Steve Lott not a Mike Gibbons fan

Exactly. Some of these supposed "modern" boxers dont fight much differently then fighters of the past.

 

During the defense of Jose Torres against Eddie Cotton, Carlos Ortiz interestingly commented from the broadcast position that he was against the peek-a-boo, but never got a chance to follow up and elaborate why, with the distraction of the action in mid round [Ring's FOTY for 1966]. But it was an intriguing remark, and I wonder if he's ever gone on record elsewhere as to why he doesn't favor it.

 

Ive heard other people say that as well. Their point was that limited the field of view leaving you susceptible to damaging punches that you couldnt see coming.

 

Do you know what's ironic? Gibbons is usually credited for developing the so called St. Paul style which pretty much was about not getting hit. His reputation was built mostly on his defensive skills. He actually criticized his bro Tommy for taking too many chances by becoming more aggressive later in his career.

 

100% correct. And the St. Paul style was highly influential throughout the sport. Gene Tunney studied it intensely and brought in fighters from St. Paul like Jock Malone and Jimmy Delaney to work with on it. Other fighters and trainers tried to emulate or incorporate it as well. In my opinion Gibbons was extremely important to the evolution of the sport. He was certainly credited as such by the folks in the Twin Cities. I love watching him. He was a master and despite being a defensive wiz he was a FIGHTER as well. He gets in there with that snarl on his face and goes to work. He didnt like to hurt people but he certainly wasnt a shrinking violet either.

 

You are right about everything. I've actually seen a few of those modern bare knuckle gypsy fights online. They are slow, sloppy, and they take forever.

Also, while I have seen Jim Jacobs give his opinion on the old time fighters before I have not read his debate with Nat Fleischer. If someone would please tell me the article's title, I would be much obliged to them. Just searching for Jim Jacobs in the Ring's search engine doesn't turn up anything.

 

Mike Tyson was awfully reminiscent of Dempsey at times with his bob and weave, his crouch, his hook, aggression, and power. And the way that Holyfield beat Tyson, clinching and smothering his attacks on the inside, was very reminiscent of how Tunney beat Dempsey. The difference being mainly that in the modern fight the men are slightly bigger, faster, and stronger.

No heavyweight today fights in the manner of Johnson, because they would be disqualified for excessive holding, but you can find guys that look something like Dempsey and possibly Tunney. Joe Frazier or Dwight Qawi have been compared to Dempsey. Denis Boytsov can be a brutal, aggressive, speedy puncher that checks a few of those Dempsey boxes.

Tunney's up on the toes, lots of movement, good jab, seems to be more emulated at light heavyweight. Ali did some of that, but I believe his direct influences were guys like Willie Pastrano and Jersey Joe Walcott rather than Tunney. Besides, didn't Tunney fight differently in the non-Dempsey fights?

 

I still kick myself for missing out the full Gibbons-O'Dowd. His footwork was a thing of beauty. Quick and shifty.

I dare not comment such claims.

 

You dont see classic skills in todays hwts. The feinting, short punching, parrying, blocking and countering you see from Johnson Dempsey Tunney does not exist to that extent today. Today its all keep away, fight at distance, no infighting....low skill styles.

Holding was illegal also in Johnsons day. Read the newspaper reports after johnsons bout with flynn. Flynn complained the johnson was holding but the ref properly stated that he was not holding..flynn was free to punch but just could not hit johnson. If you wa tch that fight flynn was free to punch and he did to body and head. Problem is each head shot was calmly blocked by johnson.

 

Two I think. Forgot the title of the other. He was also a trainer in hand to hand combat for the army during WWI and the St. Paul police for a while.

 

It wasnt a book it was a "learn by mail" boxing course (a series of pamphlets). One of my friends has the only copy complete copy known to exist.

 

:adminIt must be amazing. He seems to have been very didactic judging by his class to the army. Consequence of how methodical he was probably. Do you know if Tommy had a hand in either project? He was just as nerdy.