Joe Baksi destroys Woodcock

Discussion in 'Classic Boxing Forum' started by SuzieQ49, Jul 18, 2018.


  1. mcvey

    mcvey VIP Member Full Member

    97,108
    27,982
    Jun 2, 2006
    At least you didnt dismiss it as I was half expecting.Trust me Woodcock wasn't much.
     
  2. mcvey

    mcvey VIP Member Full Member

    97,108
    27,982
    Jun 2, 2006
    Bruce was a decent enough guy who only wanted enough dough to buy a small holding ,throwing him in with Baksi was stupid he never really got over it. When he retired , blind in one eye,he bought a pub.
     
  3. SuzieQ49

    SuzieQ49 The Manager Full Member

    37,067
    3,701
    Sep 14, 2005

    That’s sad he went blind. Did the pub workout for him?
     
  4. mcvey

    mcvey VIP Member Full Member

    97,108
    27,982
    Jun 2, 2006
    At first he did okay.
     
  5. SuzieQ49

    SuzieQ49 The Manager Full Member

    37,067
    3,701
    Sep 14, 2005
    The fight looks on the level, albeit neither fighter was particularly impressive. Woodcock had a Strong right hand, Lesnevich couldn’t stop it or take it.

    Lesnevich’s timing looks way off and I suspect he is past his prime here from the long layoff. Lesnevich simply wasn’t a heavyweight. Wasn’t big or strong enough.

    The fact Lesnevich still beat Mauriello 2x in 1947 shows me Tami’s deficiencies and that he belonged in the light heavyweight division.
     
  6. janitor

    janitor VIP Member Full Member

    71,341
    26,738
    Feb 15, 2006
    You are practically arguing that Mauriello is no good because he lost to Lesnevich, Lesnevich is no good because he lost to Woodcock, and Woodcock is no good because he lost to Mauriello.

    That logic is too circular!
     
  7. SuzieQ49

    SuzieQ49 The Manager Full Member

    37,067
    3,701
    Sep 14, 2005
    I said Tami belonged in the light heavyweight division. He had a tire around his midsection against Louis. He started his career at 144. You don’t think he could have made 175? I think had he stayed lean and in shape at 175 he could have had a better longer career.

    I think losing to an over the hill Lesnevich by knockout in 1947 is a bad loss.

    Do you think Lesnevich looks good here vs woodcock on film? I don’t. His speed, athleticism, punching ability doesn’t look good. He looks weathered and aged.

    Woodcock is young, strong with a right hand, but lacks skill and defense. That Lesnevich wasn’t able to expose him shows how far back he had gone.


    What if Lesnevich or woodcock was in the ring with Walcott or Charles here in 47? Think they have a chance? Baksi looks much better on film than both and he got badly outboxed by both Walcott and Charles
     
  8. mcvey

    mcvey VIP Member Full Member

    97,108
    27,982
    Jun 2, 2006
    Yes you have to factor in he beat Mauriello twice while probably significantly past his prime. Fair is fair.
     
  9. SuzieQ49

    SuzieQ49 The Manager Full Member

    37,067
    3,701
    Sep 14, 2005
    This content is protected

    Yeah how do you think Gus looks here? His reflexes look a bit shot to me. Woodcock was wide open and Gus couldn’t expose him. Part of it was Gus had trouble with woodcocks strength
     
  10. janitor

    janitor VIP Member Full Member

    71,341
    26,738
    Feb 15, 2006
    I am guessing that he couldn't, or he would probably have done so when the heavyweight competition got too stiff for him.
    On paper yes, but Mauriello had a lot of ring wear himself, and seems to have declined fairly rapidly in 47.
    Whether a fighter looks good on film or not, is not always a reliable indicator of how they will perform.
    I would be very confident of Walcott or Charles beating either, but that doesn't mena that hey did not have some legitimacy as contenders.
     
  11. SuzieQ49

    SuzieQ49 The Manager Full Member

    37,067
    3,701
    Sep 14, 2005
    Woodcocks trainer should have stopped the fight before the second round started...corner retirement. He took way too much damage
     
  12. SuzieQ49

    SuzieQ49 The Manager Full Member

    37,067
    3,701
    Sep 14, 2005
    I don’t buy the Mauriello possibly being over the hill. He was 23 years old in 1947. Whose physically past his prime at 23? You’re basically still a kid. You can argue he let his body go and looked out of shape, but that’s about it.
     
  13. SuzieQ49

    SuzieQ49 The Manager Full Member

    37,067
    3,701
    Sep 14, 2005
    “Same legitimacy”

    Do you believe Woodcock or Lesnevich had the same legitimacy as Walcott and Charles as heavyweight contenders?

    Do you believe Lesnevich had the same legitimacy as Charles as a light heavyweight contender?
     
  14. janitor

    janitor VIP Member Full Member

    71,341
    26,738
    Feb 15, 2006
    He had 80+ professional fights at this point, and had been fighting world class opposition since he was 18.

    I would say that his was a formula for an early burn out.
     
    mcvey likes this.
  15. mcvey

    mcvey VIP Member Full Member

    97,108
    27,982
    Jun 2, 2006
    That's a very reasonable statement.