What qualifies a boxing historian 'n who's best?

This is what I'm talking about. What sources are there that detail Kaplan's knowledge and research skills? He obviously had as good an archive as any, but I've not read much from him to know how good an historian/analyst of information he actually was.

 

A Great boxing historian does their own research. Like spending hours, weeks, years going through micro-films of newspapers and old magazines. I have done that since the late 1970's. I first became the Boxing Historian of Ring 9, then the New Jersey Boxing Hall of Fame and the unofficial Boxing Historian of the New Jersey State Athletic Commission. Now I was just selected as the Boxing Historian of Ring 8, which is the largest Veteran Boxers Organization in the World, and very soon, I will be the Boxing Historian of one of the largest and well known boxing organizations in the sport.

I have done work with, or helped out Herb Goldman, Ralph Citro, Mike Silver, Burt Sugar, Hank Kaplan, Luckett Davis, Jack Kincaid plus all the other outstanding members of IBRO and I am also a charter member of that Organization.

To say who is the best is very hard, as every Boxing Historian is an expert in a different area of the sport. Most of the best ones, work together. The real Boxing Historians don't need BoxRec, and a lot of them have put in 1,000's of bouts for that site. We have some so called Boxing Historians, that will get all there information from BoxRec or some other record book or source.

Some are Great in writing books, others in reporting, story telling, researching, trivia, record keeping, etc., and we need them all.

 

Well spoken:good I especially like your last statement. We DO indeed need them all.

The challenge for many boxing historians is sorting through all the endless mythology and getting to the truth. Only Old West/Gunfighters history and Mafia/Organized Crime history have more twisted facts and outright falsehoods written into their fabric than boxing history and it's quite a challenge to UN-twist it.

 

not a parking lot anymore. there's apartments there

 

Bert Sugar recites stale old stories that any amateur who has done minimal research already knows (and has probably debunked).

All poor style and no substance, he is an abomination upon sport.

 

I just received a letter the other day from the International Boxing Hall of Fame. It stated that the Committees will be receiving all the names up for Induction by the 1st week of October. This letter goes out to all the Boxing Writers Association of America and several top boxing historians.

I am on 2 Committees, the Modern and the Old-Timers. Last year I received 45 names for the Modern and 50 for the Old-Timers. We can pick as many as 10 in each category, But only the top 3 get in. I give a lot of the Boxing Writers information that they can use to decide who to pick, But I don't tell them who to vote for. It really isn't as easy as you might think.

When I receive all the names, I will post them to show you.

 

Thanks:good

 

Fantastic,h!!:goodThanks

 

Mind giving an example, possibly on some fighter who has been inducted already? The descriptions in Boxing Registry are pretty poor, in my opinion, hope it's nothing like that. Always have to give the pros and cons.

 

I give them information like:

1. How many months they were rated in the Top 10 & the highest rating they ever had.
PS- There is only one IBHOF member that wasn't a Champion or #1 Contender.

2. What their records are against each Champion and Hall of Famer, with a list of all those boxers.

3. What they did head to head against each other.

4. Ratings of other Top Boxing Historians, to show them how other people rate them.

Usually they have questions about them, and I try to answer them fairly as possible.

 

So the losses or questionable decisions are not even mentioned? I see.

 

Hugh McIlvanney. For those of you based in the States,and elsewhere overseas,Mcilvanney is a very knowledgeable British sports journalist,who wrote a superb book called McIlvanney On Boxing. It covers a lot of boxing's classic fighters' battles from the 60's through to the 90's.

 

I didn't say that, I just gave you some of things I give them.

Every close decision is mentioned, win or lose. I would say boxer A lost a close decision to boxer B, but a lot of people thought differently. I would give them the scores of the judges Plus scores of all the others that I could find, and articles if available. I can't tell them that I thought the decision should have been the other way around, because that is only my opinion.

There are several other things that we go over as well.

When did they box them, before prime, prime or after prime, and this goes for the candidate as well.

It's a lot to go through, and it actually takes me a lot of time to pick my top 10 before I send the ballots in. People will say, how come so and so isn't in the Hall of Fame. Well, maybe he should be But he is going against 45 to 50 other boxers and 10 of them might have better qualifications then he does.

 

Most of the CBZ inner club ...... self-annointed indeed!

 

Barry Deskins :rofl