I did a thread on him a little while ago. Fearless fighter who in the snippets of film we have looks very good. Beat the crap out of Armstrong. Took one arguably 2 from LaMotta while being the lighter man. Tons of losses which seem shady in alot of cases along with some very big wins. The loses make him a bit of an enigma but all in all I think he was a very very smart tough fighter who I have a high opinion of.
Despite having many losses and being quite inconsistent, Fritzie Zivic certainly was an outstanding or great fighter with plenty of savvy and skills. Many of his losses took place in very close bouts or when Zivic had quite a few bouts within a very small period of time. What really convinced me that Zivic was something special was his four bouts with Jake LaMotta. LaMotta was an extremely strong middleweight while Zivic was a welterweight. While Zivic won only one of the bouts with LaMotta, three of the bouts were extremely close and could have gone either way while LaMotta probably had a decent margin in their final bout, which still was highly competitive. By the way, it is very difficult to find any bout of LaMotta's which wasn't exciting. - Chuck Johnston
I read an article years ago in some obscure boxing magazine by Zivic himself about that 1st bout with Armstrong which Zivic won the title. He wrote about his strategy vs Armstrong...and the fact that it was successful of course. I came away very impressed by Fritzie and believe now like I believed then that he was a clever, formidable fighter with a high boxing IQ, and a never ending bag of dirty tricks...in fact, he was a virtuoso of dirty fighting...raising it to an art form. . He beat Armstrong again in a rematch, winning on a bloody 12th round tko to defend the crown he won. After losing to Freddie Cochrane, fought Armstrong a 3rd time, this time losing a 12 round decision. I have always thought that this fight in particular was unnecessary, in that he had already beaten Hank twice...why fight him again? But Zivic was one of those guys like Maxie Rosenbloom, Greb (in earlier times) who fought all the time, ...even vs guys who they had beaten multiple times. Oh, as an addendum, I musta forgot (thank you Roy Jones Jr)....Zivic had This content is protected
Exactly - people see 40 losses, for example, while completely eluding to gage it against 200 fights and 160 VICTORIES for example... it always befuddles me, this short sightedness - mostly Innocent, I might add - although some employ it deliberately to try to undermine a Fighter(s)... Fritzie Zivic was a GREAT Fighter.
He would have a field day if he boxed now. I could just see him covered in tats, with a bevy of molls screaming him on ringside.
When guys like Robinson and Conn say that fighting you was like going to boxing university you probably had at least a little more than the average. The thing that has always fascinated me about Zivic was the variety of his weapons- when you read about his fights you will read that he beat so and so with his jab. Or with counter right hands, or with hooks to the body. Zivic was a guy that I heard a lot about growing up. My father was born and raised in Pittsburgh and we are Croatian and my father boxed during the 1930s so...He eventually sparred with Zivic in an exhibition in about 1943 while my father was in the army. I own a Fritzie Zivic autograph that he signed for my aunt in 1940. My partner in the boxing game has turned his home into a museum/shrine of boxing memorabilia and the autograph is framed and on his wall. I think that Zivic is very over looked when it comes to fantasy fights. In my opinion he would take guys like Oscar, Shane to school.
Saw a photo recently of Zivic standing next to LaMotta after beating Jake. LaMotta looked like he'd been beaten up and was still dazed after the fight. Fritzie had a lot of wear and tear but he was smiling. I think Zivic is probably over looked quite often as you said due to so many seemingly inexplicable losses to fighters that on paper he should thrash. I suppose fighting so often can lead to that but their does seem to be more to it than that. The mob was quite active in boxing in those days
keep in mind that some of those fighters whom he should trash, were also noted & capable fighters too... especially back then.
I really wish we had more tape of all the fights back in the 30s and 40s. So many great fighters fighting a variety of competition on a (generally) consistent schedule
The game of today and of Zivic's day was sooooooo different. At one point of Zivic's career on the way up he lost 7 straight fights. Anyone today would have retired after the 3rd loss and would have had huge gaps between the losses as they would have to mentally and emotionally come to grips with a loss. How many fighters of today would give up gobs of weight to go at it with fighters like LaMotta and Conn? Just think, Zivic fought a 10-rounder with Kid Azteca in San Antonio and after the fight hopped a plane to Beaumont, Texas because he was signed for another 10-rounder the next night with Pat Saia. BTW, Zivic won both 10-rounders on points. Also, he did that while on leave from the Service. Today you'd be lucky if a fighter fights twice a year never mind over 2 days. Different game today. Todays fighters have enormous amounts of time between fights for preparation for an opponent, dietary needs, getting their team together and their strength and conditioning coaches and their strategies set. What do you think was on Zivic's mind on that plane to Beaumont? Probably nothing more than who he was being lined up for after the Pat Saia bout.
Crazy TRUE. yet it surprises so much when we see on these Boxing Sites that These FACTS are Quickly Forgotten in conversations and discussions about Fighters & Eras... as I always state as an example; " If RJJ fought then, would he have encountered a Tarver MUCH Sooner? " Of Course he Would Have!
