Has Bob Fitzsimmons Got A Legit Claim As The Gretest Fighter Of All Time?

I can't see a good case for ranking him above the likes of Langford, Greb, Robinson, Armstong & co myself, but I wouldn't have any qualms seeing him in a top 10 though. Like you say, champion at 160, 175 and HW, he's strong, powerful and tough, and with wins like Dempsey, Maher, Sharkey, Corbett, Ruhlin and Gardner his resumé isn't bad either.

 

No.

 

No because he was ina prehistoric era and had very low ability by modern standards. The era had with poor training, poor technique, poor physical performance and poor standards.

Ever heard of Don Lippincott, he was 100m world Record Holder in 1912, running it in 10.6seconds. Is there a case for Don Lippincott being rated over Usain Bolt? Ofcourse not

 

Did someone just mention Bob Fitzsimmons and then say something about 'bad training'. Heh.

What the hell does 'bad training' mean anyway? Like you have to be told how a do a push-up? Fitzsimmons was a cardiovascular monster who trained from sunrise to sunset.

I find it hard to make a case for fighters to rank above him! A natural middleweight who made a habit of sparking out legit heavy's while scratching at the SMW poundage.

 

I think he has a claim yeah.

Although I don't necessarily think he's a lock for beating every fighter around the 168-175lb mark. Although if he's allowed to wear his gloves (which I allow in hypothetical matchups) he's gonna' do some damage despite any evolutions in technique that may have taken place between, for arguments sake, Fitzsimmons and Matthew Saad Muhammad.

So, in short, his achievements mark him out to be a fighter of some worth, and some magnitude.

Do I think he's infallible though? No. Can I envision him being beaten fairly emphatically by fighters round his weight class? There's not much footage, and grainy as it is and glittering as his reputation may be, I'm gonna' say yes.

I don't hold him in the high esteem I do for Henry Armstrong, Ray Robinson or Roberto Duran. But in terms of 'how good was he for his time' I'd say pretty much the best. Therefore he has to be ranked amongst the best of all time.

 

The argument could be made, though I wouldn't personally put him at the #1 spot. I've really come along to Fitz over time. As of now I believe he's a legitimate top 10 all time great, whereas I used to have him in the 15-20 range.

 

this is the greatest bull**** i have ever red.
you have to learn to see things in perspective. bolt lives in modern times with modern training methods and modern food and so on and so on. maybe by looking at in in perspective don lipincott was a greater athlete then usain bolt who knows ??
look at cycling. fausto coppi was a great from the 40ties and 50ties. those days the material was not as good as today they didn't know so much about good food. if you take an average ahtlete from today that person will cycle faster then coppi. does that mean the modern guy is a better ahtlete ?? ofcourse not...it's a matter of perspective... and this goes for all sports.

 

Dident the legendary LA Times sportswriter jim murrey label Fitz "a stork with a backache" after reviewing film?

 

I have to say the way he constantly leans back would work for a very tall fighter, but if he tried to do that against a lot of 'modern' fighters they'd soon find ways to exploit it.

I assume upon trying so they would be hit by one of these monsterous shots? I just don't see it, though as Frazier Hook says, in terms of his era Fitz was very good. You rank him on your list depending on how favourably you view his era.

 

That he a case could be made for him should be beyond question.

He is the only middleweight since the conception of the division, ever to establish himself as the undisputed No1 heavyweight. That in itself should tell you how hard a transition that is to make. He was the first three division champ and across three divisions where the feat has never been replicated.

On top of that he is not even regarded as one of the weaker heavyweight champions by many people. A strong case could be made for a top 20 ranking in that weight class. He is certainly the best heavyweight finisher of his era and probably the best finisher of the period between John L Sullivan and Sam Langford.

Finaly, some historians do rank him as the greatest fighter of all time so they are clearly trying to make the case whether they are right or not.

 

If you think you can find a middleweright of the postwar era with a tougher training regime than Bob Fitzsimmons then good luck.