fastest hands in heavyweight history?

Kalan
Super Middleweight
Posts: 10083
Joined: 23 Sep 2012, 23:22

Re: fastest hands in heavyweight history?

Post by Kalan »

davie wrote:"how come he missed any punches against such a pathetic bag?" Because landing punches is not just about speed, if it were Amir Khan would be the most accurate fighter in the world. It takes timing, accuracy, choosing the right shot, feints to get your man in the position you want to throw the punch at. Come on man, you've trained hundreds of fighters, you should know this sh1t. Slow fighters land punches if they do it right. Fast fighter miss if they're shite.

the rest of the post basically equates levels of competition and nature of victories (which are decided on many many physical and technical attributes) to hand speed as if the argument actually makes any sense. It's utter pish, below even your usually dismal level

I do know all that "sh!t" and you're just throwing stuff back at me about distance, feinting, and footwork that I've repeated many, many times, so you're full of it. Maybe you just don't want to listen but want to argue for the sake of trying to win an argument.

You're confusing flashiness with speed... It doesn't take a lot of hand speed to be flashy.. The Jitterbug is a very flashy dance that's impressive because of the apparent speed and intricacy of the moves, but most young dancers are fast enough to master the moves by practicing each component of the move individually and finally putting them all together. Though it may take months to do well, the end result is a natural and extremely fast, flashy, and skilled dancer to the average observer.

Amir Khan is flashy and throws barrages of punches that didn't accomplish a lot against Danny Garcia except getting him blasted with full-blooded counter-shots. But against someone like Dmitriy Salita it produced a quick flashy KO that had some fans marveling.

You saw Ali throw flashy flurries against London that you never saw him throw against Frazier, Norton, or more dangerous fighters because there’d be something coming back. You can sacrifice power and accuracy for speed and flashiness, but a couple levels above the London’s and Williams’ of the world, the dancing, and flashy milling flurries do not get winning results.

Shane Mosley was always thought to be extremely fast until he fought Vernon Forrest and rangy straight punches ripped into him. Forrest was faster.

Part of the reason Tunney had MUCH faster hands than Dempsey is because he focused more on straight punches like the jab and straight right, and Dempsey generally abandoned the jab in favor of spectacular hooks and swings. The fastest way from point A to point B is a straight shot.

I’m not pointing this out because it’s a revelation, but because many boxers abandon the jab and straight right lead because they’re very difficult punches to master. They think that if you’re bigger, stronger, faster, and tougher why not simply get close and start throwing??? Which is what they believe the fans want to see. They don’t want to see a boring jabbing contest. But if you want to have fast hands and outscore your opponent by a ton you need a boxer’s mentality and not a fighter’s.
Tomasino
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 7876
Joined: 24 Apr 2010, 16:39

Re: fastest hands in heavyweight history?

Post by Tomasino »

davie wrote:
Kalan wrote:How pathetic was Brian London??? He was stopped in 2 rounds by Jerry Quarry. By your logic Henry Cooper had faster hands because he knocked London out in the 1st round with a flurry. London won only 2 of his last 10 fights and he was in that stretch when he fought Ali.. You don't decide how fast somebody is by measuring him against a punching bag who can't defend himself.. If Ali was so fast how come he missed any punches against such a pathetic bag? London is the only male boxer I ever saw who twaddles around the ring like Szilvia Szabados - the punching bag who lost to Claressa Shields the other night.

Ali hit Karl Mildenberger with more punches, but missed a lot more... Mildenberger was a very small Heavyweight who was really clumsy and terrible -- and who was knocked ice cold in the 1st round by Dick Richardson.. He wasn't half as bad as London and went 12 rounds with Ali.. London decided to dive for the canvas and stay there after taking a few light hits in that 3rd round flurry.. Why not get out of the fight with very little punishment rather than stick around like the bigger and just as slow Chuvalo did for 15 rounds -- and get all beaten up??? It's the same money.

Was Anthony Joshua faster because he canned the 6'5" X 245, undefeated Heavyweight Champion Charles Martin in only 2 rounds? At least Martin got up after the 1st knockdown although he also bagged the fight like London did.. He was much stronger competition who was tagged more cleanly and effortlessly without Joshua spinning himself around when he missed and other nonsense you saw with Ali vs London.

Even by your standards this post is dreadful.

"by your logic Cooper had faster hands...."
His logic? He didn't say Ali had fast hands because he knocked London out or what round he did it in.
You have decided "his logic" for yourself. His logic was probably watching the fight and not surprisingly seeing how fast his hands moved
Watch the fight. Ali flicks out quick jabs, fires of fast right hands, the knockout finish is an absolute blur of a combination, I just watched it and genuinely couldn't tell you what he threw or how many..... Why? his hands were moving really fvcking fast. Tada, there's your fvcking logic

"how come he missed any punches against such a pathetic bag?"
Because landing punches is not just about speed, if it were Amir Khan would be the most accurate fighter in the world.
It takes timing, accuracy, choosing the right shot, feints to get your man in the position you want to throw the punch at. Come on man, you've trained hundreds of fighters, you should know this sh1t. Slow fighters land punches if they do it right. Fast fighter miss if they're shite.

the rest of the post basically equates levels of competition and nature of victories (which are decided on many many physical and technical attributes) to hand speed as if the argument actually makes any sense. It's utter pish, below even your usually dismal level

We all take turns telling the cûnt the same shît. He comes back again tomorrow with exact same tripe :lol:
Tomasino
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 7876
Joined: 24 Apr 2010, 16:39

Re: fastest hands in heavyweight history?

Post by Tomasino »

golden oldie wrote:
Kalan wrote:
You saw Ali throw flashy flurries against London that you never saw him throw against Frazier, Norton,.
Why do people like you always persist in using POST EXILE Ali as an example of his greatness to suit your own agenda's? Stevie Wonder could tell the difference of Ali's speed before 1967, and after 1970.

Tell you what to do. Try convincing people there was no difference between boxrec's favourite pin up boy ( Leonard ) from his rubber match with Duran, and when he got exposed, humiliated and battered by Terry Norris 14 months later, and see how you get on.

What was Leonard exposed as Oldie?
candyslim
Super Lightweight
Posts: 5464
Joined: 06 Jun 2016, 06:13

Re: fastest hands in heavyweight history?

Post by candyslim »

Syntax Error wrote: For example, how fast were Jack Johnson, or Jack Dempsey really?

Only people who are old enough to have watched them can answer than, & there's none of those people left.
Would it not be possible with modern technology to correct or calculate and compensate for the error in the speed of those old films?. I might be talking rubbish but I would not have thought that beyond modern science.

My bet would be Floyd Patterson. Gene Tunney would have to up there too.
dalcumly
Cruiserweight
Posts: 1319
Joined: 03 Sep 2010, 08:11

Re: fastest hands in heavyweight history?

Post by dalcumly »

Kalan

I don't usually comment in the Boxing History section so I don't know your background.
But can I just say that to call Brian London pathetic is unjust, and unfair. He boxed as a pro for 15 years, twice for the undisputed world title, and he fought them all. Brian will unashamedly tell you he fought only for money. Well into his 80's now, I don't know his health, but up to 3/4 years ago he was still jogging from his house and had a punch bag in his garage which he belted regularly. Totally undamaged mentally and physically.
So please don't call him pathetic.
BoxBuzz
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 29847
Joined: 07 Jun 2005, 16:37

Re: fastest hands in heavyweight history?

Post by BoxBuzz »

Kalan wrote:This is going to take far more focus and intelligence than you ever possessed BuzzBox.. But I'm going tell you this anyway in case you ever grow a brain.

Holmes was a much better natural athlete than Ali... Holmes had a much better stance that allowed him to slip punches with greater ease... and for that reason he lasted a lot longer than Ali -- and even though Larry grew a big fat pot belly in his 40's... and weighed far more than Ali ever did for any fight... he still boxed the bejabbers out of Ray Mercer at the age of 42... You see BuzzBox...when you know how to box you don't get tattooed by tyros like Leon Spinks... you tend to retain more of your speed, reflexes, and abilities a lot longer - by dint of those fewer head shots taken... and therefore you have a career in your 40's and 50's more closely resembling that of Larry Holmes rather than getting trashed like Muhammad Ali

I'm hoping that you get some enlightenment out of that.
Lot's of white noise...and some of this is very well and good, and noted. and to your credit...NOT 100% incorrect.

with that stipulation...it is regretfully...... the wrong answer.

Like to try again?

Maybe it's just too difficult.

Anyone else in class wishing to answer this very difficult question for Kalan?

To paraphrase the question for everyone:

Why was Holmes as successful as he was in his fight against Muhammad Ali?

(Faster handspeed in that fight is an example).
Kalan
Super Middleweight
Posts: 10083
Joined: 23 Sep 2012, 23:22

Re: fastest hands in heavyweight history?

Post by Kalan »

dalcumly wrote:Kalan

I don't usually comment in the Boxing History section so I don't know your background.
But can I just say that to call Brian London pathetic is unjust, and unfair. He boxed as a pro for 15 years, twice for the undisputed world title, and he fought them all. Brian will unashamedly tell you he fought only for money. Well into his 80's now, I don't know his health, but up to 3/4 years ago he was still jogging from his house and had a punch bag in his garage which he belted regularly. Totally undamaged mentally and physically.
So please don't call him pathetic.
You have to take comments in context -- and not defend terrible match making that placed an easy target who had no business fighting for the Heavyweight Title into a match where he was almost certainly going to get beaten up and knocked out.. London was an average fighter who had 20 losses versus 37 wins and a draw. His shot at Patterson came directly after he lost to bleeder Cooper by a lopsided margin.

London didn't get the shot at Patterson because he deserved it or because Cus D'Amato thought he would be any problem for Patterson.. Ingemar Johansson watched the Patterson-London fight and contemptuously said, "London couldn’t beat my sister.” That was a fair comment from Ingo because although London had a very hard head, he was so easy for a highly skilled Heavyweight to hit it was ridiculous.

His shot at Ali was also panned as a setup and London even refused to say he would win the fight… He suffered many losses to Heavyweights far below the caliber of Ali. He knew the drill.
Kalan
Super Middleweight
Posts: 10083
Joined: 23 Sep 2012, 23:22

Re: fastest hands in heavyweight history?

Post by Kalan »

BoxBuzz wrote:Why was Holmes as successful as he was in his fight against Muhammad Ali? (Faster handspeed in that fight is an example)
I reduced your posts to the actual question at hand BuzzBox -- to cut through the inane commentary and traipsing through the tulips that you do.

Holmes had great skills and that is undeniable.. He would have beaten Ali at his best -- so he CERTAINLY was going to beat a 38-year-old Ali... It wasn't a fight... It was NOT a boxing match... It wasn't even a sparring session... because NO SERIOUS PROFESSIONAL BOXER uses sparring partners who are incapable of doing the work or landing a decent punch... Are you getting this???? ... The fight was a miserable exploitation of the gullible public... which Boxing has been known for MANY times throughout it's bleak and storied history.

Does THAT answer your question???? ... Or do you need an English class to understand it?
BoxBuzz
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 29847
Joined: 07 Jun 2005, 16:37

Re: fastest hands in heavyweight history?

Post by BoxBuzz »

Kalan wrote:
BoxBuzz wrote:Why was Holmes as successful as he was in his fight against Muhammad Ali? (Faster handspeed in that fight is an example)
I reduced your posts to the actual question at hand BuzzBox -- to cut through the inane commentary and traipsing through the tulips that you do.

Holmes had great skills and that is undeniable.. He would have beaten Ali at his best -- so he CERTAINLY was going to beat a 38-year-old Ali... It wasn't a fight... It was NOT a boxing match... It wasn't even a sparring session... because NO SERIOUS PROFESSIONAL BOXER uses sparring partners who are incapable of doing the work or landing a decent punch... Are you getting this???? ... The fight was a miserable exploitation of the gullible public... which Boxing has been known for MANY times throughout it's bleak and storied history.

Does THAT answer your question???? ... Or do you need an English class to understand it?


Well your at your old transparent tricks again.....you like your facts....so you happily introduce them....while completely and utterly missing the point. Not to mention your prime assessment being pretty far off course in this case.

It's like we are having a conversation about which car is more of a cultural historical Icon between the 57 Ford Fairlane and the 57 Chevy Bel Air,....Your old pal buzz states that the 57 Chevy was a bigger ICON than the 57 ford......which is a pretty measurable fact....though it admittedly has a smidge of subjectivity to it.

So, you quietly favor the Ford...and you know I'm right about this...but you're not willing to give an inch on the subject....because you are a stubborn mule.....so you "innovate, postulate and ad lib" something like the following.......

"Well Buzz the 57 Ford outsold the Chevy in a rare feat for Ford in the 50's.....and the price of tea in china was slowly going up, and as we all know, the year "Nineteen fifty seven" is spelled with two "f"s in it, which of course the word "Ford" begins with...... and conversely does not contain a single "C" for Chevy. So Buzz.....ti's clear that the Ford is the answer.

And of course....that would be wrong.

But not on planet Kalan.
Kalan
Super Middleweight
Posts: 10083
Joined: 23 Sep 2012, 23:22

Re: fastest hands in heavyweight history?

Post by Kalan »

BoxBuzz wrote:
Kalan wrote:
BoxBuzz wrote:Why was Holmes as successful as he was in his fight against Muhammad Ali? (Faster handspeed in that fight is an example)
I reduced your posts to the actual question at hand BuzzBox -- to cut through the inane commentary and traipsing through the tulips that you do.

Holmes had great skills and that is undeniable.. He would have beaten Ali at his best -- so he CERTAINLY was going to beat a 38-year-old Ali... It wasn't a fight... It was NOT a boxing match... It wasn't even a sparring session... because NO SERIOUS PROFESSIONAL BOXER uses sparring partners who are incapable of doing the work or landing a decent punch... Are you getting this???? ... The fight was a miserable exploitation of the gullible public... which Boxing has been known for MANY times throughout it's bleak and storied history.

Does THAT answer your question???? ... Or do you need an English class to understand it?


Well your at your old transparent tricks again.....you like your facts....so you happily introduce them....while completely and utterly missing the point. Not to mention your prime assessment being pretty far off course in this case.

It's like we are having a conversation about which car is more of a cultural historical Icon between the 57 Ford Fairlane and the 57 Chevy Bel Air,....Your old pal buzz states that the 57 Chevy was a bigger ICON than the 57 ford......which is a pretty measurable fact....though it admittedly has a smidge of subjectivity to it.

So, you quietly favor the Ford...and you know I'm right about this...but you're not willing to give an inch on the subject....because you are a stubborn mule.....so you "innovate, postulate and ad lib" something like the following.......

"Well Buzz the 57 Ford outsold the Chevy in a rare feat for Ford in the 50's.....and the price of tea in china was slowly going up, and as we all know, the year "Nineteen fifty seven" is spelled with two "f"s in it, which of course the word "Ford" begins with...... and conversely does not contain a single "C" for Chevy. So Buzz.....ti's clear that the Ford is the answer.

And of course....that would be wrong.

But not on planet Kalan.
Let me explain this BuzzBox... Stop moving you lips to no effect -- and listen for a change... absorb something real... don't go traipsing off into the tulips and the moonlight sprinkling stardust around... I’m not trying to trick you... You don’t want to be confused with the fact bud… We are not talking classic cars... We are not talking collectibles... We are not talking objects... We are talking ATG Heavyweights and WHY one particular ATG Heavyweight was so superior to the other at the time the fight was made -- that it was pathetically ridiculous to even watch the debacle.

And in light of those facts... go over my previous post addressed to you on this thread with an open mind...

As Larry Holmes, in response to Ali’s many taunts, lectures, barrages of verbal abuse, and contemptuous put downs said “Ali can go sell the fight. That’s what he’s good at. He’s the greatest talker and jive artist. But he’s not so good at actual boxing, punching, and fighting to tell you the cold hard truth about it. Because when that bell rings his ass is grass – and I’m the lawnmower.”
Kalan
Super Middleweight
Posts: 10083
Joined: 23 Sep 2012, 23:22

Re: fastest hands in heavyweight history?

Post by Kalan »

Ali was one of the best at talking, ballyhoo, publicity, and building a fight. He would always search for an angle for every fight, and one of his stocks in trade was to belittle his opponent to great extremes.. This served 3 ends... 1. it was quotable and built up his fights... 2. Ali's fans delighted in the braggadocio, poems, and put-downs... and 3. the verbal abuse would often knock the opponent off their game.,. I think in the case of Ken Norton it worked for Ali because Norton didn't fight very intelligently during Ali-Norton III ... and he was running his mouth more than Ali.

Even though Holmes was a friend of Ali's... worked for him for a long time and admired how Ali worked a crowd... and he knew Ali's blasts weren't mean spirited or directed at his abilities as a boxer like they sounded... but he got a little tired of Ali fans telling him he was going to get his ass kicked -- and throwing Ali's rhetoric at him. Like fans calling Sonny Liston a "Big Ugly Bear" from across the street, Holmes got tired of Ali's mouth.

He felt Ali overdid it... "There a time to stop building the fight and shut your mouth.. You don't get into the ring and keep calling me names before the fight because all the ticket have been sold.. We both knew I was going to box his ears off and maybe he didn't like it.. I didn't like it either, but he got 10 million for it.. If anybody ever thought the Ali fight was about anything other than money they're the dumbest fools out there."
BoxBuzz
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 29847
Joined: 07 Jun 2005, 16:37

Re: fastest hands in heavyweight history?

Post by BoxBuzz »

Not a bad come back Kalan. What's clear is that you recognize this was Holmes at his best and Ali at his worst.

An apples and oranges moment....and meaningless in a prime vs prime discussion between consenting adults.

and/or young enthusiastic boxing fans.

So now we can agree to clearly disagree......in their primes I believe it would be one hell of a fight....I favor Ali.

You disagree... and apparently think it would be a replay of the apples and oranges fight... correct?
evrenb
Super Middleweight
Posts: 3410
Joined: 16 Feb 2013, 09:47

Re: fastest hands in heavyweight history?

Post by evrenb »

BoxBuzz wrote:Not a bad come back Kalan. What's clear is that you recognize this was Holmes at his best and Ali at his worst.

An apples and oranges moment....and meaningless in a prime vs prime discussion between consenting adults.

and/or young enthusiastic boxing fans.

So now we can agree to clearly disagree......in their primes I believe it would be one hell of a fight....I favor Ali.

You disagree... and apparently think it would be a replay of the apples and oranges fight... correct?
Shall I start a new poll
Ali was in his prime against Holmes
Ali was past his prime against Holmes

:maybe:
Caractacus
Super Welterweight
Posts: 18491
Joined: 13 Jun 2014, 16:47

Re: fastest hands in heavyweight history?

Post by Caractacus »

candyslim wrote:
Syntax Error wrote: For example, how fast were Jack Johnson, or Jack Dempsey really?

Only people who are old enough to have watched them can answer than, & there's none of those people left.
Would it not be possible with modern technology to correct or calculate and compensate for the error in the speed of those old films?. I might be talking rubbish but I would not have thought that beyond modern science.

My bet would be Floyd Patterson. Gene Tunney would have to up there too.
yeah,if you have a DVD player with a remote,just press 'half-speed".
I did that with the Willard vrs Johnson fight on the DVD Unforgivable Blackness
and it was almost like watching a real fight in real time instead of watching old Keystone Cops footage they use to show on TV.
BoxBuzz
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 29847
Joined: 07 Jun 2005, 16:37

Re: fastest hands in heavyweight history?

Post by BoxBuzz »

evrenb wrote:
BoxBuzz wrote:Not a bad come back Kalan. What's clear is that you recognize this was Holmes at his best and Ali at his worst.

An apples and oranges moment....and meaningless in a prime vs prime discussion between consenting adults.

and/or young enthusiastic boxing fans.

So now we can agree to clearly disagree......in their primes I believe it would be one hell of a fight....I favor Ali.

You disagree... and apparently think it would be a replay of the apples and oranges fight... correct?
Shall I start a new poll
Ali was in his prime against Holmes
Ali was past his prime against Holmes

:maybe:

it'd be a close one....as long as Kalan votes early and often.
Kalan
Super Middleweight
Posts: 10083
Joined: 23 Sep 2012, 23:22

Re: fastest hands in heavyweight history?

Post by Kalan »

BoxBuzz wrote:So now we can agree to clearly disagree......in their primes I believe it would be one hell of a fight....I favor Ali.

You disagree... and apparently think it would be a replay of the apples and oranges fight... correct?
Holmes and Ali had no apples n oranges fight.. They had a real fight -- but fought too late.. for the wrong reasons.. was a ripoff for the fans.. and worthless for Holmes.. Larry should have gotten the shot instead of Leon Spinks.. Was Larry an apple or an orange when he beat Ray Mercer and should have been declared World Heavyweight Champion at age 42??? ... Mercer had to relinquish his WBO Heavyweight Championship he won in his previous fight by knocking out 28-0 Tommy Morrison... The WBO didn't want Mercer to fight Holmes because they had a different World Champion in mind other than Mercer or Holmes.

The progression of the WBO Heavyweight Championship was strange from there... Michael Moorer stopped Bert Cooper for the vacant title and what exactly Moorer did with the WBO belt I have no idea... The title was declared vacant again -- and Morrison got another shot at it with Foreman as his opponent.

A prime Holmes was more skilled defensively and more versatile offensively than prime Ali... Holmes could get close and attack the body were Ali was pretty inept at that.. Holmes got hit less, landed more, and lasted longer.. Ali had more fights when he came back to fight Quarry at 28 than Holmes had at 28 when he 1st won the World Title versus Norton.. Holmes got a very late start.. Ali had a 3-year layoff which is very common and happened to Foreman, Dempsey, Louis, Holmes, Vitali Klitschko and other Heavyweight Champions who took 3 years plus off.
BoxBuzz
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 29847
Joined: 07 Jun 2005, 16:37

Re: fastest hands in heavyweight history?

Post by BoxBuzz »

You are quite a bit like a clown fish.

I say this with no disrespect.

Because Clownfish live in and around anemones, and are immune to the poisonous tentacles of sea anemones.

All the time hangin' out with them, and never once get stung...and that is pretty amazing.

I believe you could live in a pin cushion and always miss the point.

One thing for you to concern yourself with......especially if you've been feelin' a bit bitchy these days.......

Clownfish are born male and change into females upon maturity.

no need to over worry any time soon.....as you do appear to have plenty of time.
Kalan
Super Middleweight
Posts: 10083
Joined: 23 Sep 2012, 23:22

Re: fastest hands in heavyweight history?

Post by Kalan »

Oh brother... BuzzBox, I resent the clownfish insult, being no fan of Catlin Jenner -- but it sounds like you've undergone sex change surgery already.

And I'd say you’re a different kind of fish BuzzBox.

You see...it was said of Edward Livingston that "He's a man of such splendid abilities and tireless capacity for hard work -- yet so utterly corrupt and conniving in his sinister undertakings, that like a rotten mackerel by moonlight, he both shines and stinks."

You’re the rotten mackerel after the shine wears off and the stink remains. No guts, no brains, no argument — only a vermin infested fragment of rubbish
BoxBuzz
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 29847
Joined: 07 Jun 2005, 16:37

Re: fastest hands in heavyweight history?

Post by BoxBuzz »

stop it....I'm blushin'.


Now....who had faster hands in your opinion?

rate them in order of speed in your estimation.

Holmes, Ali, Or Patterson.




Oh....and let's go with each of them at their very super bestest. Not first day in the ring, Not last hurrah stuff. You know what I'm takin' about......the really good stuff in the middle.
Caractacus
Super Welterweight
Posts: 18491
Joined: 13 Jun 2014, 16:47

Re: fastest hands in heavyweight history?

Post by Caractacus »

Joe Mesi had some fast hands.
Kalan
Super Middleweight
Posts: 10083
Joined: 23 Sep 2012, 23:22

Re: fastest hands in heavyweight history?

Post by Kalan »

He didn't catch Monte Barrett or Vasily Jirov with an in credible number of shots -- like they got caught in other fights.
Kalan
Super Middleweight
Posts: 10083
Joined: 23 Sep 2012, 23:22

Re: fastest hands in heavyweight history?

Post by Kalan »

BoxBuzz wrote:stop it....I'm blushin'.


Now....who had faster hands in your opinion?

rate them in order of speed in your estimation.

Holmes, Ali, Or Patterson.




Oh....and let's go with each of them at their very super bestest. Not first day in the ring, Not last hurrah stuff. You know what I'm takin' about......the really good stuff in the middle.
Why blush??? That's a very minimal compliment ... but to the subject at hand, which you never come up with any data:

Holmes had the quickest hands of the 3... There's data to back that, including the fact Holmes won his first 48 straight including 21 World Title Fights

In the documentary "When We Were Kings" Ali took Holmes to Africa and sparred a lot with him in preparation for Foreman.. As Ali and Holmes are sparring in the documentary, you hear an observer say "Ali hasn't won a round from Holmes in a week." Holmes really had fast hands and he would whip up on Ali about any time he wanted. Holmes told a couple confidants words to this effect.. "Don't tell anybody this. Don’t breath a word of this, but I could beat Ali anytime I wanted. I'm faster and a better boxer than Ali all day. I have to hold myself way down because it's such a good paying job and Ali treats me so good.. The best food and accommodations and couldn’t ask for a better job. I get free sparring with some really good boxers, but just from sparring Ali, I know I’m the best Heavyweight in the world.”

I wasn’t a fly on the wall. I didn’t get that from Holmes. But like a lot of things said in confidence the people you trust share it with THEIR most trusted friend, “Don’t breath a word” and it got back to Ali through the grapevine. That’s a well-known story now and almost cost Holmes his job. You never tell anybody anything if it’s about you being much better than somebody who’s supposed to be the best in the world.
BoxBuzz
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 29847
Joined: 07 Jun 2005, 16:37

Re: fastest hands in heavyweight history?

Post by BoxBuzz »

Kalan wrote:

Holmes had the quickest hands of the 3... There's data to back that, including the fact Holmes won his first 48 straight including 21 World Title Fights






Ah....thanks....numbers of wins in a row is the big determinant?

then without a doubt Marciano had faster hands than Holmes right?

Cuz he won his first 49 fights.

funny thing about Logic....it either holds true when tested.......or it's not.......logic.


right?
Kalan
Super Middleweight
Posts: 10083
Joined: 23 Sep 2012, 23:22

Re: fastest hands in heavyweight history?

Post by Kalan »

BoxBuzz wrote:
Kalan wrote: then [with 49 fights] without a doubt Marciano had faster hands than Holmes right?
How many were World Title Fight opponents? ... 21? ... NOPE!!! ... Only 5 men faced Marciano in title fights... They were all over-the-hill little guys
Kalan
Super Middleweight
Posts: 10083
Joined: 23 Sep 2012, 23:22

Re: fastest hands in heavyweight history?

Post by Kalan »

I said the data "included" the fact Holmes won his first 48 straight including 21 World Title Fights... I didn't say that was conclusive proof is his superiority among those 3 -- and Marciano wasn't included for obvious reasons you left him out.. I didn't say Holmes had the fastest hands ever -- only among those 3.
Post Reply