Stanley Ketchel vs. Tony Zale

Yes it was a diferen't era and yes Ketchel was cruder than shitting on a church pew but Zale's no ballerina. He'll come to him and that matters in this particular matchup. And for all those who think that simple skill will determine this fight and think that those dinosaurs can't compete (in some instances of course they can't) I have two words for you... Ricardo Mayorga.

 

Ketchel is one of the select few that could boss Zale imo.
Stan carried his power all through a fight, he gets to the Man Of Steel in the latter stages of the bout and melts him for a stoppage.

 

Good grief...Zale beats the **** out of Ketchel. Sweat Pea summed it up.

 

Come on man. Like Pea said look at the films. Ive never held Ketchel in awe like alot of people here do. Zale was a superb fighter who missed some of his best yrs due to military service as we all know.

 

:d

 

" Another fine mess you've got me into Stanley".

 

Great ppv...

 

R, I'll VOUCH for Stanley Ketchel...In his time and up to the advent of TV ,Ketchel was considered along with Harry Greb the best MW of alltime...
Some fans today watching only 2 clips of Ketchel on film , wrongly underate the Michigan Assassin. The 2 clips were the last bout with Billy Papke in which Ketchel damaged his hand but still won a 20 round decision, not looking too impressive. The other film is the misguided bout with the 40 pound heavier Jack Johnson, in which the great Johnson toyed with Ketchel,
though Stanley dropped Lil Artha...Silly Mismatch...
So on these two clips Stanley Ketchel is called a clumsy Neanderthal fighter, completely disregarding the 49 kos of top MWs,including the clever Light Heavyweight Phil. Jack O'Brien...So R, I'll agree with the vast majority of boxing experts who saw Ketchel at his best wrecking havoc amongst the MWs of his time, and declared Stanley the best MW of alltime, even after the reign of Ray Robinson...
P.S. if 100 years from now boxing fans [if there is still boxing] would only see two available clips remaining of Ray Robinson losing to Tiger Jones and Randy Turpin in London, would they not also feel that Robinson "was not that good".? They would be wrong with Ketchel and Robinson...It is the whole body of a career that truly counts...

 

Good post.!
ps Zale was NOT a pure boxer. so?????

 

To me, despite how tough, storming and hard punching he may have been, Ketchel personifies the rawness of the earliest eras of the fight game ... I am only basing this on what I have seen which does not look impressive ... Zale, as tough and brave as anyone, was a murderous puncher in his own right and seemed to throw much straighter punches and more fluid combinations ... both had terrific chins and stamina ... No offense to the Ketchel legend but I see Tony flattening him ...

 

Burt , I appreciate your post but don't buy it .... the key words about Ketchel here were before t.v. ... there is legend unsupported by any film here ... in the limited Sam Langford film we see the fundaments of a well schooled fighter .. viewing Ray Robinson v.s. Joey Archer we still see a highly finished fighter even though he was an old man ... against Johnson I see flashes of what Jim Jeffries may have been ... there are fighters from the pre-1920's who had skills and could compete even today ... a Jack Johnson, a Sam Langford or a Joe Jeanette , a Fitz, a Joe Gans, a Jack Blackburn ... based on what I see I just don't see it w Ketchel who appears to have dominated on raw physical gifts but little skill ....

Again, I could be wrong but not based so far on what I see ..