Question for all those who think they know their stuff!!!

mattym · Post by **mattym** » 11 Jun 2006, 16:26

Get a load of this one then you bast****! Sorry just glad i thought of this so i can look clever for once.

Which boxer who went on to become the world champion years later boxed in ALL the weight classes?

Im being vague on purpose not to give away the era by mentioning the amount of weight classes around at this particular time.

Apologies if there is more than 1 (probably about 10 with my luck) please try to make me look clever by guessing wrong at first lol cheers n good luck

Edit: mistake on my part and a huge apology, it was all as a pro.

KO Artist · Post by **KO Artist** » 11 Jun 2006, 16:36

mattym wrote:Get a load of this one then you bast****! Sorry just glad i thought of this so i can look clever for once.

Which boxer who went on to become the world champion years later boxed in ALL the weight classes as an amateur?

Im being vague on purpose not to give away the era by mentioning the amount of weight classes around at this particular time.

Apologies if there is more than 1 (probably about 10 with my luck) please try to make me look clever by guessing wrong at first lol cheers n good luck

I was going to say Georges Carpentier.

James Toney?

mattym · Post by **mattym** » 11 Jun 2006, 16:41

KO Artist wrote:
mattym wrote:Get a load of this one then you bast****! Sorry just glad i thought of this so i can look clever for once.

Which boxer who went on to become the world champion years later boxed in ALL the weight classes as an amateur?

Im being vague on purpose not to give away the era by mentioning the amount of weight classes around at this particular time.

Apologies if there is more than 1 (probably about 10 with my luck) please try to make me look clever by guessing wrong at first lol cheers n good luck
I was going to say Georges Carpentier.

James Toney?

Hey 1 guess only mate!!!! lol Toney??? that man was NEVER a minimum/strawweight. I bet he was born atleast a welter

harrygreb · Post by **harrygreb** » 11 Jun 2006, 17:26

ted kid lewis went thru the weights like a madman. never a heavy though, so i guess you have beaten me

klompton · Post by **klompton** » 11 Jun 2006, 19:09

Supposedly Carpentier did but there is some doubt as to whether he actually boxed in the lowest divisions.

-KOKid- · Post by **-KOKid-** » 12 Jun 2006, 07:19

I believe Geroges Carpentier is the correct answer to this, at least I've have read that this is the case.
I think Young Stribling also fought in every weightclass but he never won a world title.

-KOKid-

mattym · Post by **mattym** » 12 Jun 2006, 12:09

Well done yes carpentier is correct

lamphey · Post by **lamphey** » 12 Jun 2006, 19:20

klompton wrote:Supposedly Carpentier did but there is some doubt as to whether he actually boxed in the lowest divisions.

That statement surprises me, as I have several fight reports of Carpentier fighting at the Bantamweight limit which at the time (1909-1910) was, I think, the lightest weight category.

klompton · Post by **klompton** » 12 Jun 2006, 19:50

Im certainly no expert on Carp's early career but I was under the impression that his bantamweight bouts were over the weight matches in which he was fighting guys who smaller than him but it was somewhat acceptable because he was so young.

barry · Post by **barry** » 13 Jun 2006, 02:13

I have a really good article on Charles Ledoux that the late Bob Soderman wrote and I know that Soderman researched the New York Herlad (Paris, France edition) very thoroughly during those years, so I'll go back through the article and Soderman also copied a lot of results/recaps of the Paris edition. I know I have results from 1910, but I'm not certain about 1909, but the 1910 results should tell a lot about the weight that Carpentier was at during that year...I'll check it out and print what I find in a couple of hours.

lamphey · Post by **lamphey** » 13 Jun 2006, 15:08

klompton wrote:Im certainly no expert on Carp's early career but I was under the impression that his bantamweight bouts were over the weight matches in which he was fighting guys who smaller than him but it was somewhat acceptable because he was so young.

Interesting, and the first time I've heard mention of over the weight matches.

I've just had a quick look through some of his fight reports (late 1909 to early 1910), Carpentier received a lot of ink in the British Boxing press from early in his career.

Many of the reports mention his frail build, slip of a lad, etc. He is also labelled as a Bantamweight and two of the reports I looked at were billed as for the French title against Til so presumably he weighed within the limit.

A few reports mention the opponents being physically more imposing, heavier or sturdier than Carpentier.

Nothing I read suggested Carpentier was the bigger man, if anything it was the reverse.

I skipped ahead to the end of 1910 and one report noted how "Carpentier had shot up into a Lightweight".

I'll be interested to read what Barry finds in his Soderman notes.

barry · Post by **barry** » 14 Jun 2006, 03:17

I haven't checked it out yet...I got busy doing something else and forgot about it, but I will check it out.

barry · Post by **barry** » 15 Jun 2006, 08:10

Bob Soderman's notes from his research in the Paris Herald mentions that near the beginning of 1910 Carpentier was fighting as a bantamweight, of which it states that he was Champion of France at bantamweight, but by the end of the year he was nearly a full-fledged lightweight.

lamphey · Post by **lamphey** » 15 Jun 2006, 13:10

barry wrote:Bob Soderman's notes from his research in the Paris Herald mentions that near the beginning of 1910 Carpentier was fighting as a bantamweight, of which it states that he was Champion of France at bantamweight, but by the end of the year he was nearly a full-fledged lightweight.

Thanks Barry, that ties in exactly with what I wrote a few posts up ...... but then again Soderman was probably using the same reports that I was.

The Scranton Assassin · Post by **The Scranton Assassin** » 16 Jun 2006, 03:09

harrygreb wrote:ted kid lewis went thru the weights like a madman. never a heavy though, so i guess you have beaten me

Lewis actualy did fight a heavyweight named Joe Gummer and royaly kicked his ass! Anyone ever see this fight? According to the film I have Gummer weighed in at exactly 200 lbs. However I check the weighs in Lewis record and there was no weights

Jaclem · Post by **Jaclem** » 17 Jun 2006, 01:19

..i forget if it was jess willard or carnera who fought a flyweight in an over-the -weight match....but whichever it was the flyweight got the newspaper decision...which was said to be essentially a jabbing contest.

Cap · Post by **Cap** » 24 Jun 2006, 09:05

Decagon wrote:...some say that he held "all the French titles, from flyweight to heavyweight," most notably on the ESPN Classic version of Jack Johnson vs. Frank Moran, which Carpentier officiated. This simply isn't true.

Someone mentioned that Carpentier fought in the bantamweight division. It's true that the bantamweight division - which had a limit of 112 pounds - was the smallest division in boxing around 1908, but I doubt that Carpentier actually fought at 112. Carpentier was almost 6 feet tall as an adult, and when he reffed the fight between Johnson and Moran in 1914, he looked like a solid light heavyweight or heavyweight. I've always seen the talk of him fighting in all eight divisions as a myth. As far as I know, he's never fought below 126.

'nuff said.

sockdolager · Post by **sockdolager** » 24 Jun 2006, 09:09

didnt Carpentier start fighting proffesionally at like 13? If that is the case than he could have possibly weighed in the low 100's at the time. Just a thought, I do not claim to know this to be true but thought I remembered reading it.

granberry · Post by **granberry** » 13 Jul 2006, 12:02

Some remarkable fighters

Jimmy McLarnin--flyweight through welterweight

Sam Langford--lighweight thhrough heavyweight

Mickey Walker--welterweight through heavyweight

Bob Fitzsimmons--middleweight (welterweight?) through heavyweight

The Great John L · Post by **The Great John L** » 13 Jul 2006, 12:13

granberry wrote:Some remarkable fighters

Jimmy McLarnin--flyweight through welterweight

Sam Langford--lighweight thhrough heavyweight

Mickey Walker--welterweight through heavyweight

Bob Fitzsimmons--middleweight (welterweight?) through heavyweight

How about RJJ and Toney, also MW through HW. Actually RJJ started at JMW

granberry · Post by **granberry** » 13 Jul 2006, 12:18

Those I listed fought in a time of better fighters.

The Great John L · Post by **The Great John L** » 13 Jul 2006, 12:39

granberry wrote:Those I listed fought in a time of better fighters.

Agreed. But you can't fault JT and RJJ for when they were born.

theone · Post by **theone** » 14 Jul 2006, 21:48

[Some remarkable fighters

Jimmy McLarnin--flyweight through welterweight

Sam Langford--lighweight thhrough heavyweight

Mickey Walker--welterweight through heavyweight

Bob Fitzsimmons--middleweight (welterweight?) through heavyweight

Roy Jones in his prime would have beaten them all. Yes, including Langford.

Jaclem · Post by **Jaclem** » 15 Jul 2006, 01:03

..what do you mean, we can't blame RJJ for when he was born???Well, snmart ass, than i ask you ...just who CAN we blame?

theone · Post by **theone** » 15 Jul 2006, 09:16

If Tarver could close his eyes and swing, Langford, the best boxer-puncher ever, could knock Jones out.

Notice I said prime. If you truly believe that was Jones at his best against Tarver, than there is no point to continueing this disscussion.

Question for all those who think they know their stuff!!!

Question for all those who think they know their stuff!!!

Re: Question for all those who think they know their stuff!!

Re: Question for all those who think they know their stuff!!

re

re

re

Re: re