Which old timer HOF fighters are you least/most impressed with after watching footage

Impressed by Panama Al Brown, Ad Wolgast (vs Battling Nelson), Willie Ritchie. Brown was a later era fighter but he did fight in the 1920's. Looks trendemous on film but then again the likes of Kid Chocolate, Barney Ross and Tony Canzoneri started appearing in those times, although Brown was older and learned his trade in the early 1920s.

Wolgast surprisingly shows good movement, defense and combinations against the ridiculously tough Battling Nelson, along with incredible stamina and durability. Not what I expected from a man who (rightfully) had a reputation as a mauling brawler (which he showcases more so against Owen Moran, another impressive boxer of the era).

Ritchie had good skills, fast hands and combinations for a 1910's fighter, as seen against Mexican Joe Rivers.

Jack Sharkey to me is one of the first fighters who utilized defensive head and upperbody movement to near perfection, out of the ones I've seen. Dempsey has a reputation, but he often threw skills out of the window in favour of brute force, and it worked for the most part. It worked against Sharkey.

I remain unimpressed by Philadelphia Jack O'Brien, Stanley Ketchel & Sam McVea but I do take into account that the filmed fights of theirs are by no means their best efforts.

 

I am not impressed or disapointed when I see a film of an oldtime great fighter. Let's be real ! Someone mentioned Stanley Ketchel for example ,not living up to his alltime greatness when out of 49 knockouts, they watch TWO available films in exitance today.
One with the 40 pound heavier Jack Johnson in 1909, an alltime great heavyweight against a middleweight. A travesty to watch.
2- The last fight with Billy Papke in 1909, when Ketchel was fighting with a fractured
bone in his hand, but still showed his unparalleled stamina winning a TWENTY round Decision. Is THIS the true Stanley Ketchell who flattened 49 opponents in 64 bouts,and was lauded by all who saw him in his career as the greatest middleweight ? Hell NO.
like if 100 years from now ,fight fans saw the only available films of Ray Robinson,
being whipped by Ralph Tiger Jones, or losing to Randy Turpin in London. The misinformed would most likely say after watching those films, "hell, this Ray Robinson
was overated"...Every top fighter that ever lived must be JUDGED ,by the great body of his work, his entire record ,and the value that the boxing experts of his time,regarded him.NOT on one or two AVAILABLE films in existance.

 

My bad, k

 

What Walker did in the Hudkins rematch is something which might not be believed if it wasn't filmed, thoroughly outboxing the Wildcat on the retreat.

Tommy Gibbons blasting out Jack Bloomfield is also a revelation. The man could hit. Gans and Benny Leonard look great. In upsetting Squires, Burns shows good speed and mobility as well as power.

Few have benefited as greatly from action film of them being available for everybody to view as the much maligned Carnera and Willard. A lot of folks have expressed their surprise at how good Big Jess looks against Floyd Johnson, and Primo displays a good jab and decent mobility, in contrast to other huge heavyweights of his era, like Buddy Baer and Abe Simon.

Ketchel suffers on the little extant film we have of him.

 

Even with high quality film, a fighter who is only known from one film is never going to get a fair shake.

Lets say that the only footage of Ali waqs the Young fight for example.

 

Least impressed:

Ketchel
McVey
Jack Johnson
Dixon - though he was past his best on the flim


Most impressed

Langford
Tunney
Leonard
Gans
Mcgovern

 

K, of course when i said " the whole body of work" should be considered
in judging a fighters legacy, any knowledegable fan should take only a fighters competitive years, not when they were a shell of themselves..

 

D, about one year ago I watched on youtube , the 33 year old Tommy Gibbons ko Jack Bloomfield in London, 1924-5. I was astounded by the
beatiful combinations and the hitting power of Tommy Gibbons, who is famous for his defensive skills. But dammit this film shows he could HIT.
It gave me a renewed appreciation that the 160 pound Harry Greb licked
the bigger Tommy Gibbons. Anyone who calls the "oldtimers" unskilled,
should be "forced" to see this film clip. It is like the "Rosetta's Stone"
of boxing.
May I ask D,where did you see this Gibbons/Bloomfield clip ? Sure would like to see it again, and ESB posters would have a greater appreciation of
the great fighters of yesterday....Cheers D...

 

The REGULAR FORUM? What are you, a plebeian who drinks cognac on the rocks? Aren't you afraid of getting a brain infection if you expose yourself to the pathogens there? (Jeezus, the last time I peeked in there for a moment, it was like peering down an outhouse seat and ducking back out before I could smell anything, all those differently colored poops and craps and pees and pukes with flies buzzing about. Too much fetid, putrefied feculence for my stomach to handle.)

 

Burt, I saw it where and when you did, like a number of other posters here. Since it's already turned up once on youtube, I have every confidence it will appear again at some time in the future, however long it takes. Whenever that is though, you and I have already seen it.

Does Tommy Gibbons therefore stand as your answer to this thread? (I remain mindful of your previous posts here on the primacy of whole body of work.)

 

D, by all means,Tommy Gibbons on this film impressed me the most. Here he is at the age of 33-4, knocking out a decent Heavyweight in London, with a beautiful combination,that would have made Archie Moore proud. The film was almost modern in it's clarity and as I have posted ,would
ENLIGHTEN ESB classic forum fans. And again it made me appreciate the greatness of lil ole Harry Greb beating a prime and heavier great fighter like Tommy Gibbons. I always wondered why Nat Fleischer had Tommy Gibbons just below Gene Tunney in his top 10 lightheavyweights,but
this film explains why...D, this is why I never became a collector of old boxing films.They hoard the films from the public ,to make the film more valuable as the years go by. Because of my nature, I would share it with the forum. Take care D.:hi: