Steve Lott not a Mike Gibbons fan

I'm more interested in the Jacob's-Fleisher conversations if they had any? Can you fill me in at all here Slakka?

 

Well...that's interesting. I guess...
I haven't been privy to have seen that extended version of Gibbons/O'Dowd yet...but in the bit I've seen, Gibbons exhibits defensive footwork around the perimeter of the opponent, changing angles in a very similar manner to one Bernard Hopkins...I'd say Gibbons' style is one that has been analyzed and emulated by many great fighters...Others can speak on this better that I can, but Gibbons seemed to be very respected as a great scientific boxer especially noted for seamless, quick footwork.

 

Jacobs watched lots of films but did not know what he was looking at. Those that were equally uninformed were influenced by Jacobs rants. Fighters from the last kept hands low to be in better position to throw punches and to protect the body. The used had movement, feints footwork to avoid punches. Watch Loughran...hands low but nearly impossible to hit cleanly.

 

Where the hell did Tony Canzoneri carry his hands at Mr Lott ? His sides...

 

Experienced fighters can hold their hands where the **** they want because they know where to stand.

There is no right or wrong way to fight. just a successful way to fight.

There is a right way to study and master boxing, after that use what works.

DId steve Lott, Bill cayton and Jimmy Jacobs ever fight or did they just let old cus brainwash them? Obviously cus knew what he was talking about but I don't trust the second hand interpretation of fight collectors. Nor would any serious boxing person.

 

A lot of people here didn't box either. (I think Lott might have, dunno.)

Lott's opinion is as valid as most of us here.
I haven't seen Mike Gibbons (or I cannot recall seeing him except some brief footage of him sparring with brother Tom) so I cannot offer a opinion nor contradict Lott.

 

Some people seem to think that fighters of the past carried their hands low because nobody had ever thought of carrying them higher, and that they just got punched a lot and didn’t like it, but that they essentially had no choice.

Presumably at some point an unknown fighter had the idea of lifting his hands a bit higher, and he started knocking everybody out left right and centre, until everybody copied him.

If you believe that, then you are probably a bit gullible.

 

I can't even see the difference.
Outside of peek-a-boo types like Tyson and Patterson and some others, I don't even see this modern "high guard"/ old-timer "low guard" thing that people on the internet go on about.

 

Exactly.:good

The natural human response is to raise your arms in protection when under fire. This is why millions of untrained victims suffer "nightsick" wounds to the arms shielding their heads from clubs, kicks or punches on the streets. SAme today as it was for stone age man. Call it peekabo, high guard it's the same thing. Nobody invented it.

Fighters who know where to stand draw people in with a low guard. They know what they are doing. It's a lure. It is not textbook boxing but it works. all fighters know when to defend, when to unload and when to draw a lead. Some are always well defended, that's fine. Some are not but that's because they no what they are doing. Others argue that you get hit less with a high guard but that has to be measured with how easy you can get your own shots off. Some can defend or punch. Some can do both. Some cant. One thing is for sure nobody lasts more than 5 competative fights with a low guard unless they no what they are doing.

 

"No" would have been an ok answer too.

 

I've read that Damato trained Jacobs for 6 months with the idea of ....believe this or not....fighting Moore for the Lt heavyweight championship. He wanted Jacobs to be the only person ever to win a championship on his first pro fight.

 

D'amato was nuts.

 

Stark raving.