FAN-FAVOURITE BUT NOT THE FIGHTERS FAVOURITE 'Funny how the old time 'fighters' don’t think that Stanley Ketchel could fight, while most persons who 'saw' Ketchel fight - and who are not and never have been fighters - think the "Assassin" was a marvel. The foregoing remarks are occasioned by an interview in an Eastern paper with "Syracuse” Tom Ryan, ex-Middleweight Champion, and in his day, one of the ring's greatest boxers. "Yes,” Ryan is alleged to have said. "Ketchel WAS great - a great slugger; but sluggers in the old days didn’t figure. We simply feinted them out and then knocked them down." Three rears ago or thereabouts Joe Choynski was visiting in San Francisco, and in the course of a conversation, with Sam Berger we think it was, somebody remarked that there would never be another fighter like Ketchel. "There it goes again!" exclaimed Choynski, a bit nettled: "that s all vou people know in San Francisco Ketchel, Ketchel, Ketchel! I wish Ketchel had been the hardest chap I had to meet in my day!? I would rather have fought TWO Ketchels than one Peter Maher!” Bob Fitzsimmons expressed himself in a somewhat similar way when he last visited San Francisco. "My eyes!” said Fitz; "if Ketchel had come at me with his chest open like he did at other chaps, why, blime me, I’d have stepped in and stood him on his head!”' - Marion T. Salazar, 'San Francisco Call', 1917 Do you agree, or disagree with any of these old timers’ assertions on Ketchel?
I can say I’m sure he was courageous, a warrior with killer instinct, a big time puncher, extremely well conditioned w a terrific chin but that said he remains one of the standout arguments against old timers from what I’ve seen on film.
"I would rather have fought TWO Ketchels than one Peter Maher!” Says the guy who almost got knocked out by Bill Hanrahan.
Put Ketchel in the modern era and they would eat him alive. Imagine somebody like Canelo or Bivol against this guy OMG.
Yes, sign me up for Ketchel - Alvarez, say over 30 or 45 rounds on a nice hot day in the open air. Dosing both of them up with Clenbuterol.
No but Im saying that most peoples negative impression of him today is based on the film footage that exists of him. You qualified your argument by saying “from what ive seen on film.” Unfortunately that footage is two of his worst performances. If 100 years from now we only have footage of Tyson is Tyson-Douglas and Tyson-Lewis do you think people would think about his meteoric rise and reign in the 1980s? What if we only had footage of Roy Jones against Tarver in their second fight and Griffin 1? Theres no doubt that people would look askance at all of the great press those guys got.
I respect and appreciate your point but mine is how do we know those are his worst performances ? We can put Johnson aside as Johnson was an insane defensive fighter with a big size advantage ...
By most accounts Ketchel looked flat in his fourth fight with Papke. Some of the reporters even thought he lost that fight. The point is that it wasnt one of his better fights according to his contemporaries.
Same can be said about Jack Johnson. He'd get obliterated by most top 10 Heavyweights now. Not just lose but obliterated. We can do this for just about anyone from that era.
