Ike Williams

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

What sort of record has he got that could propell him into a top five all-time lightweight spot?

We'll concentrate on his prime years, say, 1944-1950 (not going to just say his prime was '46-'49 where he was winning the most). It was a very deep era.

Enrique Bolanos, for instance, would be today's equivalent of a one-time IBF title holder, maybe having defended it a couple of times and losing it to Williams himself. He was a more-than-solid Mexican-American outfighter who racked up an impressive record for the era. He did lose to Williams, three times - one clear decision (which was recorded unjustly as a split decision rather than unanimous) and two punishing knockouts.

Willie Joyce was even better than Bolanos at sticking & moving, if a bit more patchy owing to his higher level of opposition. If anyone had Williams' number, it was Joyce, who beat him three times out of four, all by decision. To Williams' credit, he probably improved slightly after this period and also scored the most convincing win in their series, although these fights, despite the Bolanos wins, may give us a clue as to what kind of fighter would always give Williams trouble.

Everyone knows Beau Jack, but does everybody know how good he was? A top draw at Madison Square Garden at the time, he had beaten Fritzie Zivic, Sammy Angott, a fading but still strong Henry Armstrong and also won two out of four fights with fellow great Bob Montgomery. Ventures into welterweight would also prove mostly successful - Ike Williams turned savage in a surprising sixth round annihilation of the iron-chinned Jack.

Bob Montgomery was the contrast in style to the above mentioned Jack, being a sharper, more fluid boxer-puncher to Jack's brutish, physical bullying which was revisited by one Dick Tiger some years later. Montgomery totally white washed Williams in 1944 but in 1947 was thrashed himself and lost the lightweight title. You could argue that Montgomery was faded by this point as his career immediately drowned afterwards - or was it Williams who sank him?

Sammy Angott is probably the most underrated opponent on Williams' boxing record, mostly because people will remember Angott stopping Williams in six rounds in 1945 due to a freak injury (although in fairness Angott did well, assaulting the body). Remember, Williams had beaten Angott twice already by decision, which was no easy task as Angott had been mixing it up multiple times already versus Ray Robinson, Willie Pep, Bob Montgomery, Lew Jenkins, Fritzie Zivic and Baby Arizmendi - all Hall of Famers.

Kid Gavilan has to be the best win for Williams. A welterweight Cuban with the equivalent greatness in his own division as Ike himself. He did take revenge and beat Williams twice after, but that first fight was a special achievement, especially as Gavilan suffered the first knockdown of his career. It's like Carlos Ortiz in 1962 stepping up to split a close series of fights with Emile Griffith.

Various other 'name' fighters of the era also fell victim to Williams, including his title defences Jesse Flores, Freddie Dawson, Ronnie James and welterweights Joe Miceli, Tony Pellone, Tippy Larkin, Ralph Zannelli and Johnny Bratton, and even more contenders such as Lulu Constantino and Gene Burton. And it doesn't stop there, that's just from memory.

It's difficult to judge which fights Williams truly lost and which ones he didn't. Some are obvious, such as the fourteenth round knockout loss to the very worthy Jimmy Carter in '51, but then Carter himself would also succumb to 'the mob' later in his career, often losing a fight just to generate extra money in the rematch. Williams is known to have worn the cuffs on at least a couple of occasions, and judging by some other suspicious losses I'm wondering if he really could have fared better than he did around 1950 and '51, extending his good years.

So who's seen Williams on tape, and what do you think? And would a high lightweight ratings of #5 all-time be reasonable?

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

 

Maybe, maybe. Benny Leonard is my #1.

 

He's my favourite fighter and I still disagree with you. I wouldn't get too carried away - unless you can back it up of course? What makes him greater than say, Roberto Duran or Benny Leonard?

On my list he's #3.

 

Not sure about Blackburn, never have been... Mystery man. The lightweights are hard to rate after about #6. I mean, how do you separate Jimmy Carter and Ismael Laguna?

 

I think Benny Leonard, Pernell Whitaker and to a slightly lesser extent, Ken Buchanan would beat Williams definitively. I'm talking 2-0-1 in three fights against him, or something.

Williams would crush Joe Brown, decision Tony Canzoneri and probably Julio Cesar Chavez, too.

Ismael Laguna could go 1-2 with Williams. Carlos Ortiz, Barney Ross and Roberto Duran would also split a series, but which way it goes, I don't know. I'm quite confident that Henry Armstrong would be defeated, but Armstrong would beat a few of the movers that Williams wouldn't.

A few lesser fighters could get a win or two as well, if only to be struck down by revenge months later. It's the deepest division.

I think most of the top seven or eight welterweights would beat Williams 2-1 or even 3-0 (Robinson, Hearns, Rodriguez possibly, Leonard, Napoles too unless cut) but he'd beat a few of the lesser ones. Williams-Basilio would be a great fight, the former being primed and actually dangerous instead of past it.

Billy Graham and Kid Lewis may also be beat.

I think Joe Gans would have his nose bone driven into his skull.

But it all depends on what kind of schedule. If Williams was primed, groomed and in absolute peak condition (and so were his opponents), I'd pick him over all but about three lightweights. If he's fighting them in succession, like in real life, he is obviously going to struggle more.

 

Nice. That's two people, maybe three, he rate him above Duran.

 

Buchanan was brilliant and highly underrated. You have to be a bit special to both outbox, outfight (if only by slight margins) and even hurt Ismael Laguna - twice. If not for Duran, I'd expect Buchanan to have eventually split a couple of fights with a prime Esteban De Jesus, losing and regaining the title, then have defended it about another five times against, say, Ray Lampkin, Rodolfo Gonzalez, a bald Carlos Ortiz and a couple of others, before eventually losing the title again in a valiant effort against someone like Edwin Viruet, which would just be a case of Buchanan aging and slowing. He'd retire as one of the consensus greats of the division. And especially without Duran there, he'd rate about #4?

I disagree about middleweight. More pound-for-pound greats at lightweight, many more infact, with just as much depth down the line. For my money it goes:

1. Lightweight
2. Welterweight
3. Light heavyweight & middleweight

Anyway, back on topic. I'm not sold on miniature Joe Walcott, or Gans for that matter...