Top Ten Middleweights pre-1950

W. Naughton of SF Examiner had Ketchel far ahead on points (8 rounds for Ketchel, 2 for Papke, the rest being even).

Harry B. Smith of SF Chronicle thought it was a draw or slight shade for Papke.

William Slattery of SF Call thought Ketchel was lucky to receive the decision.

Eddie Smith of Oakland Tribune thought that had Papke fought better the last round, the referee would have a hard time deciding against him.

H.M. Walker of Los Angeles Examiner shared the same opinion and thought the last round pretty much decided it.

Associated Press round by round gives 7 rounds to each fighter, with 6 rounds even.

 

I like this comparison. I kinda agree. How exactly you think he's comparable to Pea?

 

His brilliant head movement is something I bet Pea himself studied when he was learning his craft.

More than that it's the propensity to infighting with such defensive prowess and getting out before the opponent can set them self.

All of Gibbons losses seem to be debatable as well and I wonder if that's down to low output which is something pea could be criticised for during his career.

Finally there's the lack of power and the discipline to stick to his style no matter the opponent because he had the faith in his skills.

Not a perfect comparison but defensive fighters of that style are few and far between at the top level because of hoe reliant it is on hand, foot and head speed.

 

Then you dont know much about this era. Irregardless, picking three syndicated accounts as gospel is goofy to begin with because assuming they all came from a ringside source the odds are likely that they originated from a single source or at best two different sources meaning one is redundant and just adding weight to your argument falsely. Either way its a faulty practice and bad history from a bad historian who likes to toot his own horn. Just saying.

 

Obviously, the three San Francisco writers were there for a local bout, Eddie Smith and "Beanie" Walker also attended big fights held at San Francisco on a regular basis, even though they were from Oakland and Los Angeles. Associated Press was obviously there, with a long next-day write-up and a round-by-round description.

What Steve may be saying is sometimes the fighters' managers sent out very short reports over the wire, claiming a win for their fighter regardless of how the fight went, this is especially true for newspapers from a fighter's hometown, they often tried to have a "special" report sent to them that was different from AP/UP/INS. Sending their own correspondent to write such report was usually out of the question, but since the manager attended it with his fighter anyway, they asked him to telegraph them after the fight with the result.

 

I think Naughton was honest in his opinion, but based on secondary sources, he seemed to be the only one among San Francisco writers who saw a clear victory for Ketchel, the rest thought a draw or a shade for Papke.

 

Aren't the frist four in the hall of fame? How is that " paper thin " You said the same thing a while back with Young Stribling.

If you take away Ketchel's 4 best wins, or most their resume is going to look thin for the most part.

 

No, only two of the 7 you listed are in the hof (which is meaningless anyway) and both of those were past their best, Zale was WAY past his best.

And yes, i stand by my criticism of Stribling (whose record ****s all over Cerdans).

 

McGrain, I was reading up a bit on this fight and I did read that Williams' leg cramped up on him, but I didn't read anything about his arm. Not saying that it didn't happen, I just didn't see an article mentioning it. However, not to leave out, Cerdan broke or injured a hand in that fight (in the 4th I believe) and it was mentioned that he essentially fought one-handed. I would say Cerdan's injury was by far the worse of the two seeing as how it kept him out of action for 3 months, whereas Williams was back in the ring the following month. All in all, it was a great name on Cerdan's resume, even if that name was 35 years old.