The most impressive thing about Carp to me would be Tommy Laughran praising him so AND at such a late point in his career, 1926 http://news.google.com/newspapers?i...IBAJ&pg=3941,83932&dq=given-him-by-carpentier http://news.google.com/newspapers?i...&pg=5815,3680954&dq=carpentier+loughran&hl=en
I couldn't help but notice the account of Walcott and Lavigne's first bout on your page, Senya. I can't give a man credit for a win when it was agreed upon prior that were he to last the distance, he'd get the verdict. Those circumstances are baffling to me in their acceptance, even if Walcott agreed to the terms prior. Going by the round by round, it would appear that Walcott did much the better of the work throughout most of the bout, though Lavigne came on stronger in the end. I'd love to see a next-day report of the rematch.
http://chroniclingamerica.loc.gov/lccn/sn85066387/1897-10-30/ed-1/seq-8/ http://chroniclingamerica.loc.gov/lccn/sn85066387/1897-10-30/ed-1/seq-9/
Great stuff, Senya. Thanks a lot. Going by the round by round it would seem that Lavigne set the higher pace and kept it going through his varied onslaught and, in particular, his body-punching which eventually did Walcott in, though it seems to have been a two-way barn-burner of the highest order for the most part, regardless. After briefly skimming the second clipping it would seem that there may've been some extenuating circumstances prior to the fight involving Walcott's condition, which seemed to have taken it's toll by the mid-rounds. I'll get around to reading it in full later to see how much merit I put into it. This kind of info is invaluable.
Great posts Steve. Very informative. I know Carp said he took a thrashing from Papke and that it was his toughest bout. What did the reports say about this? Or how about the Klaus fight? I've seen that video and it looked like Frank outroughed him. What's does your research show on those two bouts?
Both bouts were very similar with a lot of infighting. Both fighters were not hard to find and not afraid to take a punch to land one and as such Carpentier got his blows in, particularly against Klaus but both men continued to roll on, bore in, and use their strength and physicality to wear Carpentier down. As the fights progressed Carpentier became progressively weaker and took more and more punishment, particularly in the Klaus fight. By the end of the Klaus fight Carpentier was a mess and was beginning to vomit or spit blood from the internal damages from the bad body beating Klaus had given him. Descamps was frantic at the site of this to the point where some ringside thought he would lose his mind. They tried to restrain him but he burst into the ring and got Carpentier DQd rather than see him lose by stoppage or take more punishment to the end, which he felt might kill him.
The more I read, the less I think of Descamps rather than Carpentier, although it's quite obvious Carpentier was no elite.
Tommy Loughran goes into some detail about Carpentier in In This Corner (by Peter Heller) and indeed rates him very highly. Loughran doesn't seem to be one to talk baloney about his boxing career judging from that segment and other interviews, so I take his word as worth a lot more than some of the "experts" here. Carpentier could fight. In fact he was a great fighter. If he wasn't as great in his time as some of the less famous men of that time, that shows how great the era was.
That is one thing you have to say about Frank Klaus- the longer a fight went the stronger he seemed to get. He and Bat Nelson were never made for 6 and 8 round fights. It took them at least 10 rounds just to start getting warmed up!
He was not a great fighter. Great fighters dont lose every important fight on their resume, or win their biggest fights by back room shinnanigans...
I take your point too and it's hard to know when his prime was, he was a fighter who was allways in condition. BTW Carp was a teenager when he fought Papke and Klaus, bit like an 18yo fighting Pavic to-day and Carp appears to have fought 18 rounds as a 14yo!