where, prior to WW1 a colony of American fighters went abroad and planted the seed of boxing in continental Europe. This seed germinated very quickly and resulted in a boom in boxing that drew some of the most talented fighters in history who had extended stays in Europe and taught many of the upcoming European fighters. Carpentier was a direct result of this and his tutelage under Willie Lewis (who some believe invented the 1-2, and who would go on to become an expert handler and trainer) and other well known american boxers gave him a wonderful advantage over some of the other European fighters who were still basically in the dark ages as far as skill was concerned.

 

Anyone have any thoughts on Carpentier's demo job on Kid Lewis? It took him less then a round to stop the extremely durable Lewis.

Levinsky was also very durable and he went 4 rounds before George stopped him.

Those are pretty devastating results.

 

As stated several times before the Levinsky fight was thought by most to be a fix orchestrated to give Dempsey-Carpentier legitimacy.

Lets put the Lewis fight in perspective: Three years after Carpentier stopped Lewis Lewis was able to make 138 pounds. Carpentier weighed one of the highest weights of his career for Lewis. That fight was a mismatch that was only made because of the drawing power of both fighters. People will tell you that Lewis deserved the fight because he was the British LHW champ but those same people need to keep in mind that Lewis won that somewhat dubious title by beating Boy McCormick. McCormick was a capable fighter but never a legit LHW. He weighed 162 for the Lewis fight and was coming off a stoppage loss. There was nothing in Lewis' record to suggest he should be in the ring with a light heavyweight. Lewis was already on the downside of his career after having been a pro for 14 years simply did not have the frame to compete against these much larger fighters. Taking all of that into account it has still been alleged by those who were there that Carpentier hit Lewis on the break when the referee ordered them to seperate and Lewis turned his head to complain. The films of this are somewhat unclear as the referee is clearly trying to break them but there is action from both fighters before Lewis is knocked out. Either way I dont think a LHW beating a WW who is past his best is anything to brag about in any era. If Harry Greb beat Benny Leonard (which would be a similar weight disparity) I dont think anyone would be rating that as one of Greb's finer moments...

 

Alot of interesting information on this thread re Carp...I can defineitely see the arguement that he was overrated...but he hung in, showed heart and extended Tunney at the very least...cannot take that away from him.

 

Georges Carpentier was a great fighter. Terrific puncher for his size.
Men who shared a ring with him rated him highly, such as Tommy Loughran (who fought a far past-prime Carpentier) and Gunboat Smith.

I dont see the sense in singling him out for "fixes" or "favouritism" or "suspicion" in the way his career was orchestrated.
The cloud of suspicion hangs over the whole sport of professional boxing, the whole business relies a bit on deceit and hype and making things seem other to what they are.
All the great fighters of that time (and probably any time) fought some set-ups and flat-out fixes, and had accusations of crookedness thrown on one or more of their fights. And many threw fights too.
And most of that stuff probably went unnoted.
Professional boxing is what it is. Some of it is rigged. We know that.
I notice a very small few great fighters get used as scapegoats though. Often Europeans.

 

I personally think Carpentier was a great fighter - amazingly fast right hand and great mover too - and i think his style would've translated very well to the modern ring too - i think he's an ATG light heavyweight definately - my grandad really raved about him - I know an old Carp wasn't particularly impressed with Tunney after having fought him - interested to get peoples opinions on how the young prime Carp would've gone with Tunney - Carp did well against say Joe Jeanette too - love watching the Dempsey fight - he clearly had some balls going in with Demp - because he must've known he didn't really stand any chance - but to go in there and test it - he got on the run and tried everything he could to ping Dempsey with big shots with everything he could muster every so often but he wasn't going to hurt Dempsey really - but he was a classical fighter and could slug to - the match against Siki is a wild affair probably fixed from the outset - there's so much faking going on in that one it's hilarious

 

This is true...you can't really absolutely laud a Tunney, then turn around and totally dismiss Carp. A bit of favoritsm going on maybe?...That's okay everybody has thier favorites, but you have to keep it in perspective too.
Historians on here know this better than I...but the Siki fight was fixed, but Siki became pissed and started to really go after Carp...Carp getting KO'd was not the intended result.

 

Jeannette was 35, but to be fair to Carpentier, Georges was 16 lbs lighter.

 

I dont understand why people keep bringing up the Tunney fight. Carpentier was only competetive in MAYBE three rounds. Beyond that he was totally dominated and got a pretty brutal ass kicking from Tunney. If you are going to judge that fight by the highlights then dont even comment because the complete fight is a lot different than the back and forth boxing match that HLs make it look.

 

I think most people actually agree on Carp and I agree with Klompton, his harshest critic on here, when he says that there were several middleweights that might beat him, at least 5 or so l/h's and probably 10/15 hw's. He was also marketed very well and with his looks, charm, war record etc he was the Kournikova of his time. But he could fight on the level, was brave and hit hard, he was no fraud either. The truth lies somewhere twixt the hype and the put-down.

 

and would go on to draw with Wills, beat Langford twice, Battling Jim Johnson , Norfolk and a slew of good contender types, indeed he was unbeaten in his next 22 fights. Joe didnt have his first pro fight until he 25 and like late starters in Mercer, Willard etc peaked late, I think.

 

What is known about the Carpentier vs Gunboat Smith fight. Carpentier won on fouls, but i see that Gunboat prior to the bout had beat a string of great fighters, including Langford. Was this fight fixed or a poor refereeing decision or did Carpentier deserve a win?

 

According to most ringside reports, and those who saw the films afterwards Gunboat was dropped early and hurt, it took him a few rounds to recover but once he did he started to take it to Carpentier who seemed troubled. Carpentier had been ducking very low throughout the fight and Smith landed a bomb that dropped Carpentier to his knees, Smith started another punch not realizing Carpentier was not merely ducking but was indeed down, he apparently tried to pull the punch in mid flight because most describe it as being very weak and merely skimming the top of Carpentier's head or hair. At this point Descamps, Carpentiers manager jumped into the ring and started screaming foul (as he often did) Suddenly Carpentier grabbed his head in his hands and began rolling around milking it for all it was worth. The referee disqualified Smith but later admitted that he felt the punch had done no damage but disqualified Smith on a strict adherence to the rules. Even fans who admired Carpentier were outraged that the fight was stopped in this manner given that no damage was done and that the fight was still in its early stages.