Nat ranked him as #1. I don't recall Jacobs as "very high" on Jack Johnson. I believe he stated that Johnson would have been competitive against modern (that is, late 1960s) heavyweights.Goodnight, Irene wrote:Jacobs was very high on Jack Johnson, however (a view I do not share).
What was Fleischer's take on Johnson?
Mike or Tommy Gibbons?
Re: Mike or Tommy Gibbons?
Re: Mike or Tommy Gibbons?
From 1915-08-30 Chicago Examiner:klompton wrote:Gibbons made an unnaturally low weight as dictated by McFarland
When asked for a statement on the match, Mike pondered a moment and then obliged as follows:
"I am in grand condition and the weight is going to be soft for me. After my workout in St. Paul yesterday I weighed only 148 3/4 pounds. That's close enough to 147 with the fight two weeks away.
Re: Mike or Tommy Gibbons?
Whats this supposed to mean? Do you want me to quote back to a plethora of sources which illustrate how difficult it was to make weight?
You know as well as I do that even today fighters dont admit when they struggle to make weight and why would they, it would give their opponents some insight into their condition.
You can scrounge all you want but the fact remains that the weight you posted on Boxrec is not the official weight, period. I wont change it because its not like its the only mistake on Boxrec but its incorrect and nothing you say, nor posting unofficial weights will change that.
You know as well as I do that even today fighters dont admit when they struggle to make weight and why would they, it would give their opponents some insight into their condition.
You can scrounge all you want but the fact remains that the weight you posted on Boxrec is not the official weight, period. I wont change it because its not like its the only mistake on Boxrec but its incorrect and nothing you say, nor posting unofficial weights will change that.
Re: Mike or Tommy Gibbons?
Do you have pre-fight sources that talk of Gibbons' problems of making weight?
Re: Mike or Tommy Gibbons?
Yes, and I will post them, but what difference does that make? A quick look at Gibbons record shows that the contracted weight was well out of his comfort range. He hadnt made a weight that low in years, and it had been even longer than that that he had consistently weighed in the 140s.
Re: Mike or Tommy Gibbons?
That would make the difference in that it's not the usual excuse after the fight where a boxer didn't perform on the level expected of him.
Re: Mike or Tommy Gibbons?
The below article illustrates that weight was a major wrangling point in the contract, McFarland feeling the lighter Gibbons weighed the more advantage he had. The eventually settled on 147 at 3pm, at this time McFarland was holding out for 145.
CHICAGO. April 26.—In both Mc-
Farland and Gibbons camps the chief
talk these days Is about poundage.
The followers of the scientific stock-
yard marvel contend that at 145
pounds, the weight agreed upon In the
contract that calls for a ten round
battle, within a few weeks. Gibbons
Will be greatly weakened.
This article is taken from the following year but illustrates that it was common knowledge that the agreed upon weight benefitted McFarland:
Auburn Citizen October 23, 1916
Gibbons was himself the victim of
McFarland's cunning in the matter of
weight, and he apparently would like to
work the same trick on Dillon. While
Gibbons cannot box with any vigor at
all when weighing less than 154, he was
unsophisticated enough to permit Mc-
Farland to dictate 147 for the Brighton
Beach match. After the affair McFarland
gleefully boasted that he had
tricked Gibbons into making a weight
that insured weak work on his part in
the ring, and the 'result of the bout bore
out the Chicagoan's declaration.
Gibbons also admitted that he was so
weak at the weight that it was surprising
he was able to keep his feet for 10
rounds, let alone box.
Yet another article dating to before the fight illustrating that the weight was an issue for Gibbons. This one the top is cut off so I cant cite it correctly:
The matter of weight was not so
hard although McFarland held out
for a little while for 145 pounds at
3 o'clock. Mike would not do the
weight and' finajly Packey conceded
two pounds and the we'ght was made
to be 147 pounds at 3 o'clock in the
afternoon, or seven hours before ring
time. Other details were easily arranged
after that and Packey announced
himself as about to get
ready at West Baden Spring, after
which he will go to New York to finish
his work for the match. Making
the weight will be easy for him, for
today he is not far from this mark.
Gibbons will have to do much work
to scale in at the stipulated figure, for
Mike has grown and today, stripped
weighs 162 pounds. But he has about
six weeks in which to get down for
the fight is slated for September II.
New York Herald Sept 11, 1915 (day of the fight) If a fighter isnt even drinking water a day before the fight hes having problems making weight:
Gibbons refused his dally
pitcher of water last night and will not
drink again until after he has weighed
in this afternoon.
This exchange took place at the weigh in and not only illustrates Gibbons' hunger but also the fact that soup was his waiting meal means his stomach probably could not handle anything heavier after the ordeal of fasting:
BOTH MEN UNDER WEIGHT.
Boxers Meet in Ring Used by Mc-
Govern and Pedlar Palmer.
McFarland and Gibbons weighed in
stripped at 3 o'clock yesterday afternoon.
Flrst Packey hopped on the
scales, which were set at 147 pounds.
He was ounces under and the beam did
not move. Mike was Impatient, and
said :
"' Hurry up, Packey. I want to
get a big plate of soup."
"That's so," answered Packey. -'I
want some of that, too."
Gibbons stepped on the scales, and he,
too, was ounces below 147 pounds. The
actual weights of the boxers were not
given.
This is Gibbons statement a week after the fight:
Chicago, 111., Sept. 18.—•Circums
t a n c e s which culminated in t h e disappointing
showing of Mike Gibbons
when he t a n g l ed with Packey McFarland
in their $32,500 tangoing-bee at
Brighton a week ago last night were
unloaded upon Chicago's fight fans
when the St. Paul Phantom breezed
i n to town erf r o u t e . t o his home in the
northwest. Mike, while admitting, he
was in no condition t o m a k e his best
fight, declares he w a s "outstaged" by
t h e Jollet brewer.
"The weight, 147 pounds a t 3 o'clock,
weakened me," said Michael, and he
didn't spill t h a t lin- of c h a t t e r in a p proved
box fighters' alibi style. "That
notch was just three pounds too fine.
Then, too, I took the milling too seriously,
while McFarland kept smiling
and always giving the impression that
t h e whole affair was merely a day's
work. I cannot understand why
Packey was given t h e decision > y some
of t h e critics, for if" ever I won a. fight
I certainly defeated McFarland. Never
once, during the bout did h e h i t me
with a closed glove and never once did
he sting me—and this despite my
weakened condition.
"One writer stated that my e y e was
cut by a left hook, but McFarland
couldn't have inflicted t h a t Injury with
a n axe in h i s hand.. His left hook and
in fact, everything he h a s couldn't
h u r t a feather-weight. That cut was
t h e direct result of a head-on collision
between us..
"The weight would have been easy
for me a year ago, but I am heavier
t w + + v + ** + **"**"*" + +
now and more muscular. Although I
don't believe Packey will ever agree to
box me again, I want to s a y t h a t never
again—not even for $50,000—would I
agree to make 147 pounds a t 3 o'clock.
I suffered agonies during my t r a i n i ng
grind and especially on t h e day of the
fight. I starved myself for days, living
on toast and t e a a n d I went to bed
Friday night weighing 146 and a fraction.
I hoped to awake still underweight
and to Indulge in a n orange,
but discovered I had gained more than
a pound and a half during the night.
"Consequently I had to go on fasting
and working. I did not t a k e a
mouthful of food or a sip of water
until I weighed in Saturday afternoon.
My vision was bleary and every
rjb in my body showed through my
skin. Honestly. I believe I aged five
years during t h a t process. I believe it
is up to me to vindicate myself and I
propose to t a k e on middle-weights, r e gardless
of challenges from welters,
and I will begin where I left off before
t a k i n g the McFarland bout. I am sorely
disappointed over some of t h e stories
written by t h e critics who should
know the boxing game, and one can
imagine my disgust when the first
paper I read gave McFarland the decision
despite the fact that I w a s
credited with seven of t h e ten rounds.
In my* future battles," said Mike in
conclusion, "I will attempt to look
sweet and t a k e things lightly—a la
McFarland—and then, even though I
am walloped to a pulp, the fans will
think that I won by a city block."
Gibbons discusses the bout in 1917
"In the McFarland fight everyone
knows that the weight sapped every
ounce of strength I had, and on the
evening of t h e fight, on t h e way to t ho
arena, I reeled like a. drunken man.
I still believe that I bent McFarland
and have slnco offered to box him a t
a reasonable weight."
In his biographical sketch "My Eighteen Years in the Ring" Published in Boxing Blade in 1924 and 1925 Gibbons goes into depth over the negotiations, weight making, and fight:
"Packy wanted 145. I wanted 150. I reasoned that I could not have taken on more than two solid pounds of weight in the past year and we finally agreed on 147 pounds at 3 o'clock. This was the most serious mistake of my career."
He then details that he weighed in at home after negotiations at 160 pounds. He states that by four days before the fight he was in perfect condition at 150. On the day of the fight he was still half a pound over after having not eaten or drinking for two days. He finally made weight but was a nervous wreck from the exhaustion of the ordeal.
Now all of this not only illustrates that making 147 was an ordeal, but that it was indeed the official weight, they had to make that weight as per the contract and they did at 3pm on the day of the fight. That though is all besides the point, because there is no reason why unofficial weights should be used on boxrec in place of official weights (even if we dont know exactly what they weighed). That literally makes no sense, especially considering they did not weigh in ringside so the unofficial weights you use are just guestimates given to the announcer by the camps of the two fighters. I say again, if we are going to use unofficial weights we might as well use HBO weights in which fighters are actually weighed the night of the fight as opposed to 36 hours before hand (being the weights we actually use).
CHICAGO. April 26.—In both Mc-
Farland and Gibbons camps the chief
talk these days Is about poundage.
The followers of the scientific stock-
yard marvel contend that at 145
pounds, the weight agreed upon In the
contract that calls for a ten round
battle, within a few weeks. Gibbons
Will be greatly weakened.
This article is taken from the following year but illustrates that it was common knowledge that the agreed upon weight benefitted McFarland:
Auburn Citizen October 23, 1916
Gibbons was himself the victim of
McFarland's cunning in the matter of
weight, and he apparently would like to
work the same trick on Dillon. While
Gibbons cannot box with any vigor at
all when weighing less than 154, he was
unsophisticated enough to permit Mc-
Farland to dictate 147 for the Brighton
Beach match. After the affair McFarland
gleefully boasted that he had
tricked Gibbons into making a weight
that insured weak work on his part in
the ring, and the 'result of the bout bore
out the Chicagoan's declaration.
Gibbons also admitted that he was so
weak at the weight that it was surprising
he was able to keep his feet for 10
rounds, let alone box.
Yet another article dating to before the fight illustrating that the weight was an issue for Gibbons. This one the top is cut off so I cant cite it correctly:
The matter of weight was not so
hard although McFarland held out
for a little while for 145 pounds at
3 o'clock. Mike would not do the
weight and' finajly Packey conceded
two pounds and the we'ght was made
to be 147 pounds at 3 o'clock in the
afternoon, or seven hours before ring
time. Other details were easily arranged
after that and Packey announced
himself as about to get
ready at West Baden Spring, after
which he will go to New York to finish
his work for the match. Making
the weight will be easy for him, for
today he is not far from this mark.
Gibbons will have to do much work
to scale in at the stipulated figure, for
Mike has grown and today, stripped
weighs 162 pounds. But he has about
six weeks in which to get down for
the fight is slated for September II.
New York Herald Sept 11, 1915 (day of the fight) If a fighter isnt even drinking water a day before the fight hes having problems making weight:
Gibbons refused his dally
pitcher of water last night and will not
drink again until after he has weighed
in this afternoon.
This exchange took place at the weigh in and not only illustrates Gibbons' hunger but also the fact that soup was his waiting meal means his stomach probably could not handle anything heavier after the ordeal of fasting:
BOTH MEN UNDER WEIGHT.
Boxers Meet in Ring Used by Mc-
Govern and Pedlar Palmer.
McFarland and Gibbons weighed in
stripped at 3 o'clock yesterday afternoon.
Flrst Packey hopped on the
scales, which were set at 147 pounds.
He was ounces under and the beam did
not move. Mike was Impatient, and
said :
"' Hurry up, Packey. I want to
get a big plate of soup."
"That's so," answered Packey. -'I
want some of that, too."
Gibbons stepped on the scales, and he,
too, was ounces below 147 pounds. The
actual weights of the boxers were not
given.
This is Gibbons statement a week after the fight:
Chicago, 111., Sept. 18.—•Circums
t a n c e s which culminated in t h e disappointing
showing of Mike Gibbons
when he t a n g l ed with Packey McFarland
in their $32,500 tangoing-bee at
Brighton a week ago last night were
unloaded upon Chicago's fight fans
when the St. Paul Phantom breezed
i n to town erf r o u t e . t o his home in the
northwest. Mike, while admitting, he
was in no condition t o m a k e his best
fight, declares he w a s "outstaged" by
t h e Jollet brewer.
"The weight, 147 pounds a t 3 o'clock,
weakened me," said Michael, and he
didn't spill t h a t lin- of c h a t t e r in a p proved
box fighters' alibi style. "That
notch was just three pounds too fine.
Then, too, I took the milling too seriously,
while McFarland kept smiling
and always giving the impression that
t h e whole affair was merely a day's
work. I cannot understand why
Packey was given t h e decision > y some
of t h e critics, for if" ever I won a. fight
I certainly defeated McFarland. Never
once, during the bout did h e h i t me
with a closed glove and never once did
he sting me—and this despite my
weakened condition.
"One writer stated that my e y e was
cut by a left hook, but McFarland
couldn't have inflicted t h a t Injury with
a n axe in h i s hand.. His left hook and
in fact, everything he h a s couldn't
h u r t a feather-weight. That cut was
t h e direct result of a head-on collision
between us..
"The weight would have been easy
for me a year ago, but I am heavier
t w + + v + ** + **"**"*" + +
now and more muscular. Although I
don't believe Packey will ever agree to
box me again, I want to s a y t h a t never
again—not even for $50,000—would I
agree to make 147 pounds a t 3 o'clock.
I suffered agonies during my t r a i n i ng
grind and especially on t h e day of the
fight. I starved myself for days, living
on toast and t e a a n d I went to bed
Friday night weighing 146 and a fraction.
I hoped to awake still underweight
and to Indulge in a n orange,
but discovered I had gained more than
a pound and a half during the night.
"Consequently I had to go on fasting
and working. I did not t a k e a
mouthful of food or a sip of water
until I weighed in Saturday afternoon.
My vision was bleary and every
rjb in my body showed through my
skin. Honestly. I believe I aged five
years during t h a t process. I believe it
is up to me to vindicate myself and I
propose to t a k e on middle-weights, r e gardless
of challenges from welters,
and I will begin where I left off before
t a k i n g the McFarland bout. I am sorely
disappointed over some of t h e stories
written by t h e critics who should
know the boxing game, and one can
imagine my disgust when the first
paper I read gave McFarland the decision
despite the fact that I w a s
credited with seven of t h e ten rounds.
In my* future battles," said Mike in
conclusion, "I will attempt to look
sweet and t a k e things lightly—a la
McFarland—and then, even though I
am walloped to a pulp, the fans will
think that I won by a city block."
Gibbons discusses the bout in 1917
"In the McFarland fight everyone
knows that the weight sapped every
ounce of strength I had, and on the
evening of t h e fight, on t h e way to t ho
arena, I reeled like a. drunken man.
I still believe that I bent McFarland
and have slnco offered to box him a t
a reasonable weight."
In his biographical sketch "My Eighteen Years in the Ring" Published in Boxing Blade in 1924 and 1925 Gibbons goes into depth over the negotiations, weight making, and fight:
"Packy wanted 145. I wanted 150. I reasoned that I could not have taken on more than two solid pounds of weight in the past year and we finally agreed on 147 pounds at 3 o'clock. This was the most serious mistake of my career."
He then details that he weighed in at home after negotiations at 160 pounds. He states that by four days before the fight he was in perfect condition at 150. On the day of the fight he was still half a pound over after having not eaten or drinking for two days. He finally made weight but was a nervous wreck from the exhaustion of the ordeal.
Now all of this not only illustrates that making 147 was an ordeal, but that it was indeed the official weight, they had to make that weight as per the contract and they did at 3pm on the day of the fight. That though is all besides the point, because there is no reason why unofficial weights should be used on boxrec in place of official weights (even if we dont know exactly what they weighed). That literally makes no sense, especially considering they did not weigh in ringside so the unofficial weights you use are just guestimates given to the announcer by the camps of the two fighters. I say again, if we are going to use unofficial weights we might as well use HBO weights in which fighters are actually weighed the night of the fight as opposed to 36 hours before hand (being the weights we actually use).
Re: Mike or Tommy Gibbons?
Many of these are either long before the bout speculations, or the post-fight interviews. I quoted Gibbons' statement from Chicago Examiner, there's also this statement the day before the fight in NY Herald: "Never have I felt so fit for fight as now. Making weight is a new venture for me, but it has put me so on edge that I think henceforth I will take off a few pounds for each bout. It certainly leaves you feeling like a two-year-old."
The quote about Gibbons weighing 162 lbs. As it is talking about the agreement that was finally reached, it must be dated early August (Aug 3 or 4). William Inglis wrote in NY Evening World on Aug 7 that McFarland was weighing 157 pounds, that's hardly "not far from this mark".
The quote from Sept 11 NY Herald is incomplete. It stated that "Both men are under weight, Gibbons weighing two pounds less than that called for in the articles."
Damon Runyon stated the day before the fight that "Gibbons seems to be in better condition than McFarland. He looks stronger. He is more active and strikes the casual observer as faster in every way". This, of course, doesn't say anything about the weight, but it's an interesting observation nonetheless.
Mike Gibbons stated the same day that "Stories sent out from here to the effect that I have been living on broth for a couple of weeks and am weak and stale at the low weight are ridiculous. I am ready and will do my best, which will be good enough to win."
Sept 10 Chicago Examiner wrote about the day before (Sept 9) training of both fighters: "Gibbons tipped the beam at 147 3/4 pounds and Packey weighed an even 148. By the time both have dried out to-morrow they should have no trouble in making 147 pounds, the stipulated weight. ... Mike went about the daily grind in the same old way. The Gopher state ghost never looked better in his life and it is seldom he has gone into the ring far from good form. He says he has lost no strength through the weight reducing method he has employed."
The quote about Gibbons weighing 162 lbs. As it is talking about the agreement that was finally reached, it must be dated early August (Aug 3 or 4). William Inglis wrote in NY Evening World on Aug 7 that McFarland was weighing 157 pounds, that's hardly "not far from this mark".
The quote from Sept 11 NY Herald is incomplete. It stated that "Both men are under weight, Gibbons weighing two pounds less than that called for in the articles."
Damon Runyon stated the day before the fight that "Gibbons seems to be in better condition than McFarland. He looks stronger. He is more active and strikes the casual observer as faster in every way". This, of course, doesn't say anything about the weight, but it's an interesting observation nonetheless.
Mike Gibbons stated the same day that "Stories sent out from here to the effect that I have been living on broth for a couple of weeks and am weak and stale at the low weight are ridiculous. I am ready and will do my best, which will be good enough to win."
Sept 10 Chicago Examiner wrote about the day before (Sept 9) training of both fighters: "Gibbons tipped the beam at 147 3/4 pounds and Packey weighed an even 148. By the time both have dried out to-morrow they should have no trouble in making 147 pounds, the stipulated weight. ... Mike went about the daily grind in the same old way. The Gopher state ghost never looked better in his life and it is seldom he has gone into the ring far from good form. He says he has lost no strength through the weight reducing method he has employed."
Re: Mike or Tommy Gibbons?
None of what you said refutes anything I posted and nor does it change the fact that you have listed unofficial weights in the official weight section of the fight which COMPLETELY ignores the fact that they fighters were contractually obliged to come in at a much lower poundage on the day of the fight. Period. And yet for some reason you cling to the idea that the official weight should be relegated to the WIKI and not the unofficial weight? That makes no sense to me.
Re: Mike or Tommy Gibbons?
It may not refute it, but neither does it sound as conclusive that Mike really had so much difficulty making weight.
Re: Mike or Tommy Gibbons?
If there was no trouble making weight, why didnt Gibbons stick to that weight for the remainder of his bouts? Or why wasnt he weighing that for his previous fights?
The reports you have are so close to the fight that Gibbons would be mad to admit to feeling dead at the weight.
The reports you have are so close to the fight that Gibbons would be mad to admit to feeling dead at the weight.
Re: Mike or Tommy Gibbons?
Whether you choose to believe that or not is beside the point. The fact remains that the weight you have placed in the spot for the official weights is UNOFFICIAL and should be removed.Senya13 wrote:It may not refute it, but neither does it sound as conclusive that Mike really had so much difficulty making weight.
Re: Mike or Tommy Gibbons?
Boxer Tom Gibbons (1891-1960) was my Grandfather.
I always heard in our Gibbons family if asked who was the better boxer Mike or Tom? Everyone including Grandfather Tom Gibbons would say “Mike”. We have an interview where Tom Gibbons says “My brother Mike was to boxing what Einstein was to science”.
"I think Mike Gibbons was probably the greatest boxer that ever put a glove on. They called him The Wizard, The Phantom of the ring and he was that. I boxed with Mike about ten years and I never really hit him a hard punch during the time. Repeating again, Mike was one of the great boxers of the age."
-Tom Gibbons in a radio interview in 1949.
_________________________
"For many years I was known merely as Mike's younger brother. It wasn't until Mike retired temporarily along about 1919 that I really became known as Tommy Gibbons, heavyweight contender. For a long time we both were middleweights and Mike was regarded as the uncrowned king of the division.
However, that was all right with me. I don't think anybody ever lived who knew more about boxing than Mike did, or still does, for that matter. He began where the average boxer left off. He was to boxing what Einstein was to science. Even after I learned what the game was all about and thought I knew most of the answers, Mike used to amaze me with some new trick he'd developed."
-Tom Gibbons in the 1943 Fight Stories article "How I Fought The Champs"
_________________________
"My brother, Mike."
-Tom Gibbons when asked who was the best boxer that he ever fought.
_________________________
"Gene Tunney called (Mike) Gibbons 'the perfect boxer.' Gene said he learned more about the technique of boxing and punching from watching Mike training in New York gymnasiums and in actual fights in Gotham than he learned from any other individual associated with the fistic sport.
Moreover, Tunney has told me it was Gibbons' clean-cut victory over Jack Dillon, the mighty light heavyweight from Indianapolis, that inspired in him the belief he could whip Jack Dempsey."
-Barton, George A. My Lifetime In Sports. Minneapolis: The Olympic Press, 1957
I always heard in our Gibbons family if asked who was the better boxer Mike or Tom? Everyone including Grandfather Tom Gibbons would say “Mike”. We have an interview where Tom Gibbons says “My brother Mike was to boxing what Einstein was to science”.
"I think Mike Gibbons was probably the greatest boxer that ever put a glove on. They called him The Wizard, The Phantom of the ring and he was that. I boxed with Mike about ten years and I never really hit him a hard punch during the time. Repeating again, Mike was one of the great boxers of the age."
-Tom Gibbons in a radio interview in 1949.
_________________________
"For many years I was known merely as Mike's younger brother. It wasn't until Mike retired temporarily along about 1919 that I really became known as Tommy Gibbons, heavyweight contender. For a long time we both were middleweights and Mike was regarded as the uncrowned king of the division.
However, that was all right with me. I don't think anybody ever lived who knew more about boxing than Mike did, or still does, for that matter. He began where the average boxer left off. He was to boxing what Einstein was to science. Even after I learned what the game was all about and thought I knew most of the answers, Mike used to amaze me with some new trick he'd developed."
-Tom Gibbons in the 1943 Fight Stories article "How I Fought The Champs"
_________________________
"My brother, Mike."
-Tom Gibbons when asked who was the best boxer that he ever fought.
_________________________
"Gene Tunney called (Mike) Gibbons 'the perfect boxer.' Gene said he learned more about the technique of boxing and punching from watching Mike training in New York gymnasiums and in actual fights in Gotham than he learned from any other individual associated with the fistic sport.
Moreover, Tunney has told me it was Gibbons' clean-cut victory over Jack Dillon, the mighty light heavyweight from Indianapolis, that inspired in him the belief he could whip Jack Dempsey."
-Barton, George A. My Lifetime In Sports. Minneapolis: The Olympic Press, 1957
Re: Mike or Tommy Gibbons?
Thank you for posting this. Absolutely wonderfulBc1232 wrote: ↑03 May 2023, 19:24 Boxer Tom Gibbons (1891-1960) was my Grandfather.
I always heard in our Gibbons family if asked who was the better boxer Mike or Tom? Everyone including Grandfather Tom Gibbons would say “Mike”. We have an interview where Tom Gibbons says “My brother Mike was to boxing what Einstein was to science”.
"I think Mike Gibbons was probably the greatest boxer that ever put a glove on. They called him The Wizard, The Phantom of the ring and he was that. I boxed with Mike about ten years and I never really hit him a hard punch during the time. Repeating again, Mike was one of the great boxers of the age."
-Tom Gibbons in a radio interview in 1949.
_________________________
"For many years I was known merely as Mike's younger brother. It wasn't until Mike retired temporarily along about 1919 that I really became known as Tommy Gibbons, heavyweight contender. For a long time we both were middleweights and Mike was regarded as the uncrowned king of the division.
However, that was all right with me. I don't think anybody ever lived who knew more about boxing than Mike did, or still does, for that matter. He began where the average boxer left off. He was to boxing what Einstein was to science. Even after I learned what the game was all about and thought I knew most of the answers, Mike used to amaze me with some new trick he'd developed."
-Tom Gibbons in the 1943 Fight Stories article "How I Fought The Champs"
_________________________
"My brother, Mike."
-Tom Gibbons when asked who was the best boxer that he ever fought.
_________________________
"Gene Tunney called (Mike) Gibbons 'the perfect boxer.' Gene said he learned more about the technique of boxing and punching from watching Mike training in New York gymnasiums and in actual fights in Gotham than he learned from any other individual associated with the fistic sport.
Moreover, Tunney has told me it was Gibbons' clean-cut victory over Jack Dillon, the mighty light heavyweight from Indianapolis, that inspired in him the belief he could whip Jack Dempsey."
-Barton, George A. My Lifetime In Sports. Minneapolis: The Olympic Press, 1957
Re: Mike or Tommy Gibbons?
Ezzard wrote: ↑05 May 2023, 04:15Thank you for posting this. Absolutely wonderful.Bc1232 wrote: ↑03 May 2023, 19:24 Boxer Tom Gibbons (1891-1960) was my Grandfather.
I always heard in our Gibbons family if asked who was the better boxer Mike or Tom? Everyone including Grandfather Tom Gibbons would say “Mike”. We have an interview where Tom Gibbons says “My brother Mike was to boxing what Einstein was to science”.
"I think Mike Gibbons was probably the greatest boxer that ever put a glove on. They called him The Wizard, The Phantom of the ring and he was that. I boxed with Mike about ten years and I never really hit him a hard punch during the time. Repeating again, Mike was one of the great boxers of the age."
-Tom Gibbons in a radio interview in 1949.
_________________________
"For many years I was known merely as Mike's younger brother. It wasn't until Mike retired temporarily along about 1919 that I really became known as Tommy Gibbons, heavyweight contender. For a long time we both were middleweights and Mike was regarded as the uncrowned king of the division.
However, that was all right with me. I don't think anybody ever lived who knew more about boxing than Mike did, or still does, for that matter. He began where the average boxer left off. He was to boxing what Einstein was to science. Even after I learned what the game was all about and thought I knew most of the answers, Mike used to amaze me with some new trick he'd developed."
-Tom Gibbons in the 1943 Fight Stories article "How I Fought The Champs"
_________________________
"My brother, Mike."
-Tom Gibbons when asked who was the best boxer that he ever fought.
_________________________
"Gene Tunney called (Mike) Gibbons 'the perfect boxer.' Gene said he learned more about the technique of boxing and punching from watching Mike training in New York gymnasiums and in actual fights in Gotham than he learned from any other individual associated with the fistic sport.
Moreover, Tunney has told me it was Gibbons' clean-cut victory over Jack Dillon, the mighty light heavyweight from Indianapolis, that inspired in him the belief he could whip Jack Dempsey."
-Barton, George A. My Lifetime In Sports. Minneapolis: The Olympic Press, 1957
Both Tom and Mike were great fighters.