ketchel vs zale....

its a lot better than some of your match ups.i'll take ketchel

 

it would be a real humdinger:good

 

Tony could be hurt and dropped, while Stan had the stamina to knock out Joe Thomas in 32 rounds, on top of his power. This is somebody who went 20 rounds or more on eight different occasions. He took three of four from Papke, and only he ever knocked Billy out. Ketchel had terrific speed to go along with his power. That was a peak version of Langford he went six rugged rounds with. Stan had too much for Zale.

 

I like Zale.

 

I go with Ketchel but, not sure about the "terrific speed" ,against Johnson he was clearly the slower puncher.If he had terrific speed, how fast would that make Johnson?

 

with a man the size of Jack Johnson, Ketchel's only hope was not speed , but a "lucky " punch. He almost succeeded in his mission. You, or I never truly saw Ketchel on film.Aside from the Johnson fiasco, and the 20 round decision over billy Papke,when Ketchel broke a bone in his hand,we have not seen this murderous devil may care puncher who kod 49 opponents in his blazing career. I have read that piece that Hype Igoe wrote about Stanley. "All those
who have seen him,can see no others ".Were all our ancestors delusional, in their praise of Ketchel ? I think not ! Did the 49 opponents who Ketchel flattened suffer a coronary attack when they fell to the floor ? Doubt it.
He very well might have been our greatest middleweight,along with Greb, Walker, Robinson ...

 

I concur with Burt 100% on Ketchel to be honest - I just refuse to beleive how anyone who can be lionized to the extent Ketchel was could be anything less something extremely extremely great - also in my opinion if no one had told me he had a broken hand against Papke I would've said he looked pretty damn vicious in that one anyway - Tony Zale is one of my all time time favourite fighters to watch and man - no one took a punch better in my eyes - but he'd damn sure no about it when Ketchel was swinging from down home!

 

The film is the film ... Ketchel looks very crude ... Zale looks sharper, threw his punches tighter in more fluent combinations, looks quicker and better ... I'm sure Stanley was as tough and as game as they come but I also think Tony was the better puncher ...

 

For whatever it is worth, Zale is not in Ketchels class relative to their respective eras.

Even as late as Zale's era, there would have been a polite assumption that Ketchel would have slaughtered him!

 

I've said this before...while Ketchel does look crude at times, but that isn't the whole story. Just take a look at the things he does right. Ketchel is very aware of where he is in the ring, and what he is doing. He never lets his back touch the ropes (against another strong fighter in Papke). He reacts whenever Papke charges forward making him reset. Ketchel gets a lower center of gravity using his legs to push Papke to the ropes. Has infighting skills (and viciousness) that would trouble ANYONE, he gets his punches off, and smothers the opponent's returns (something a guy named Duran would do)
Being effective doesn't mean being pretty. Watching this film tells me Ketchel for all of his vicious reputation, was a thinking fighter. Old timers pick him as the best.
As for Zale...I think Ketchel would move him back, not allowing him to explode forward with his main plan of attack with that right hand to the body...If Zale isn't coming forward, he won't be as effective. I think Ketchel would stop Tony Zale.

 

I am a bit bafffled here Burt,I dont see why the quick defence, I haven't attacked Stanislaus Keical.
I think he is top 5 at middle without any question ,I picked Ketchel to beat Zale.

I just said the film of Ketchel v Johnson shows that Johnson had quicker hand speed,and , if a heavyweight has quicker handspeed than a middle weight, can that middle weight have terrific speed?

For the record, Johnson said he was astonished, how easy to hit Ketchel was .
I think there are very ,very few middles that could prevail in a shootout with Stan, maybe Ray, Fitz, Langford,thats about it.
Greb beats him imo . Monzon and Hagler go close.
I LOVE STAN.:good

 

Johnson was the Ali of his day with respect to hand speed (among other things), something sometimes difficult to clearly discern on the inferior youtube clips, slightly better videotape, and even the movie films themselves. Stan was in a situation with Jack where he had to load up and tee off a bit, and his best speed was probably not a match for Johnson's straight up, just as Jimmy Jacobs extrapolated that Robinson's speed may not have been a match for a peak Ali's straight up.