Wills-Weinert - tale of the tape

APerno
Super Lightweight
Posts: 1654
Joined: 20 Jul 2016, 03:38

Wills-Weinert - tale of the tape

Post by APerno »

I never saw Wills numbers before. - This fight was July of 1925 with Wills winning by a 2nd round KO (at the Polo Grounds).

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

Re: Wills-Weinert - tale of the tape

Post by Kalan »

So??? ... It would have been a little different if he were facing Jack Dempsey -- who was about the same weight but had 3 X the firepower.
APerno
Super Lightweight
Posts: 1654
Joined: 20 Jul 2016, 03:38

Re: Wills-Weinert - tale of the tape

Post by APerno »

Kalan wrote:So??? ... It would have been a little different if he were facing Jack Dempsey -- who was about the same weight but had 3 X the firepower.
No "so" - I literally meant I had never countered Wills measurements before. Wasn't trying to make a point.
scorpio83
Middleweight
Posts: 4624
Joined: 18 Aug 2013, 06:01

Re: Wills-Weinert - tale of the tape

Post by scorpio83 »

APerno, I checked Charley Weinert's file at this website that he stood 5'11" not 6'2 1/2" like in this tale of the tape with Harry Wills. For Harry Wills, I believe that Wills is taller than 6'2" because I looked at the photos standing next to Luis Angel Firpo and Wills look taller than Firpo, who stood 6'2 1/2 or 6'3". If Firpo stood 6'2 1/2 or 6'3", Wills may stood 6'3" or 6'4". The tale of the tape between Wills and Weinert maybe misleading. :maybe:
APerno
Super Lightweight
Posts: 1654
Joined: 20 Jul 2016, 03:38

Re: Wills-Weinert - tale of the tape

Post by APerno »

scorpio83 wrote:APerno, I checked Charley Weinert's file at this website that he stood 5'11" not 6'2 1/2" like in this tale of the tape with Harry Wills. For Harry Wills, I believe that Wills is taller than 6'2" because I looked at the photos standing next to Luis Angel Firpo and Wills look taller than Firpo, who stood 6'2 1/2 or 6'3". If Firpo stood 6'2 1/2 or 6'3", Wills may stood 6'3" or 6'4". The tale of the tape between Wills and Weinert maybe misleading. :maybe:
Here is a second and third example - none seem to match :KO: - there is no way I find a second Weinert 'tale of the tape' he just wasn't important enough.

Image
Image
Ambling Alp II
Super Middleweight
Posts: 15182
Joined: 04 Nov 2012, 18:31

Re: Wills-Weinert - tale of the tape

Post by Ambling Alp II »

It is odd about Wills height. I have seen it as high at 6'4. He does seem to be pretty tall. And how could reach possibly be 74" for one fight and 84" for another?
scorpio83
Middleweight
Posts: 4624
Joined: 18 Aug 2013, 06:01

Re: Wills-Weinert - tale of the tape

Post by scorpio83 »

Ambling Alp II wrote:It is odd about Wills height. I have seen it as high at 6'4. He does seem to be pretty tall. And how could reach possibly be 74" for one fight and 84" for another?
You're right. Wills did seem to be pretty tall and there is a picture of him and Luis Firpo stood next to each other before their fight. Wills was not shorter than Firpo, who was 6'2 1/2 or 6'3" and Wills stood about 6'3 or 6'4" and his reach is 76 before his fight with Tut Jackson according to one of the old newspaper archive, which is lost due to the content change from news google. I believed that whoever wrote the tale of the tape of every Wills' fights from the old newspaper back in the day didn't check the picture as evidence that he was taller than 6'2" as he stood 6'3" or 6'4".

APerno, outside of Wills vs. Weinert - tale of the tape, do you have the tale of the tape of Jack Dempsey vs. Bill Brennan World Heavyweight Title Fight, so I want to know how long were Brennan's reach?
Controversial
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 9186
Joined: 13 Jul 2002, 18:29

Re: Wills-Weinert - tale of the tape

Post by Controversial »

I think most tale of the tapes are inaccurate and normally exaggerated. It don't know why they don't stick fighters on machines that also measure height and reach when they do the weigh-in.
APerno
Super Lightweight
Posts: 1654
Joined: 20 Jul 2016, 03:38

Re: Wills-Weinert - tale of the tape

Post by APerno »

scorpio83 wrote: 31 Oct 2017, 04:54
Ambling Alp II wrote:It is odd about Wills height. I have seen it as high at 6'4. He does seem to be pretty tall. And how could reach possibly be 74" for one fight and 84" for another?
You're right. Wills did seem to be pretty tall and there is a picture of him and Luis Firpo stood next to each other before their fight. Wills was not shorter than Firpo, who was 6'2 1/2 or 6'3" and Wills stood about 6'3 or 6'4" and his reach is 76 before his fight with Tut Jackson according to one of the old newspaper archive, which is lost due to the content change from news google. I believed that whoever wrote the tale of the tape of every Wills' fights from the old newspaper back in the day didn't check the picture as evidence that he was taller than 6'2" as he stood 6'3" or 6'4".

APerno, outside of Wills vs. Weinert - tale of the tape, do you have the tale of the tape of Jack Dempsey vs. Bill Brennan World Heavyweight Title Fight, so I want to know how long were Brennan's reach?
Here we go again - you ain't going to get shite out these two unless of course the man's arms grew during middle age.- sorry.

Image

Image
APerno
Super Lightweight
Posts: 1654
Joined: 20 Jul 2016, 03:38

Re: Wills-Weinert - tale of the tape

Post by APerno »

Controversial wrote: 31 Oct 2017, 06:01 I think most tale of the tapes are inaccurate and normally exaggerated. It don't know why they don't stick fighters on machines that also measure height and reach when they do the weigh-in.
. . . and do we really need to know ankle size?
punchoutsb
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 5842
Joined: 16 Sep 2009, 01:05

Re: Wills-Weinert - tale of the tape

Post by punchoutsb »

mercman wrote: 30 Oct 2017, 12:25
APerno wrote:I never saw Wills numbers before. - This fight was July of 1925 with Wills winning by a 2nd round KO (at the Polo Grounds).

Image
Those measurements don't give the impression of one guy being 22lbs heavier than the other.

188lbs seems quite light for someone over 6'2" with a reach of nearly 80", a 17" neck, 33" waist, etc.
A 21 inch thigh is a very very skinny thigh. A rule of thumb (and it's generally inaccurate but it's at least in the ball park) is an inch of mass on a large area like the thighs can equal about ten pounds in bodyweight. If the numbers were accurate there two inches difference in both the thighs and the upper arms. That would equate to at least 20+ pounds of bodyweight difference.
APerno
Super Lightweight
Posts: 1654
Joined: 20 Jul 2016, 03:38

Re: Wills-Weinert - tale of the tape

Post by APerno »

punchoutsb wrote: 31 Oct 2017, 22:43
mercman wrote: 30 Oct 2017, 12:25
APerno wrote:I never saw Wills numbers before. - This fight was July of 1925 with Wills winning by a 2nd round KO (at the Polo Grounds).

Image
Those measurements don't give the impression of one guy being 22lbs heavier than the other.

188lbs seems quite light for someone over 6'2" with a reach of nearly 80", a 17" neck, 33" waist, etc.
A 21 inch thigh is a very very skinny thigh. A rule of thumb (and it's generally inaccurate but it's at least in the ball park) is an inch of mass on a large area like the thighs can equal about ten pounds in bodyweight. If the numbers were accurate there two inches difference in both the thighs and the upper arms. That would equate to at least 20+ pounds of bodyweight difference.
This page has him (Weinert) at 5' 11" 190lbs

http://www.harrygreb.com/charlesweinartbio.html
Controversial
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 9186
Joined: 13 Jul 2002, 18:29

Re: Wills-Weinert - tale of the tape

Post by Controversial »

APerno wrote: 31 Oct 2017, 22:37
Controversial wrote: 31 Oct 2017, 06:01 I think most tale of the tapes are inaccurate and normally exaggerated. It don't know why they don't stick fighters on machines that also measure height and reach when they do the weigh-in.
. . . and do we really need to know ankle size?
No not really. I'm not sure how these stats are obtained as I'm pretty sure they don't measure all these things before every fight. They appear to be made up most of the time, I've seen Ali's reach recorded as anything between 78" and 82"

I remember an early Tyson promo video where they show his height being measured, they showed him just under 6" however he was clearly standing away from the chart and you could only see him from waist upwards. Most people say he is 5'10" at the most.
APerno
Super Lightweight
Posts: 1654
Joined: 20 Jul 2016, 03:38

Re: Wills-Weinert - tale of the tape

Post by APerno »

I found two for Tyson, Biggs and Holmes - for both fights he is listed at 5' 11 1/2" - sounds too tall to me; wrong but consistent. His reach, both times is posted at 71"
Controversial
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 9186
Joined: 13 Jul 2002, 18:29

Re: Wills-Weinert - tale of the tape

Post by Controversial »

APerno wrote: 01 Nov 2017, 14:32 I found two for Tyson, Biggs and Holmes - for both fights he is listed at 5' 11 1/2" - sounds too tall to me; wrong but consistent. His reach, both times is posted at 71"
Yes that's what he was normally listed as, he was never that tall. That's what I mean they never appear to be official stats, they can't be as they are often wrong. It's probably the height his promotors told everyone he was to make him seem bigger than he was.
APerno
Super Lightweight
Posts: 1654
Joined: 20 Jul 2016, 03:38

Re: Wills-Weinert - tale of the tape

Post by APerno »

Controversial wrote: 01 Nov 2017, 15:07
APerno wrote: 01 Nov 2017, 14:32 I found two for Tyson, Biggs and Holmes - for both fights he is listed at 5' 11 1/2" - sounds too tall to me; wrong but consistent. His reach, both times is posted at 71"
Yes that's what he was normally listed as, he was never that tall. That's what I mean they never appear to be official stats, they can't be as they are often wrong. It's probably the height his promotors told everyone he was to make him seem bigger than he was.
After Tyson lost to Douglas someone asked Angelo Dundee what he would do (if it was his problem) to get back Tyson's intimidation factor - Dundee replied (something to the effect) 'everyone now realizes that he is not that big, I would hire small men to walk around with him to make him look bigger.' (Not sure if he was trying to be funny or not.)
Controversial
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 9186
Joined: 13 Jul 2002, 18:29

Re: Wills-Weinert - tale of the tape

Post by Controversial »

APerno wrote: 01 Nov 2017, 21:42
After Tyson lost to Douglas someone asked Angelo Dundee what he would do (if it was his problem) to get back Tyson's intimidation factor - Dundee replied (something to the effect) 'everyone now realizes that he is not that big, I would hire small men to walk around with him to make him look bigger.' (Not sure if he was trying to be funny or not.)
I haven't heard that before but yes he probably had a point. Tyson won most fights on the intimidation factor, once he lost he was never the same again.
jamamb
Lightweight
Posts: 14329
Joined: 17 Sep 2017, 05:37

Re: Wills-Weinert - tale of the tape

Post by jamamb »

take your height and add at least an inch or two for your official listing
scorpio83
Middleweight
Posts: 4624
Joined: 18 Aug 2013, 06:01

Re: Wills-Weinert - tale of the tape

Post by scorpio83 »

APerno wrote: 31 Oct 2017, 18:32
scorpio83 wrote: 31 Oct 2017, 04:54
Ambling Alp II wrote:It is odd about Wills height. I have seen it as high at 6'4. He does seem to be pretty tall. And how could reach possibly be 74" for one fight and 84" for another?
You're right. Wills did seem to be pretty tall and there is a picture of him and Luis Firpo stood next to each other before their fight. Wills was not shorter than Firpo, who was 6'2 1/2 or 6'3" and Wills stood about 6'3 or 6'4" and his reach is 76 before his fight with Tut Jackson according to one of the old newspaper archive, which is lost due to the content change from news google. I believed that whoever wrote the tale of the tape of every Wills' fights from the old newspaper back in the day didn't check the picture as evidence that he was taller than 6'2" as he stood 6'3" or 6'4".

APerno, outside of Wills vs. Weinert - tale of the tape, do you have the tale of the tape of Jack Dempsey vs. Bill Brennan World Heavyweight Title Fight, so I want to know how long were Brennan's reach?
Here we go again - you ain't going to get shite out these two unless of course the man's arms grew during middle age.- sorry.

Image

Image
Thanks APerno.
scorpio83
Middleweight
Posts: 4624
Joined: 18 Aug 2013, 06:01

Re: Wills-Weinert - tale of the tape

Post by scorpio83 »

APerno, where did you get those newspapers with the boxing tale of the tape because I wanted to look at certain fighters' tale of the tape. Before you show me that, do you have the tale of the tape of Bob Satterfield? If you watch his fights on YouTube, Satterfield did not stood 6'2" according to website and need to change, but he stood 5'10", who was two inches shorter than Ezzard Charles and stood the same height as Harold Johnson. I also want to know how long were Satterfield's arms in reach. Please compare his tale of the tape fights of Satterfield each against Ezzard Charles, Harold Johnson and Nino Valdes, so I want to know if his measurement was accurate like Sandy Saddler vs. Willie Pepp.
Controversial
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 9186
Joined: 13 Jul 2002, 18:29

Re: Wills-Weinert - tale of the tape

Post by Controversial »

I assume Aperno subscribes to an archived newspaper website
APerno
Super Lightweight
Posts: 1654
Joined: 20 Jul 2016, 03:38

Re: Wills-Weinert - tale of the tape

Post by APerno »

scorpio83 wrote: 04 Nov 2017, 04:48 APerno, where did you get those newspapers with the boxing tale of the tape because I wanted to look at certain fighters' tale of the tape. Before you show me that, do you have the tale of the tape of Bob Satterfield? If you watch his fights on YouTube, Satterfield did not stood 6'2" according to website and need to change, but he stood 5'10", who was two inches shorter than Ezzard Charles and stood the same height as Harold Johnson. I also want to know how long were Satterfield's arms in reach. Please compare his tale of the tape fights of Satterfield each against Ezzard Charles, Harold Johnson and Nino Valdes, so I want to know if his measurement was accurate like Sandy Saddler vs. Willie Pepp.
All I got going here (as Controversial pointed out) is a a subscription to the NY Times archive - I will look for Satterfield but with it being The Times only the big fights get mentioned. I will see what I can find.
BoxBuzz
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 29847
Joined: 07 Jun 2005, 16:37

Re: Wills-Weinert - tale of the tape

Post by BoxBuzz »

Dempsey's chest at 89 inches in one of the readouts had me laughin......I'm sure it was 39 and seems to have been goofed with.

But it got my attention.
APerno
Super Lightweight
Posts: 1654
Joined: 20 Jul 2016, 03:38

Re: Wills-Weinert - tale of the tape

Post by APerno »

scorpio83 wrote: 04 Nov 2017, 04:48 APerno, where did you get those newspapers with the boxing tale of the tape because I wanted to look at certain fighters' tale of the tape. Before you show me that, do you have the tale of the tape of Bob Satterfield? If you watch his fights on YouTube, Satterfield did not stood 6'2" according to website and need to change, but he stood 5'10", who was two inches shorter than Ezzard Charles and stood the same height as Harold Johnson. I also want to know how long were Satterfield's arms in reach. Please compare his tale of the tape fights of Satterfield each against Ezzard Charles, Harold Johnson and Nino Valdes, so I want to know if his measurement was accurate like Sandy Saddler vs. Willie Pepp.
I came up empty on Bob Satterfield. He seems to have fought many under card fights and there are several blips posted (like the one I posted below) but no tale-of-the-tape postings. I did notice two separate 'tapes' on Charles (one against Marciano of course, the other against Maxim.) - Sorry I could help more, I will keep an eye out.

Image
punchoutsb
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 5842
Joined: 16 Sep 2009, 01:05

Re: Wills-Weinert - tale of the tape

Post by punchoutsb »

BoxBuzz wrote: 04 Nov 2017, 12:03 Dempsey's chest at 89 inches in one of the readouts had me laughin......I'm sure it was 39 and seems to have been goofed with.

But it got my attention.
:lol:

I want an 89 inch chest, I'll bench press 2,000 pounds RAW!
Post Reply