Discussion in 'Classic Boxing Forum' started by Showstopper97, Mar 10, 2021.
There’s zero footage of Rosenbloom, so I’m not sure how anyone can say one way or the other. I’ve always been given the impression he was a Loughran/Slattery type with Calzaghe punching technique. Either way, doesn’t seem like a fighter lacking in speed by any measure.
I've never heard anything of his speed mentioned aside from that John Henry Lewis had a vast speed advantage over him. I doubt he was downright slow, but I don't think he had the speed to match his greatness while making up for his complete lack of power. If he did, we'd have heard of it IMO.
Not the speed to match his greatness. We’d certainly have heard of it otherwise, I agree. But there’s a tremendous amount of middle ground between that and lacking speed outright.
How many highly touted fighters renowned for their footwork and defensive mastery lacked speed?
Oh I agree, he definitely wouldn't have been slow as molasses.
Where did you read that in regards to the Rosenbloom/Lewis fights, by the way. I’d love a link, if you got it.
He was missing another ingredient listed in the thread title.
What would that be.., great?
He held the WBC title, fought for 6 championships, won silver at the Olympics , arguably beat Named, went the distance with both him and Morales and was never down in his career.
I think he qualifies
Losing to a great fighter (arguably two) doesn’t make you great. McCullough was Mickey Ward level at best. His chin was great, though.
Well thought out reply, and on the money, well done. keep well.
Thinking maybe : Nicolino Locche ?
Well, We are kinda diving deep to find good/greats without speed or power. Slim pickings
I would have said Ward, but he has some power and also an all time great body shot.
Wayne McCullough is a better fighter than Mickey Ward ....lets give him that much lol