Marcel Cerdan or Marcel Thil?

I dont know where I would rank Thil or Cerdan overall. That isnt the point. I also dont care where other people rank them. What is pertinent to the argument is who I think was the better MW. Thats Thil to me.

Thil was as legitimate a champion as there was during that era. The ONLY reason he wasnt given more credit was because he wasnt American and more importantly he wasnt from New York.

 

Anyone who is prepared to hand over $$$'s can be an IBRO member . Why would anyone put any credence in their ratings?

 

Surely anyone likely to hand over $$$ to be a member would have some sort of interest in boxing history though ?

 

Some people may think giving $63 is worth it so they can come on sites like this and mention that they are IBRO members. Suzie was a member, I don't think he is now, perhaps he
didn't want to stump up another $63?


If you're happy with Mendoza having a vote on the All Time Greats that's fine.
Any organization thats only criteria for inclusion is $ 63 doesn't qualify as credible to me as far as ratings are concerned.

I see it as a vanity project for some of the lesser lights.

 

A few members post here and I know you value their opinion. The IBRO quarterly journals are worth the price alone. But feel free to take shots on something you know very little about.

Like I said no modern old timer thinks higly of Thil and only one of 50 something older historians has him in their top 15

 

Cerdan wasn't American either. No one had trouble giving him credit in his day or in 2015. I thnk Cerdan hit harder, had better skills, and beat better fighters. He also lost far less.

If you like grinder types or guys with a Jimmy Braddock type of carrer as an interest that's a different thread.

 

I value their opinion because they know what they are talking about ,are objective ,honest and do not have an agenda, not because they are IBRO members.

You by the way do not fit any of the underlined criteria.
ps How can you be a ,"modern old timer"?
HIGLY?

Four sentences and 3 mistakes, do you want to talk about comprehension now?
I've no interest in learning anymore about IBRO ,the fact that you've been admitted definitely precludes any further interest in it from me.

Back to the thread. Thil's scalps compare favourably with Cerdan's imo
Thil:
Jones
Harvey
Tunero
Dundee
Brouillard
McAvoy

Cerdan:
Zale
Delanoitt
Green
Abrams
Williams

 

Accurately rating Cerdan is a hair-splitting process though I feel, after a good investigation, there's more substance than fluff.

Initially you see the pristine record, that domination of Zale and read about his untimely demise. The basic story arc is an ill-fated, great middleweight. You take a second look, you don't recognize many fighters save for Zale in what proved to be his last bout. Injured against LaMotta but got mugged. You begin to question what many trainers said about him...possible Carpentier vibes.

A more thorough and balanced approach shows Cerdan to have out-hustled Georgie Abrams in his American début, a man who took a prime Zale to the limit and went onto arguably beat a prime Ray Robinson. This guy also beat Cocoa Kid, drew with Charley Burley and overcame Billy Soose thrice. There are few fighter's who did so much yet continually fall under the radar.

Yes, Zale would never fight again, but in his previous fight he made short work of Graziano, and shot fighter's do not take the kind of licking Marcel gave him.

What would prove to be Cerdan's last fight seems to be the make-or-break chapter when rating him, and that's why it's essential to dig up reports for this one. Some felt that Cerdan would have won had his left shoulder held up. Indeed, some gave him rounds in which there are snippets of footage and picture Cerdan gamely slugging away, right hand only.

The lack of a left hand was devastating; you can't create space, gauge range, and to top it off his honey punch (the hook) was gone.

Depending on how you think the fight would have ended has stark implications. If LaMotta whoops him regardless Cerdan is something of a transitional champion. If Cerdan successfully defends he is certified great. The truth, as the saying goes, is probably somewhere in the middle, that if Cerdan had both hands LaMotta is given hell, and I think that's enough to indemnify the many kind things which were said about the Frenchman.

To answer the thread, I feel both Cerdan looked better, and in Abrams and Zale, has two bigger victories than Thil.

 

Good post Ted.

 

Zale was at the end of the line imo. The 1935 Jock McAvoy whom Thil beat would have beaten that version of the Man Of Steel imo.Abrams was nearly 12 pounds heavier than Welterweight SRR. Abrams had 5 fights after losing to Cerdan and won just one of them, this indicates to me that ,like Zale he had gone back.

Abrams, like Zale lost 4 years of his prime toWW2 neither were ever the same again .

 

Why do people say Abrams arguably beat Robinson. Go back and read those ringside accounts and then tell me that with a straight face.

This is from another post:

In regards to Georgie Abrams and Robinson Leonard Cohen writing for the New York Post stated: "Sugar Ray Robinson lost something. Call it the will to win or perhaps its the natural letdown for a fighter who is no longer money hungry. But whatever the reason the man who stood out head and shoulders above everyone in the welterweight division before he won the crown is no longer the fighter he used to be." Cohen gave Abrams only three rounds but had the fight a draw after Robinson had two rounds deducted. "Robbies foul punches made the fight closer than it otherwise would have been for the two rounds he lost would have been credited to his side of the ledger." "It was far from a good bout with too many dull spots and clinches. Abrams took all Robbie threw at him and came plodding in."

Al Buck writing for the same paper stated: "Had the decision gone against him sugar ray would have been guilty of throwing it away himself." Buck gave the decision to Robinson by five rounds to four with one even and thats even with the deductions.

Neither report made any mention of Abrams doing anything special or making a great fight. Rather both mention Robinson being below par as the reason for the fight being close. The reference to Abrams being plodding when he was once a stylist is another clue to Abrams lack of form by this point.

Jack Cuddy, who wrote your beloved UPI article goes to great lengths to describe just how bad Robinson looked in the fight calling him unimpressive, defensively careless. Cuddy stated that in rounds 2, 7, and 8 Robinson almost knocked Abrams out. The 7th and 8th were the rounds that Robinson lost but were two of his biggest rounds.

Buster Miller writing for the New York Age wrote: "We came away with the conviction that Robinson is still the best welterweight in the world. Just that and no more." "The fight was wholely unsatisfactory. It proved nothing. Neither Robinson nor Abrams showed a great deal of enthusiasm in spots and the fight hungry Garden crowd after six weeks of lions, tigers, and elephants got stuck with a turkey." Miller stated that Robinson was obviously saving his hands for his title defense against Jimmy Doyle by going to the body. "This provided the cue for his (Abrams) handlers and the ringsiders who had taken the short ends of odds at 3-1 to raise their cry of "foul." It very nearly worked. At one stage of the fight the crowd and Abrams Handlers were yelling foul before Robbie even started to swing." "Against Abrams he was only as good as he had to be."

Tommy Holmes writing for the Brooklyn Daily Eagle wrote: "SUGAR RAY WON - One of the more difficult of God's critters to understand is the boxing critic. Here Ray Robinson the welterweight champion spots rugged tricky Georgie Abrams almost a dozen pounds. He wins handily you think. But you pick up newspapers the next day and read that Sugar Ray is well on his way to being completely washed up if not in fact in a state of rigor mortis." "This Friday night party wouldnt have even been close if Robinson hadnt been penalized two rounds in which he whaled the whey out of Abrams. Penalized for meaningless low punching. The Garden customers certainly were hypnotized into the wrong slant on Robinson's body punching. Led by the anvil chorus in Abrams corner, the started sqwuaking about legal beltline wallops and progressed to the point where the yipped about punches just below Georgies wishbone. There were a few stray blows south of the equator due mainly to the fact that Georgie rose on his toes and sometimes actually left his feet to take them there." Holmes also agreed that Robinson was trying to save his hands for his upcoming title fight.

Joseph C Nichols writing for the New York Times. Had the fight 6 rounds to 4 for Robinson with the two rounds deducted. Meaning Abrams won 2 rounds on his card.

 

Thank you for bringing this information up. Also the Burley fight should not have been scored a draw.

 

Of course, technically, Zale really was at the end of the line, though it can't erase the fact he looked good against Graziano. A classic trait of a shot fighter is they can't pull the trigger; though definitely past prime, Tony could still do the business.

LaMotta had a good weight advantage over Robinson for most of their rivalry. Artie Levine was above the middleweight limit by the time he stepped into the ring with Robinson. Aside from one decision, all those pounds amounted to zilch. If some think Abrams beat a prime candidate for the greatest fighter of all time, it's a big deal.

*For what it's worth in '48 Georgie picked Cerdan over Robinson.

 

I haven't a horse in this race, I have them about on a par,but the idea that Cerdan is automatically superior is perhaps misguided? Zale and Abrams were both heading towards the last round up.Then again Cerdan was probably slightly past prime too, but he hadn't lost 4 years as they had.