Yea, I reckon I can defend that assertion. Mickey Walker, Carmen Basilio, Henry Armstrong, Joe Walcott, you name 'em. Unless a fighter brings some kind of advanced trickery to the table, they ain't beating Gavilan. And even those ones would have their work cut out. Don't disappoint, Janitor
I have to agree with you, I give only Walcott because of his unorthodox style and above- average 147 lbs- power a chance to beat Gavilan, Kid Gavilan had the tricky style and especially the iron chin to make look most WW- brawlers, who were great, stupid...
Okay I'll bite....I think that you're right...Gavilan comes out ahead against every welterweight brawler. But here is a pick....Marcel Cerdan at welter. I've read that he could resemble Greb at times with his fighting (but he could also box). Cerdan looks good on film.
I disagree with Cerdan. He was a good fighter, but he´s IMO very overrated head-to-head. When you study his record and his opponents, you know what I mean... IMO Gavilan would box Marcel´s ears off...
Yes.... very possible. It seems opinions vary to the extreme re Cerdan. Herb Goldman rates him very highly, as does Bert Sugar.... But the record.....:huh
Yes, quite probably. His skills and, especially, his chin would be too much. Even Sugar Ray said Gavilan had the best chin of anyone he ever fought.
Bert Sugar rate him p4p as the 30th best fighter or so in the long history of sport, IMO that´s ridiculous. He retired with an outstanding 111-4- record, but look at some of his opponents: Over 100 fights, he finally fought his first decent opponents (Abrahms), than he lost to the mediocre French fighter Del.?, and beat him in a rematch, than he beat a total shot Zale (who quit on his stool, retired after this fight), and than he lost to LaMotta, IMO Cerdan is clearly one of the worst fighters ever who came in the IBHOF... here´s a link where he fought the Italian bum Manca for the EBU- belt: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ODqXNsMTQ5A
Perhaps surprisingly, I think he could outslug them all. Well, when I say that I mean he could, when encountered up close, give at least good as he takes and sometimes overcome his opposition. Gavilan was a good boxer - poised, fundamentally sound, smart. But he might be a bit overrated in this area, or misperceived... They didn't regard him as one of the most exciting fighters of the era because he boxed a lot - no, Gavilan often got into trench wars and duked it out. Gavilan's best assets were his durability, stamina, ferocity and speed - he was a real tough nut to crack and would fight right until the end. Someone like Mickey Walker was probably stronger and harder hitting, but could he conquer the sudden surges of Gavilan? To see the latter really let go with both fists puts a smile on my face - those bolos... That's the stuff which would win the fights against the greats. I'm watching Gavilan's fight with Gil Turner right now on my other monitor; Turner is quick, active, aggressive and strong. He hit fairly hard and shows a good bit of skill as well; a well equipped fighter from the angle in which I can see. Gavilan is prodding him with jabs most of the time, but occasionally they let go in a startling frenzy, hooking and uppercutting. Turner's windmill right hands have caught Gavilan flush a couple of times but they had zero effect. None whatsoever. And if you can't knock Gavilan out, what can you do (Turner just landed a flush right cross, Gavilan blinked - I think. Maybe not)? Because Gavilan certainly isn't going to sit back and let someone outpoint him, or not someone who's in his face like Henry Armstrong, at least. An interesting point to note in this Turner fight is that Gavilan is often the aggressor; he's the one edging forward, he's the one backing the seemingly stronger Turner into the ropes. They're off the ropes now - Gavilan is driving Turner to the other side of the ring. Turner might be a bit tired. Before, the landed punches were equal between the two; now Gavilan definitely has the edge. The action is astounding - Gavilan's stamina is astounding. Would Henry Armstrong's sustained pressure really be enough to outwork Gavilan? I don't believe so. Gavilan would always have the edge at distance, because he was a quality long range fighter - but he'd stay with Armstrong on the inside all the way - at the very least. He'd likely frazzle Armstrong on several occasions with his flurries. I think it would be unfair to say Gavilan could potentially make Armstrong look foolish... But I think he would surprise us all in how easy he'd make it look. Armstrong's punches would have little to no effect; his relentless pace would only be matched; in the long range fighting he would fall short. Back to the fight; Gavilan just broke Turner. He made him crumble with some solid right hands and the legs just gave way. He now has him on the ropes, pummeling with both hands. Turner gets to the middle of the ring, jelly-legged, but is soon caught on the ropes adjacent to the ones before; he's proper in the **** as three big, consecutive right hands bounce off his jaw. Now, Turner was no great like Walker, Basilio, Walcott or Armstrong - however, he was very strong, very game and probably threw more punches than all except Armstrong. I produce this fight merely as an example of what Gavilan could do - he could beat someone at their own game.
Great post, I don´t need to respond or write something more about Gavilan because I agree with everything you wrote.
Basilio would always be Gavilan's hardest fight of the brawlers I mentioned, because he held back the most. Basilio was a much smarter boxer than most give him credit for - he did sometimes take punches unnecessarily, but then at other times he'd show a good jab and deftly slip and duck straights and hooks. I reckon that the more aggressive a fighter is, the better Gavilan will fair against him.
Yeah, prolly a bit too comfortable and suited at 147 for Hank, tho it would be sensationally competitive. Hank might be the best shout.