Jack Dempsey Vs. A black 120 pound Crack head who never boxed

It makes you wonder.
It's like those boxing manuals and textbooks from early 1900s, with a multitude of techniques that weren't even used by champions until 50 years later.

 

No, I dont.
Perhaps you're misunderstanding me. I dont think there's enough film to make an assessment of what did (and what didn't) exist in the era, whereas you seem to think there might be.
I think there's merely enough film to talk about what you can see on those particular films, but without extending that to generalizations on the era.

No, there's a tipping point, a threshold. At a certain point we have enough footage to compare or make assumptions.
Just like in surveys, exit polls, etc. where a sample of a certain size will yield fairly accurate results for the whole population, but with a inadequate sample the results would be way off.
I believe ancient pre-1905 footage is some way beneath that threshold.

I think a lot of the Jack Johnson-era footage is legible. Not sure about 1905 or before though.
True, the sample is still a bit small, and I'm still hesistant to make generalizations on the era, or even a fighter such as Johnson, but I can see that some championship fighting of that time looked different to anything you might expect to see on TV in 2000s, and probably for the reasons I stated, but I dont see a level of technique that hasn't yet become advanced.

I have no idea why you keep portraying me as wanting to throw away hours of film. :huh

Actually, most fans would agree with me.
In summary, I'm saying we dont like to judge any fighter off of only one or two fights, or fragments of two or three, of poor quality.
In summary, I'm saying we dont like to judge any entire era off of a few scattered fights.

 

.......... and are you saying you can clearly see Corbett throwing rat-a-tat combinations against Fitzsimmons ?

The three-punch combos Holyfield throws at Bowe are hard enough to count on the quality film we have.
I seriously doubt the Corbett-Fitz camera would have even picked up a combination like that.
That's why I say I cannot tell whether Corbett is or is not. It appears he throws a punch followed by another and another, but not sure any of that qualifies as "combination punching" rather than a sustained attack of blows.
Not that i put a premium on one over the other.

 

This content is protected

jack dempsey stab victim croydon^^^


not funny.

happened in real life

http://www.thisiscroydontoday.co.uk...ob-stabbed/article-850167-detail/article.html



A teenager stabbed as he made his way home from a night out has welcomed the nine-year jail term handed out to his attacker.


Jack Dempsey was randomly slashed with a knife in the early hours of the morning as he cut through an Old Coulsdon churchyard.

Razib Quraishi had followed the 18-year-old off a bus before attacking him from behind.

After seeing the 25-year-old knifeman sentenced, Jack told the Advertiser: "He's not mental but he's a danger to society.

"I'm glad of the sentence because he's got nine years. I'm just relieved it's all over."

As well as admitting last June 11's attack on Jack, Quraishi, from Rickman Hill, Coulsdon, also pleaded guilty to stabbing a 62-year-old man 10 days later in Tower Hamlets.

This content is protected

 

Thanks! Do anyone think this fight even comes close to say Marciano-Charles, Ali-Frazier or Holyfield-Bowe in terms of skill? I think there's a huge gulf.

 

For me it's very, very clearly less skilled. I think boxing developed tremendously from 1900 to ca 1930-1940. Joe Louis is on a wholly different level compared to these guys.

 

That doesn't mean I don't find this time and these fighters very interesting, though. Or that I denigrate them. They were pioneers and very, very tough guys. Can't help but replaying Johnsons story about how he took on Choynski, knowing he'd get KO'd, just to learn from him.

 

You use the terms "evolve" and "advance" in regards to "technique".
That can be interpreted as "technique has become better", although you might not mean that.
Many people on this thread, and this board, do think like that, and flat-out claim earlier fighters were unskilled brawlers, so forgive me if I take issue with those kind of statements.
If you mean modern fighters have evolved to suit the modern rules, then, yes, of course, but I do point out they do so with access to exactly the same toolbox of techniques. They just might favour some over others.

I believe Corbett and Johnson, for example, most probably did adapt their styles when fighting 4- and 6- round bouts to fighting unlimited finish fights.

OK.

No.

Yes.
I can see that Corbett is quite nimble, seems to move well, and these guys knock each other down, and Fitz's body punch KO is there too, Corbett is in distress at the end etc.
But I'm not going to pretend that any intricacies of the punching and boxing are legible, and that matters of their technique are discussable on the grounds of this film.

I mean, imagine if you were training a fighter and you were sent film of that quality to prepare for an opponent. You'd still not have much of anything to go on.

That's reality. I'm not going to pretend that these old flickery fragmented films tell us an awful lot more than they do.
And the Jim Jeffries' fights are even worse ....

Yes. And many have strong opinions on fighters they haven't seen, and haven't heard about from anyone who has seen. Based on not much at all.
I cant help that.

But most here would also not dare to have any sort of strong opinion on, say, Marvin Hagler if they have only seen a few minutes of him.
They would utterly agree with me that they need to see more to judge.

But because there's so little to see of the old-timers, everyone seems to think they have a right (or a duty) to form a strong opinion based on very little. Suddenly 5 or 10 minutes of shadowy film becomes a gateway to forming a comprehensive view of a man's style and ability.

and the other 70% are clairvoyants in regular conversation with the ghost of John L. Sullivan ?

To my eyes, the footage is not legible enough to make the statements you make.
Maybe my eyes are bad, or you've seen better quality film.
I've never denied that lessons can be learned, just not to the extent you might claim.
I said Corbett-Fitz shows "not much of anything", I dont dismiss it as totally useless and totally void.
It's better than nothing.

 

Yes. You said something about him shitting his pants and falling over at the sight of black fighters.

You mean as opposed to the HOFers and world champions he's shown KOing in that clip?

 

I don't know about 1905, but we can see it at least as early as 1913, and from someone other than Benny Leonard:

[yt]WJj8eUKEzAA[/yt]