Some say that Jofre came before the era of the greatest Mexican bantamweights of the late 60s and entire 70s decade. One of the best bantams of the late 60s was Ruben Olivares. How Jofre would have fared against him?
By watching Jofre in some clips, I pick Jofre by late KO in an excellent contest. I pick Jofre, more complete fighter than Rockabye Ruben.
Bantamweights: Eder Jofre vs Ruben Olivares
-
elmersalsa
- Heavyweight
- Posts: 15678
- Joined: 02 Feb 2003, 03:50
I'd go for a peak Olivares to win this... the way to beat Jofre was to pressure him on the inside and outwork him and not give him the opportunity to use his boxing skills and work at range... this is how Fighting Harada beat Jofre twice... Olivares had a very simular style to Harada, but was a much bigger puncher... so I see him beating Jofre after a hard fought fight on points...
Isn't this really a feather vs a bantam?
Anyway I'm addicted to running these on the simulator and here's the call.
http://www.boxrec.com/forum/viewtopic.p ... highlight=
Anyway I'm addicted to running these on the simulator and here's the call.
http://www.boxrec.com/forum/viewtopic.p ... highlight=
No, both were bantamweight champion.BoxBuzz wrote:Isn't this really a feather vs a bantam?
http://www.boxrec.com/forum/viewtopic.p ... highlight=
But dont you think Olivares style would bother Jofre just like Haradas did?... and Olivares was a harder hitter than Harada... overall Jofre was the more consistant fighter but I think if we're talking about a peak conditioned Olivares, I think he would be too much for Jofre...kikibalt wrote:As good as Olivares was, Imo Jofre was better, so I would pick Jofre by UD.
Btw, I seen both fight live a few times
I agree, when he was in shape at 118 Olivares was really awesome, in the manner of a young Duran... a lot of his defeats were down to his party lifestyle...Minotauro wrote:I think Olivares had the style to beat Jofre he wouldn't give him an inch and has a great body attack as well as amazing power. I can't see any Bantamweight beating the Olivares that destroyed Lionel Rose he looked amazing in that match.
re
Both were batanmweight champs and both were featherweight champs.
Olivares, overall, fought the better competition and I think he hit harder, but Jofre was more skilled all-around...he was a complete fighter, a true professional with no weakness...like Ricardo Lopez was at strawweight for so many years, though Jofre was better than Lopez. Olivares often had a great disliking for training, which Jofre was always fit, but if they both came in at peak, prime shape then it would be a hell of a fight...though I couldn't ever see Olivares outboxing Jofre in the same way that he did Arguello for a few rounds, but it would be a very competitive fight for seven, or eight rounds...then I think Jofre would take over and I would have to go with Jofre to win by late knockout...sowhere close to round 14, but if there was ever a fighter who could knock Jofre cold...it was Olivares, but if Olivares could not put Jofre away very early then he would be in for a serious beat-down late in the fight!
Olivares, overall, fought the better competition and I think he hit harder, but Jofre was more skilled all-around...he was a complete fighter, a true professional with no weakness...like Ricardo Lopez was at strawweight for so many years, though Jofre was better than Lopez. Olivares often had a great disliking for training, which Jofre was always fit, but if they both came in at peak, prime shape then it would be a hell of a fight...though I couldn't ever see Olivares outboxing Jofre in the same way that he did Arguello for a few rounds, but it would be a very competitive fight for seven, or eight rounds...then I think Jofre would take over and I would have to go with Jofre to win by late knockout...sowhere close to round 14, but if there was ever a fighter who could knock Jofre cold...it was Olivares, but if Olivares could not put Jofre away very early then he would be in for a serious beat-down late in the fight!
re
A fight that I would like to see at bantamweight would be between Olivares and Terry McGovern...talk about a real knockdown, drag-out brawl for a couple rounds, but it wouldn't last much longer as both men hit just too damn hard...someone would be knocked out within three, which I would lean toward McGovern in that bout!
I'd go for Olivares over Mcgovern.... I think he was probably the better all round fighter and Mcgovern strikes me as someone who wouldnt do well when he was pushed back... something which Olivares would certainly do imo. Olivares was also much more durable at 118 than he was at 126... not that he was that bad at 126 though!...
re
>>>I'd go for Olivares over Mcgovern.... I think he was probably the better all round fighter and Mcgovern strikes me as someone who wouldnt do well when he was pushed back... something which Olivares would certainly do imo. Olivares was also much more durable at 118 than he was at 126... not that he was that bad at 126 though!<<<
McGovern was a freak of nature, which if strong lightweights could not push him back then no bantamweight will. Olivares only shot would be to go straight at him and whichever lands the biggest bomb first will likely win, but Olivares was not big enough, nor strong enough to push McGovern back. McGovern was one of the absolute strongest bantamweights and one of the absolute strongest featherweights in history and the only way to beat him in his prime is to beat him at his own style. Boxing wouldn't do it as he would just overwhelm an opponents trying to jab and out duel him and for the most part there were no straight forward power punchers who could get the job done either.
Young Corbett beat him by making him lose control of his anger and as McGovern came in all wild with rage, Corbett remained calm and counter punched McGovern with some heavy bombs that completely neutralized McGovern. Olivares was not physically big enough to muscle McGovern, but he could very easily follow the same blueprint that Corbett used and talk shit about McGovern, his family and anything else that might get him in a rage then Olivares could land a hard counter hook that would turn the lights out. Corbett also had the advantage that McGovern had quit training and was spending most of his time on theatre stages and in bars, which that kind of life will ruin a bopxer, which Olivares also knows about as he was quite the party guy and he paid for it in several fights.
A fight where both men where at their very best, both trained perfectly I see McGovern just being too strong and powerful for Olivares and simply just too overwhelming...and at his best McGovern had recuperative skills that only a handful of others possessed, but like Jofre, if there was anyone who could knockout a prime McGovern...it would be Olivares! But McGovern was a real force of nature from 112 up to 130.
McGovern was a freak of nature, which if strong lightweights could not push him back then no bantamweight will. Olivares only shot would be to go straight at him and whichever lands the biggest bomb first will likely win, but Olivares was not big enough, nor strong enough to push McGovern back. McGovern was one of the absolute strongest bantamweights and one of the absolute strongest featherweights in history and the only way to beat him in his prime is to beat him at his own style. Boxing wouldn't do it as he would just overwhelm an opponents trying to jab and out duel him and for the most part there were no straight forward power punchers who could get the job done either.
Young Corbett beat him by making him lose control of his anger and as McGovern came in all wild with rage, Corbett remained calm and counter punched McGovern with some heavy bombs that completely neutralized McGovern. Olivares was not physically big enough to muscle McGovern, but he could very easily follow the same blueprint that Corbett used and talk shit about McGovern, his family and anything else that might get him in a rage then Olivares could land a hard counter hook that would turn the lights out. Corbett also had the advantage that McGovern had quit training and was spending most of his time on theatre stages and in bars, which that kind of life will ruin a bopxer, which Olivares also knows about as he was quite the party guy and he paid for it in several fights.
A fight where both men where at their very best, both trained perfectly I see McGovern just being too strong and powerful for Olivares and simply just too overwhelming...and at his best McGovern had recuperative skills that only a handful of others possessed, but like Jofre, if there was anyone who could knockout a prime McGovern...it would be Olivares! But McGovern was a real force of nature from 112 up to 130.
-
elmersalsa
- Heavyweight
- Posts: 15678
- Joined: 02 Feb 2003, 03:50
Re: re
How do you know that? Do you have clips of Terry McGovern?barry wrote:>>>I'd go for Olivares over Mcgovern.... I think he was probably the better all round fighter and Mcgovern strikes me as someone who wouldnt do well when he was pushed back... something which Olivares would certainly do imo. Olivares was also much more durable at 118 than he was at 126... not that he was that bad at 126 though!<<<
McGovern was a freak of nature, which if strong lightweights could not push him back then no bantamweight will. Olivares only shot would be to go straight at him and whichever lands the biggest bomb first will likely win, but Olivares was not big enough, nor strong enough to push McGovern back. McGovern was one of the absolute strongest bantamweights and one of the absolute strongest featherweights in history and the only way to beat him in his prime is to beat him at his own style. Boxing wouldn't do it as he would just overwhelm an opponents trying to jab and out duel him and for the most part there were no straight forward power punchers who could get the job done either.
Young Corbett beat him by making him lose control of his anger and as McGovern came in all wild with rage, Corbett remained calm and counter punched McGovern with some heavy bombs that completely neutralized McGovern. Olivares was not physically big enough to muscle McGovern, but he could very easily follow the same blueprint that Corbett used and talk shit about McGovern, his family and anything else that might get him in a rage then Olivares could land a hard counter hook that would turn the lights out. Corbett also had the advantage that McGovern had quit training and was spending most of his time on theatre stages and in bars, which that kind of life will ruin a bopxer, which Olivares also knows about as he was quite the party guy and he paid for it in several fights.
A fight where both men where at their very best, both trained perfectly I see McGovern just being too strong and powerful for Olivares and simply just too overwhelming...and at his best McGovern had recuperative skills that only a handful of others possessed, but like Jofre, if there was anyone who could knockout a prime McGovern...it would be Olivares! But McGovern was a real force of nature from 112 up to 130.
Re: re
I see your point of view, but I think Olivares was a very strong Bantam and Feather... look at the trouble he gave Arguello... Alexis was huge at 126 yet Ruben was often able to push him back... at his best Ruben was pretty awesome and I think Terry with his walk in style would be a good style for him.... we will never know for sure either way though, unfortunately...barry wrote:>>>I'd go for Olivares over Mcgovern.... I think he was probably the better all round fighter and Mcgovern strikes me as someone who wouldnt do well when he was pushed back... something which Olivares would certainly do imo. Olivares was also much more durable at 118 than he was at 126... not that he was that bad at 126 though!<<<
McGovern was a freak of nature, which if strong lightweights could not push him back then no bantamweight will. Olivares only shot would be to go straight at him and whichever lands the biggest bomb first will likely win, but Olivares was not big enough, nor strong enough to push McGovern back. McGovern was one of the absolute strongest bantamweights and one of the absolute strongest featherweights in history and the only way to beat him in his prime is to beat him at his own style. Boxing wouldn't do it as he would just overwhelm an opponents trying to jab and out duel him and for the most part there were no straight forward power punchers who could get the job done either.
Young Corbett beat him by making him lose control of his anger and as McGovern came in all wild with rage, Corbett remained calm and counter punched McGovern with some heavy bombs that completely neutralized McGovern. Olivares was not physically big enough to muscle McGovern, but he could very easily follow the same blueprint that Corbett used and talk shit about McGovern, his family and anything else that might get him in a rage then Olivares could land a hard counter hook that would turn the lights out. Corbett also had the advantage that McGovern had quit training and was spending most of his time on theatre stages and in bars, which that kind of life will ruin a bopxer, which Olivares also knows about as he was quite the party guy and he paid for it in several fights.
A fight where both men where at their very best, both trained perfectly I see McGovern just being too strong and powerful for Olivares and simply just too overwhelming...and at his best McGovern had recuperative skills that only a handful of others possessed, but like Jofre, if there was anyone who could knockout a prime McGovern...it would be Olivares! But McGovern was a real force of nature from 112 up to 130.
re
>>>How do you know that? Do you have clips of Terry McGovern?<<<
Actually I do! Not to mention that I have multiple newspaper clippings for every fight that McGovern ever fought and multiple clippings for every opponent that McGovern's opponents ever faced...and guess what...as I stated, when he reached his prime around late 1898 there was no fighter who was able to jab and box McGovern...those that tried were completely overwhelmed. McGovern overwhelmed such great stylists as Harry Forbes (twice), Pedlar Palmer, George Dixon (twice), Eddie Santry, Tommy White (Twice), Frank Erne and Joe Gans...not to mention those whom he beat after losing to Corbett.
He also overwhelmed very strong, very physical featherweights and lightweights...Joe Gans, Frank Erne, "Harlem" Tommy Murphy, Oscar Gardner, Aurelio Herrera, Austin Rice, Kid Broad and Joe Bernstein...all of those guys were stronger than Olivares
Even after he was way past his prime McGovern still held his own and stood toe-to-toe with Battling Nelson, Jimmy Britt and drew in his third bout with Corbett.
>>>At the risk of igniting barry's wraith, which is not my intention at all, I would pick Oliveras over any turn of the century featherweight. And i don't think it would be that tough.<<<
You gave a solid, clear opinion...I've never had any problems with that...it's when people attack me that I unwind, or use to...now I just ignore it, or delete any nonsense, as I have better things to do rather than argue with some idiot, but anyone just speaking their opinion, as you just did...hell that's what this board is for! Now in response to your comment about Olivares over any turn of the century featherweight...I agree, with the exception of McGovern of course!
But Olivares beating McGovern...based on what would lead one to give him the edge? Olivares, though one of the greatest punchers of all-time, with the exception of perhaps three opponents, he faced weak opposition up until around 1969 and from then on his record is very spotty as he lost to a number of fighters not in McGovern's league! Olivares had a tremendous start winning 60 of 61 with 56 knockouts, but look at who that competition was! His record from 1969 to 1980 (we'll not count the bouts when he was obviously way past his best), so his record from 1969 to 1980 was 42-10-1 (34 KO) and his record against actual top ten competition is even lesser. Olivares was far superior to a lot of fighters, but when he stepped up to face actual top ten contenders his record took several hits. He certainly was not as dominant once he stepped up to the championship level. When Olivares stepped up to the elite level he was still a great fighter, but he no longer bowled over opponents in the manner he did early and as I said, his record after he stepped up to face contenders and champions is very spotty with about as many losses as wins against top opposition, which McGovern just went right through the very best, elite competition as easy as he did weaker opposition, in fact, he got better once he stepped up and it wasn't until he completely almost did away with training and staying in shape that he really slipped!
Overall, Olivares beat 8 title holders, McGovern beat 9. At their absolute best against the absolute best opposition that each man faced, Olivares had more trouble than not...the same cannot be said of McGovern. He had a couple of scares, once with Oscar Gardner and the other with Aurelio Herrera where both men knocked McGovern down and seriously had him hurt, but McGovern arose to score clean knockouts in the very next round against both fighter! Olivares was able to reverse adversity, but it was usually in the rematch and not in the same bouts where he had to show his championship quality, which he was a hell of a champion...maybe not record-wise, but he was a great fighter...just a step below McGovern!
>>>at his best Ruben was pretty awesome and I think Terry with his walk in style would be a good style for him<<<
Maybe, maybe not! Olivares did fare better against knockout specialists better than he did boxing stylists, but Olivares tired greatly in the final rounds and like Arguello I think McGovern, if he did not get him early, and if he did not get got himself then he would gradually beat Olivares down and stop him somehwere between 12 and 20!
Actually I do! Not to mention that I have multiple newspaper clippings for every fight that McGovern ever fought and multiple clippings for every opponent that McGovern's opponents ever faced...and guess what...as I stated, when he reached his prime around late 1898 there was no fighter who was able to jab and box McGovern...those that tried were completely overwhelmed. McGovern overwhelmed such great stylists as Harry Forbes (twice), Pedlar Palmer, George Dixon (twice), Eddie Santry, Tommy White (Twice), Frank Erne and Joe Gans...not to mention those whom he beat after losing to Corbett.
He also overwhelmed very strong, very physical featherweights and lightweights...Joe Gans, Frank Erne, "Harlem" Tommy Murphy, Oscar Gardner, Aurelio Herrera, Austin Rice, Kid Broad and Joe Bernstein...all of those guys were stronger than Olivares
Even after he was way past his prime McGovern still held his own and stood toe-to-toe with Battling Nelson, Jimmy Britt and drew in his third bout with Corbett.
>>>At the risk of igniting barry's wraith, which is not my intention at all, I would pick Oliveras over any turn of the century featherweight. And i don't think it would be that tough.<<<
You gave a solid, clear opinion...I've never had any problems with that...it's when people attack me that I unwind, or use to...now I just ignore it, or delete any nonsense, as I have better things to do rather than argue with some idiot, but anyone just speaking their opinion, as you just did...hell that's what this board is for! Now in response to your comment about Olivares over any turn of the century featherweight...I agree, with the exception of McGovern of course!
But Olivares beating McGovern...based on what would lead one to give him the edge? Olivares, though one of the greatest punchers of all-time, with the exception of perhaps three opponents, he faced weak opposition up until around 1969 and from then on his record is very spotty as he lost to a number of fighters not in McGovern's league! Olivares had a tremendous start winning 60 of 61 with 56 knockouts, but look at who that competition was! His record from 1969 to 1980 (we'll not count the bouts when he was obviously way past his best), so his record from 1969 to 1980 was 42-10-1 (34 KO) and his record against actual top ten competition is even lesser. Olivares was far superior to a lot of fighters, but when he stepped up to face actual top ten contenders his record took several hits. He certainly was not as dominant once he stepped up to the championship level. When Olivares stepped up to the elite level he was still a great fighter, but he no longer bowled over opponents in the manner he did early and as I said, his record after he stepped up to face contenders and champions is very spotty with about as many losses as wins against top opposition, which McGovern just went right through the very best, elite competition as easy as he did weaker opposition, in fact, he got better once he stepped up and it wasn't until he completely almost did away with training and staying in shape that he really slipped!
Overall, Olivares beat 8 title holders, McGovern beat 9. At their absolute best against the absolute best opposition that each man faced, Olivares had more trouble than not...the same cannot be said of McGovern. He had a couple of scares, once with Oscar Gardner and the other with Aurelio Herrera where both men knocked McGovern down and seriously had him hurt, but McGovern arose to score clean knockouts in the very next round against both fighter! Olivares was able to reverse adversity, but it was usually in the rematch and not in the same bouts where he had to show his championship quality, which he was a hell of a champion...maybe not record-wise, but he was a great fighter...just a step below McGovern!
>>>at his best Ruben was pretty awesome and I think Terry with his walk in style would be a good style for him<<<
Maybe, maybe not! Olivares did fare better against knockout specialists better than he did boxing stylists, but Olivares tired greatly in the final rounds and like Arguello I think McGovern, if he did not get him early, and if he did not get got himself then he would gradually beat Olivares down and stop him somehwere between 12 and 20!
Re: re
I think at his best at 118 Olivares had good stamina... as seen in his fights against Castillo... the Arguello fightcan be a bit misleading in that though Ruben gave a great fight he was still a little past his best...barry wrote:>>>How do you know that? Do you have clips of Terry McGovern?<<<
Actually I do! Not to mention that I have multiple newspaper clippings for every fight that McGovern ever fought and multiple clippings for every opponent that McGovern's opponents ever faced...and guess what...as I stated, when he reached his prime around late 1898 there was no fighter who was able to jab and box McGovern...those that tried were completely overwhelmed. McGovern overwhelmed such great stylists as Harry Forbes (twice), Pedlar Palmer, George Dixon (twice), Eddie Santry, Tommy White (Twice), Frank Erne and Joe Gans...not to mention those whom he beat after losing to Corbett.
He also overwhelmed very strong, very physical featherweights and lightweights...Joe Gans, Frank Erne, "Harlem" Tommy Murphy, Oscar Gardner, Aurelio Herrera, Austin Rice, Kid Broad and Joe Bernstein...all of those guys were stronger than Olivares
Even after he was way past his prime McGovern still held his own and stood toe-to-toe with Battling Nelson, Jimmy Britt and drew in his third bout with Corbett.
>>>At the risk of igniting barry's wraith, which is not my intention at all, I would pick Oliveras over any turn of the century featherweight. And i don't think it would be that tough.<<<
You gave a solid, clear opinion...I've never had any problems with that...it's when people attack me that I unwind, or use to...now I just ignore it, or delete any nonsense, as I have better things to do rather than argue with some idiot, but anyone just speaking their opinion, as you just did...hell that's what this board is for! Now in response to your comment about Olivares over any turn of the century featherweight...I agree, with the exception of McGovern of course!
But Olivares beating McGovern...based on what would lead one to give him the edge? Olivares, though one of the greatest punchers of all-time, with the exception of perhaps three opponents, he faced weak opposition up until around 1969 and from then on his record is very spotty as he lost to a number of fighters not in McGovern's league! Olivares had a tremendous start winning 60 of 61 with 56 knockouts, but look at who that competition was! His record from 1969 to 1980 (we'll not count the bouts when he was obviously way past his best), so his record from 1969 to 1980 was 42-10-1 (34 KO) and his record against actual top ten competition is even lesser. Olivares was far superior to a lot of fighters, but when he stepped up to face actual top ten contenders his record took several hits. He certainly was not as dominant once he stepped up to the championship level. When Olivares stepped up to the elite level he was still a great fighter, but he no longer bowled over opponents in the manner he did early and as I said, his record after he stepped up to face contenders and champions is very spotty with about as many losses as wins against top opposition, which McGovern just went right through the very best, elite competition as easy as he did weaker opposition, in fact, he got better once he stepped up and it wasn't until he completely almost did away with training and staying in shape that he really slipped!
Overall, Olivares beat 8 title holders, McGovern beat 9. At their absolute best against the absolute best opposition that each man faced, Olivares had more trouble than not...the same cannot be said of McGovern. He had a couple of scares, once with Oscar Gardner and the other with Aurelio Herrera where both men knocked McGovern down and seriously had him hurt, but McGovern arose to score clean knockouts in the very next round against both fighter! Olivares was able to reverse adversity, but it was usually in the rematch and not in the same bouts where he had to show his championship quality, which he was a hell of a champion...maybe not record-wise, but he was a great fighter...just a step below McGovern!
>>>at his best Ruben was pretty awesome and I think Terry with his walk in style would be a good style for him<<<
Maybe, maybe not! Olivares did fare better against knockout specialists better than he did boxing stylists, but Olivares tired greatly in the final rounds and like Arguello I think McGovern, if he did not get him early, and if he did not get got himself then he would gradually beat Olivares down and stop him somehwere between 12 and 20!
barry, I have a some off the topic questions but here goes.
It would be my guess that the old journalists paid close attention, wrote careful detail and prided themselves on accurate boxing event reporting and yet I know that they also held much "power" at the time. A good review for a boxer might help his marketability. And boxing was pretty popular in days gone by. So I have always wondered about the temptation writers had to tell a slanted story.
So my question goes something like this.
*Do you find that some reporters had agenda's other than reporting the truth?
*Would you name names?
*Were there some that may not have meant to spin things but you find they just had a certain bias?
*Would you name names?
*Are there some names that you can say when they wrote it...it was gospel...you could take the report to the bank? A sterling reputation so to speak?
Just curious.
Oh one last one Were there any reporting "rivalries" two sports reporters that differed in some way that it got the attention of the public?
It would be my guess that the old journalists paid close attention, wrote careful detail and prided themselves on accurate boxing event reporting and yet I know that they also held much "power" at the time. A good review for a boxer might help his marketability. And boxing was pretty popular in days gone by. So I have always wondered about the temptation writers had to tell a slanted story.
So my question goes something like this.
*Do you find that some reporters had agenda's other than reporting the truth?
*Would you name names?
*Were there some that may not have meant to spin things but you find they just had a certain bias?
*Would you name names?
*Are there some names that you can say when they wrote it...it was gospel...you could take the report to the bank? A sterling reputation so to speak?
Just curious.
Oh one last one Were there any reporting "rivalries" two sports reporters that differed in some way that it got the attention of the public?
re
>>>>*Do you find that some reporters had agenda's other than reporting the truth?<<<
Absolutely!!! There were some writers who would always write favorably for the hometown fighter and often things were greatly exaggerated! Also, managers would often go running to the AP wires to get out the result for his fighter, sometimes it was passed honestly, but sometimes tales were stretched to the limit. Sometimes the manager, even though he knew that his man barely won and close bout, would often get to the AP wire and state that his man won easily with only the bell saving the opponent. Unfortunately that was part of writing about the sport, but the better sports writers usually gave a fair and balanced account of fights. But being that things sometimes were not on the level in terms of reporting that is why I like to gather as many different reports of a fight that I can, which by doing this a researcher can get a very, very good report on a fight. The only way that I will go with only one paper is if it is the only clip that I can find. For instance…McGovern’s first bout with George Dixon…I have between 25 and 50 different reports of that fight written by different journalists at ringside, which I try to do the same with any fighter that I am researching. A person can learn all they need to know about a fighter if they really put the time and effort into it!
>>>>*Would you name names?<<<<
What about…as to writers who would bend the truth for a local boy? Sure, I wouldn’t have any problems naming names, but I have never made any lists, or really gave any notice to the issue as a writer may be a bit dishonest in one article and then be right on the money with his next write-up!
>>>>*Were there some that may not have meant to spin things but you find they just had a certain bias?<<<<
Absolutely! Most probably had no intentions of showing favor toward one fighter, but we all know that when our favorite fighter is fighting we all have a tendency to be bias in favor of that fighter. I would guess that a lot was done without actual intention of doing so!
>>>*Would you name names?<<<
Again yes!
>>>>*Are there some names that you can say when they wrote it...it was gospel...you could take the report to the bank? A sterling reputation so to speak?<<<<
Sure, but remember, everyone is human and everyone makes mistakes! For the most part I would say that most writers almost always tried to be as unbiased and fair as humanely possible, but it’s hard to keep emotions out when great fighters go against one another, but for the most part the top boxing writers were on the level and they were really very colorful writers who specialized in much detail.
>>>Oh one last one Were there any reporting "rivalries" two sports reporters that differed in some way that it got the attention of the public?<<<
I’m sure there have been rivalries among sports writers all through history, but I have never paid any attention to this. I’m sure that the press box section at fights had a lot of rivalries!
Absolutely!!! There were some writers who would always write favorably for the hometown fighter and often things were greatly exaggerated! Also, managers would often go running to the AP wires to get out the result for his fighter, sometimes it was passed honestly, but sometimes tales were stretched to the limit. Sometimes the manager, even though he knew that his man barely won and close bout, would often get to the AP wire and state that his man won easily with only the bell saving the opponent. Unfortunately that was part of writing about the sport, but the better sports writers usually gave a fair and balanced account of fights. But being that things sometimes were not on the level in terms of reporting that is why I like to gather as many different reports of a fight that I can, which by doing this a researcher can get a very, very good report on a fight. The only way that I will go with only one paper is if it is the only clip that I can find. For instance…McGovern’s first bout with George Dixon…I have between 25 and 50 different reports of that fight written by different journalists at ringside, which I try to do the same with any fighter that I am researching. A person can learn all they need to know about a fighter if they really put the time and effort into it!
>>>>*Would you name names?<<<<
What about…as to writers who would bend the truth for a local boy? Sure, I wouldn’t have any problems naming names, but I have never made any lists, or really gave any notice to the issue as a writer may be a bit dishonest in one article and then be right on the money with his next write-up!
>>>>*Were there some that may not have meant to spin things but you find they just had a certain bias?<<<<
Absolutely! Most probably had no intentions of showing favor toward one fighter, but we all know that when our favorite fighter is fighting we all have a tendency to be bias in favor of that fighter. I would guess that a lot was done without actual intention of doing so!
>>>*Would you name names?<<<
Again yes!
>>>>*Are there some names that you can say when they wrote it...it was gospel...you could take the report to the bank? A sterling reputation so to speak?<<<<
Sure, but remember, everyone is human and everyone makes mistakes! For the most part I would say that most writers almost always tried to be as unbiased and fair as humanely possible, but it’s hard to keep emotions out when great fighters go against one another, but for the most part the top boxing writers were on the level and they were really very colorful writers who specialized in much detail.
>>>Oh one last one Were there any reporting "rivalries" two sports reporters that differed in some way that it got the attention of the public?<<<
I’m sure there have been rivalries among sports writers all through history, but I have never paid any attention to this. I’m sure that the press box section at fights had a lot of rivalries!
re
>>>I think at his best at 118 Olivares had good stamina... as seen in his fights against Castillo... the Arguello fightcan be a bit misleading in that though Ruben gave a great fight he was still a little past his best...<<<
I agree...at 118 Olivares was among the very best in the top five, or ten in both p4p fighter and p4p punchers. I rate Olivares very high, he is one of my all-time favorite fighters and he would have a chance against any bantamweight, or featherweight in history based soley on his vicious punch. That punch was the great equalizer and he could knockout anyone that ever fought between 112 and 126, but I just don't see him beating McGovern as McGovern was more superior in most all characteristics of a fighter...not all, but most all. If Olivares did not score an early knockout, which certainly was not out of the question, then he would be in for a rough night as very few fighters in history punished opponents in the same kind of manner that McGovern did.
One of the strongest points about McGovern is that he beat every kind of opponent there was. He beat pure boxer/stylists, he beat straight forward brawlers, he beat counter-punching knockout artists, he beat counter-punching stylists, etc., etc. And whats most impressive, he won relatively simple against all styles. There were no styles that could neutralize McGovern and the only way to really beat him was to do as Corbett did and talk pure shit to McGovern as he was a very proud man who simply did not have the ability to just let harsh words and smack talk go in one ear and out the other...no he took things like that very serious, which was really foolish as he certainly paid for it against a smarter fighter who had a serious knockout punch himself and he was knocked out mainly because he was so angry and reckless and went straight at Corbett with no kind of defence and Corbett countered him perfectly!
I agree...at 118 Olivares was among the very best in the top five, or ten in both p4p fighter and p4p punchers. I rate Olivares very high, he is one of my all-time favorite fighters and he would have a chance against any bantamweight, or featherweight in history based soley on his vicious punch. That punch was the great equalizer and he could knockout anyone that ever fought between 112 and 126, but I just don't see him beating McGovern as McGovern was more superior in most all characteristics of a fighter...not all, but most all. If Olivares did not score an early knockout, which certainly was not out of the question, then he would be in for a rough night as very few fighters in history punished opponents in the same kind of manner that McGovern did.
One of the strongest points about McGovern is that he beat every kind of opponent there was. He beat pure boxer/stylists, he beat straight forward brawlers, he beat counter-punching knockout artists, he beat counter-punching stylists, etc., etc. And whats most impressive, he won relatively simple against all styles. There were no styles that could neutralize McGovern and the only way to really beat him was to do as Corbett did and talk pure shit to McGovern as he was a very proud man who simply did not have the ability to just let harsh words and smack talk go in one ear and out the other...no he took things like that very serious, which was really foolish as he certainly paid for it against a smarter fighter who had a serious knockout punch himself and he was knocked out mainly because he was so angry and reckless and went straight at Corbett with no kind of defence and Corbett countered him perfectly!
Re: re
Yes, I wonder whether Ruben would get under Terrys skin much like Corbett did... Ruben could be boastful before fights and then there is the fact of an American champ fighting the Mexican champ... there would definately be a huge amount of build up and tension to a Mcgovern vs Olivares clash.....barry wrote:>>>I think at his best at 118 Olivares had good stamina... as seen in his fights against Castillo... the Arguello fightcan be a bit misleading in that though Ruben gave a great fight he was still a little past his best...<<<
I agree...at 118 Olivares was among the very best in the top five, or ten in both p4p fighter and p4p punchers. I rate Olivares very high, he is one of my all-time favorite fighters and he would have a chance against any bantamweight, or featherweight in history based soley on his vicious punch. That punch was the great equalizer and he could knockout anyone that ever fought between 112 and 126, but I just don't see him beating McGovern as McGovern was more superior in most all characteristics of a fighter...not all, but most all. If Olivares did not score an early knockout, which certainly was not out of the question, then he would be in for a rough night as very few fighters in history punished opponents in the same kind of manner that McGovern did.
One of the strongest points about McGovern is that he beat every kind of opponent there was. He beat pure boxer/stylists, he beat straight forward brawlers, he beat counter-punching knockout artists, he beat counter-punching stylists, etc., etc. And whats most impressive, he won relatively simple against all styles. There were no styles that could neutralize McGovern and the only way to really beat him was to do as Corbett did and talk pure shit to McGovern as he was a very proud man who simply did not have the ability to just let harsh words and smack talk go in one ear and out the other...no he took things like that very serious, which was really foolish as he certainly paid for it against a smarter fighter who had a serious knockout punch himself and he was knocked out mainly because he was so angry and reckless and went straight at Corbett with no kind of defence and Corbett countered him perfectly!
re
>>>Yes, I wonder whether Ruben would get under Terrys skin much like Corbett did<<<
Highly unlikely considering that Olivares speaks Spanish which McGovern could not understand, so that aspect of a fight between the two wouldn't be an issue!
McGovern fought another Mexican who hit just as hard, if not harder than Olivares in Aurelio Herrera. Herrera was something like 20-0-2 (20 KO) when he stepped in the ring with McGovern and he really nailed McGovern with a vicious right and had him in serious trouble, but Herrera froze and failed to follow up and McGovern came out in the very next round to knock out Herrera!
Highly unlikely considering that Olivares speaks Spanish which McGovern could not understand, so that aspect of a fight between the two wouldn't be an issue!
McGovern fought another Mexican who hit just as hard, if not harder than Olivares in Aurelio Herrera. Herrera was something like 20-0-2 (20 KO) when he stepped in the ring with McGovern and he really nailed McGovern with a vicious right and had him in serious trouble, but Herrera froze and failed to follow up and McGovern came out in the very next round to knock out Herrera!
-
elmersalsa
- Heavyweight
- Posts: 15678
- Joined: 02 Feb 2003, 03:50
Re: re
barry wrote:>>>How do you know that? Do you have clips of Terry McGovern?<<<
Actually I do! Not to mention that I have multiple newspaper clippings for every fight that McGovern ever fought and multiple clippings for every opponent that McGovern's opponents ever faced...and guess what...as I stated, when he reached his prime around late 1898 there was no fighter who was able to jab and box McGovern...those that tried were completely overwhelmed. McGovern overwhelmed such great stylists as Harry Forbes (twice), Pedlar Palmer, George Dixon (twice), Eddie Santry, Tommy White (Twice), Frank Erne and Joe Gans...not to mention those whom he beat after losing to Corbett.
He also overwhelmed very strong, very physical featherweights and lightweights...Joe Gans, Frank Erne, "Harlem" Tommy Murphy, Oscar Gardner, Aurelio Herrera, Austin Rice, Kid Broad and Joe Bernstein...all of those guys were stronger than Olivares
Even after he was way past his prime McGovern still held his own and stood toe-to-toe with Battling Nelson, Jimmy Britt and drew in his third bout with Corbett.
>>>At the risk of igniting barry's wraith, which is not my intention at all, I would pick Oliveras over any turn of the century featherweight. And i don't think it would be that tough.<<<
You gave a solid, clear opinion...I've never had any problems with that...it's when people attack me that I unwind, or use to...now I just ignore it, or delete any nonsense, as I have better things to do rather than argue with some idiot, but anyone just speaking their opinion, as you just did...hell that's what this board is for! Now in response to your comment about Olivares over any turn of the century featherweight...I agree, with the exception of McGovern of course!
But Olivares beating McGovern...based on what would lead one to give him the edge? Olivares, though one of the greatest punchers of all-time, with the exception of perhaps three opponents, he faced weak opposition up until around 1969 and from then on his record is very spotty as he lost to a number of fighters not in McGovern's league! Olivares had a tremendous start winning 60 of 61 with 56 knockouts, but look at who that competition was! His record from 1969 to 1980 (we'll not count the bouts when he was obviously way past his best), so his record from 1969 to 1980 was 42-10-1 (34 KO) and his record against actual top ten competition is even lesser. Olivares was far superior to a lot of fighters, but when he stepped up to face actual top ten contenders his record took several hits. He certainly was not as dominant once he stepped up to the championship level. When Olivares stepped up to the elite level he was still a great fighter, but he no longer bowled over opponents in the manner he did early and as I said, his record after he stepped up to face contenders and champions is very spotty with about as many losses as wins against top opposition, which McGovern just went right through the very best, elite competition as easy as he did weaker opposition, in fact, he got better once he stepped up and it wasn't until he completely almost did away with training and staying in shape that he really slipped!
Overall, Olivares beat 8 title holders, McGovern beat 9. At their absolute best against the absolute best opposition that each man faced, Olivares had more trouble than not...the same cannot be said of McGovern. He had a couple of scares, once with Oscar Gardner and the other with Aurelio Herrera where both men knocked McGovern down and seriously had him hurt, but McGovern arose to score clean knockouts in the very next round against both fighter! Olivares was able to reverse adversity, but it was usually in the rematch and not in the same bouts where he had to show his championship quality, which he was a hell of a champion...maybe not record-wise, but he was a great fighter...just a step below McGovern!
>>>at his best Ruben was pretty awesome and I think Terry with his walk in style would be a good style for him<<<
Maybe, maybe not! Olivares did fare better against knockout specialists better than he did boxing stylists, but Olivares tired greatly in the final rounds and like Arguello I think McGovern, if he did not get him early, and if he did not get got himself then he would gradually beat Olivares down and stop him somehwere between 12 and 20!
You mentioned that McGovern beat the great Joe Gans. According to some reports, Gans took a dive.