when did over protection and undefeted records become the fad?

Its complicated.

For most of the first half of the 20th century everybody had to take fights where they were ridiculously overmatched early in their career.

Guys like Jack Johnson and Jack Dempsey were actualy homeless for part of their recorded career!!!!!!!!1

Having a manager, and the financial backing to fight without working in a factory was something that you had to earn. It was verry hard and blody to get there.

Joe Louis was the first fighter in history to be managed from his profesional debut. It came at a price. He was thrown in with the former world champion (Primo Carnera) nine months after he turned profesional. He was thrown in with Baer (who had killed two men) 14 months after he turned profesional.

The first champion who built a title reign out of fighting mediocre to bad oponents was Ezzard Charles (it brings me no pleasure to say it).

Floyd Patterson took it to a whole new level.

Ali has been criticised, but he was generaly meeting the best available, and he didnt have to fight two bums before he fought a serious challenger.

Frazier and Foreman caried on the Patterson tradition in their early title defences!!!

Holmes is perhaps the super vilain. He was the first to use the split titles for his own ends. He diluted the heavyweight championship to what it is now and is somehow resentfull that he is not compared to Joe Louis and Muhamad Ali in terms of greatness.

 

Extremely well said, Janitor.

 

It is hardly a modern phenomenon, look at some of the 'White Hopes' who tried to get a match up with Johnson.....

 

That is a verry fair observation.

We can talk more about that era 2morrow.

 

Sorry that would go to Tommy Burns. While I am a critic of Charles title reign....At least charles took on Walcott and Louis...Burns fought a bunch of tomato cans around the world who had no business getting a title shot.

 

I agree. Louis and Walcott were WELL deserving...However Pat Valentino, Gus Lesnevich, Nick Barone, Freddie Beshore, and Lee Oma were IBC controlled C level washed up fighters who had no business getting title shots over Bob Baker, Clarence Henry, Rex Layne, Roland Lastarza or Rocky Marciano

 

Wait, are we talking about champions who milk their titles, or contenders/challengers with padded undefeated records?

If we're talking about the latter, I would say the first notable one to fit that bill was Billy Fox.

But in general, the idea of "protected, undefeated" fighters being guided to title shots started to appear in earnest in the early '50s, with guys like Gil Turner and Chuck Davey, and then gradually expanded from then on.

Basically, it coincided with the rise of TV as a medium. Those 25-0, 30-0, etc. numbers look good on the screen, and they fetch high ratings (at least, that's the thinking).

 

Let us get something straight, it is us, the Internet generation that are guilty of panning an 'and one' record....

A classic example would be Amir Khan, an Olympic Champion, who had the misfortune of bumping into a power punching Colombian, who took him out inside a round.

Thus Khan, who may of learnt more in a minute of action than all his previous fights put together, and came back strong with arguably the best corner in boxing, and a very good performance against Marco Antonio Barrera, is still considred by many of the fancy, one punch from being able to throw, I told you so! In his face.

Now a days every fight that could matter, is seen by someone on the internet and commented on, thus every mistake is noted, and rarely in a good way.

 

Well Burns fought Jack Johnson, which was probably the boldest challenge ever accepted. He also was negotiating a fight with McVey and probably would have fought Langford, Jeanette or any other viable challenger if Johnson had not proved himself too good. He may have travelled the world, but I can remember him being a heavy underdog for at least one of his title shots i think it was against either Billy Lang or Bill Squires. Presumably also, the fighters he fought during his tour of Britain and Australia were both the best fighters available in those areas.

He fought Fireman Jim Flynn, who had a good winning record at the time, and later on did KO Jack Dempsey when well past it. He fought Philadelphia Jack O Brien, who had recently defeated Burns, who had a good winning ratio and streak, and was one of the few (maybe even only) people who had just recently defeated a former World champion in Bob Fitzsimmons, He then gave him a rematch as they fought the first time to a draw. I dont see how he can be faulted for any of that.

In fact, i have always thought that Burns probably more than anything, was one of the best champions ever, in terms of respect he showed to the belt in who and when he was prepared to defend it against.

 

Charles was only a champ 2years though and in that time fought 3fights with Walcott, 1 with Louis, 1 with Maxim who had recently taken Charles to an MD, fighting a few fringe contenders, including an ex-LHW champ, doesn't make him protected, thats the top2 HW's in the world for 1 thing

This is head and shoulders above the title reigns of Dempsey, Jack Johnson who were both far more protected and a good few others. Charles is a sadly underappreciated champion, not to mention he probably deserved to be a 2time HW champion in his close rematch with Walcott

 

Good post. But Johnson's and Dempsey's title reigns were hardly the stuff of legends, either.

One fighter with an extradordinarly well managed career (depending how you see it) was Foreman. He didn't fight even 10 ranked contenders yet got three shots for the lineal title. His way toward the title was very carefully planned in both his first and second career.

 

At least in the 1950's. I think Marciano was over protected for his first 30+ fights.

The thing to focus on is back in the day, fighters could make more money being a journeyman then they can today. Hence they fought more often, and were less protected.

Today managing a fighter is more of an investment. A manager can not make much money on easy fights, and to get better fighters and sparring partners often requires him shelling out money. In addition, TV revenue for boxing is not as good as it once was. All these things add up to prized prospects being protected until they are ready to be matched in higher stakes fights.