Tony Canzoneri

He is a very interesting fighter. Many liken him to Fitzsimmons and I see the resemblance and it really does work the way he offers a target but counterpunches as he pressures.

One fight I watched recently was his fight with Berg (number II) and Berg was what we would call a 'modernish' fighter. He had his hands high etc...

Well Canzoneri obliterated him with what could be described as an 'old fashioned' style.

Anyway, Canzoneri is one of my favrouites.

 

As you say, his stance obviously wasn't textbook, but his techniques were fantastic. He had innate offensive and defensive instincts, while a lot of his techniques were obviously built up through all of his experience in the ring, and against such a high quality of opponent. He countered as well with the overhand right and left hooks as any fighter I've seen from the era. Great mixture of offense and defense, particularly when he used the momentum he'd build up from slipping or rolling a shot to counter over or under with fully extended punches, often in combination. He seemed just as accurate with his often wide, looping hooks as he did his straight right hands down the pike. Great, great countering instincts. He was also obviously a showman. Some nice little displays of footwork and angles shown in those clips, often for the sheer fun of it, but just as often with real intentions.

One of the all time greats, for certain. I'd have him borderline top 20 all time, right alongside Jimmy McLarnin.

 

His fight with Chocolate is the best filmed fight I've seen of the era. Fantastic back and forth action fought at a very high, but at the same time very calculated pace from both men. Some brilliant techniques on display in that one. The definition of "violent chess". Chocolate was kinda like Mayweather with balls.

 

You make excellant observations as usual. He's is essentially an offensive fighter but has superb counter punching ability.

He was quick, and explosive with it. The way he could pull his head to the side swing a hook and knock you cold.

Why is that?

I was reading SRR's book and he said he did not want to end up like Canzoneri battling way past his prime, but it is quite odd as Canzoneri is literally in his prime then all of a sudden is losing to guys he would have beaten easily before.

I agree, Chocolate really impressed me in that fight with his defensive capabilities and countering. However I had Canzoneri a slight winner in a great contest.

How do you guys think Canzoneri would fare in todays ruleset?

 

Against the current crop? Very well. There's no reason to think otherwise, IMO. I certainly wouldn't be picking any current fighters from 135-140 to beat him. I think he matches up quite well with Pacquiao, actually.

 

Fair point as he did have a steep decline afterwards. That era was crazy teh amount of talent in it that fought each other Ross, Canzoneri, McLarnin, Ambers, Armstrong etc...

I mean more in would he be a 'modern' boxer

 

How do you mean? Would he be able to compete with them? Absolutely. He clearly had the skills and experience necessary to hold his own with any fighter under a modern ruleset (which is essentially what he fought under anyway), as he proved conclusively by how well he fared against fighters like Ross and Chocolate, among others.