BoxRec

bennie wrote:No offence to twenty six, but to me he was a leading member of the "Who wants to watch him club?"

I'd disagree with that Bennie.

I saw him from close up at The Sheffield City Hall and he was excellent to watch. A real master. Make 'em miss and make 'em pay.

jimglen wrote:Graham is a good fighter don't misunderstand, what I say is, he is vastly overated in that for years people keep giving you the impression he NEVER got a title chance, He Did and lost, that's all.

but as far as better than, that's always up for debate and contention. For my money it is/was Watson & Benn and Watson was the best and I think both beat Graham more times than not!

hope that makes it clearer for you.
Jim.

with respect i think Graham would be all wrong for watson- watson was somewhat stiff and not the quickest of foot or hand and Graham would be too fluid and unorthodox for him IMO

bennie wrote:Duran and Graham never sparred. Graham was famously knocked out in sparring by Howard Eastman.

Graham used to do an impression of Duran when he lost his temper with him. Unfortunately, I never got the great Roberto's side of the story.

Counter-puncher wrote: with respect i think Graham would be all wrong for watson- watson was somewhat stiff and not the quickest of foot or hand and Graham would be too fluid and unorthodox for him IMO

Plus Graham arguably beat the great McCallum who stopped Watson

Counter-puncher wrote: with respect i think Graham would be all wrong for watson- watson was somewhat stiff and not the quickest of foot or hand and Graham would be too fluid and unorthodox for him IMO

x 2

TerribleTerry wrote:

Counter-puncher wrote: with respect i think Graham would be all wrong for watson- watson was somewhat stiff and not the quickest of foot or hand and Graham would be too fluid and unorthodox for him IMO

x 2

X 3

Quixall wrote:Your best trying to Speak to Spud, Twenty Six or Big Lennox on this issue, particularly Spud.

Very droll Quix

With your extensive knowledge of the fight game, when are you going to post anything constructive ?

Pugilist-specialist wrote:

bennie wrote:Duran and Graham never sparred. Graham was famously knocked out in sparring by Howard Eastman.

Graham used to do an impression of Duran when he lost his temper with him. Unfortunately, I never got the great Roberto's side of the story.

When and where did they spar? The only possible chance was when Duran fought southpaw Robbie Sims in 1986 in Las Vegas, with Graham on the undercard, but Graham was training with McGuigan out in Palm Springs while Duran was training in Vegas. Plus, they showed Graham's win on the undercard and there was not one mention that Graham had been sparring Duran, nor was it mentioned in Harry Mullan's report (and he was there). In Bomber's subsequent fights, too, it was NEVER mentioned in any preview at any time that Graham had sparred the great Duran, even when Graham fought Mike McCallum just three months after Duran had licked Barkley in the Fight of the Year.

Edit: I think from memory there may have been a lack of commentary during the McCallum-Graham fight, for some reason, but you get my meaning about the written stuff - never one mention.

Phenomenal-Nutrition wrote:

Counter-puncher wrote: with respect i think Graham would be all wrong for watson- watson was somewhat stiff and not the quickest of foot or hand and Graham would be too fluid and unorthodox for him IMO

Plus Graham arguably beat the great McCallum who stopped Watson

No way (and I say that more politely than it sounds). I was right in McCallum's corner, next to the late, great Dennie Mancini (who was helping Team McCallum out strictly as the pro he was) and he turned to me at the end and said "lucky to get the split", relating to Graham.
In the States it would have been wide, unanimous.

Pugilist-specialist wrote:They did spar together.
I've been told Duran became very angry at his inability to hit Graham, and Graham was sacked.

you were told wrong, that was Alan Minter who had him as a sparring partner at the Thomas a Becket, but sent him back after a few days,

just spoke to Dominic Ingle and he says that as far as he knows, Bomber never sparred Roberto Duran.

certainly never when he was with them

Glad about that - thought I was crackin up.
Dan - off topic - how's Kel's hand ?

danfoster wrote:just spoke to Dominic Ingle and he says that as far as he knows, Bomber never sparred Roberto Duran.

certainly never when he was with them

Dan, try Brendan. He told me a long time ago that he did.

Pugilist-specialist wrote:

danfoster wrote:just spoke to Dominic Ingle and he says that as far as he knows, Bomber never sparred Roberto Duran.

certainly never when he was with them

Dan, try Brendan. He told me a long time ago that he did.

Just give it up, mate.

agreed!!

Bomber was a marvelous fighter.Absolutely no shame in losing to Jackson and McCallum. He would have beaten JJ 9/10, just got careless on walked into an almighty one and it was very, very close against the boy snatcher.To me its telling that watson, benn or eubank boxed him. Not one of them. It's no fluke.

big lennox wrote:Bomber was a marvelous fighter.Absolutely no shame in losing to Jackson and McCallum. He would have beaten JJ 9/10, just got careless on walked into an almighty one and it was very, very close against the boy snatcher.To me its telling that watson, benn or eubank boxed him. Not one of them. It's no fluke.

Bomber went out to 'chin' Jackson in the fourth round because Jackson had snapped Bomber's bridgework in the third (it came out with the gumshield at the end of the round). He was crazy to do that. Plus, he needed to beat Kalambay in 1987 in London to really secure a title (he would have then got a world title like Kalambay) but with all the advantages, he nearly got stopped in the last and was deservedly outpointed. Kalambay later outpointed him again.
For all those who avoided him, one man proved better.

Kalambay gave him a real boxing lesson in that first fight.Despite the massively biased Carpenter commentary htat would have had you thinking Graham was winning the fight.

One of the best fights to show the virtues of great conventional defensive finesse over someone who had great reflexes and pulled their head staight back from punches without being schooled.

Kalambay also went on to beat Steve Collins, who was a pretty useful fighter.....

JJ did indeed knock Bomber's teeth out and he fought the fourth round angry....a real shame as he was boxing circles around him and was well on the way to victory, probably by stoppage.

Like Naz and a lot of Ingle fighters, people seem to think that finding their style boring means that they are not any good, which couldn't be further from the truth.

Arbachakov wrote:Kalambay gave him a real boxing lesson in that first fight.Despite the massively biased Carpenter commentary htat would have had you thinking Graham was winning the fight.

One of the best fights to show the virtues of great conventional defensive finesse over someone who had great reflexes and pulled their head staight back from punches without being schooled.

the line i trot out to the point of cliche is that fundamentals are called that for a reason, and that all other things being equal, a great orthodox fighter beats a great unorthodox one (see MAB/Naz, McCallum/Graham, etc)

Kalumbay would school all of Eubank, Benn and Watson at 160lbs, by the way

Counter-puncher wrote:

Arbachakov wrote:Kalambay gave him a real boxing lesson in that first fight.Despite the massively biased Carpenter commentary htat would have had you thinking Graham was winning the fight.

One of the best fights to show the virtues of great conventional defensive finesse over someone who had great reflexes and pulled their head staight back from punches without being schooled.

the line i trot out to the point of cliche is that fundamentals are called that for a reason, and that all other things being equal, a great orthodox fighter beats a great unorthodox one (see MAB/Naz, McCallum/Graham, etc)

Kalumbay would school all of Eubank, Benn and Watson at 160lbs, by the way

That's right. Look how bad Junior Witter looked against the left-jabbing Colin Lynes.

Counter-puncher wrote:

Arbachakov wrote:Kalambay gave him a real boxing lesson in that first fight.Despite the massively biased Carpenter commentary htat would have had you thinking Graham was winning the fight.

One of the best fights to show the virtues of great conventional defensive finesse over someone who had great reflexes and pulled their head staight back from punches without being schooled.

the line i trot out to the point of cliche is that fundamentals are called that for a reason, and that all other things being equal, a great orthodox fighter beats a great unorthodox one (see MAB/Naz, McCallum/Graham, etc)

Kalumbay would school all of Eubank, Benn and Watson at 160lbs, by the way

I would agree with that

For point of reference, Junior Witter beat Colin Lynes, and it wasn't Colin Lynes left jab that was the problem, it was that he just came to survive.

re: MAB vs Naz. You have have to remember that one fighter was at his peak whilst the other was considerably past his. The naz of 5 years earlier would have absolutely smashed him.

The line that I always trot out almost the the point of cliche, is that you take an orthodox fighter and an ingle fighter with the same ability, temperament and experience and stick them in the ring together, 90% of the time the Ingle fighter will run rings about them and look a different class.

big lennox wrote:For point of reference, Junior Witter beat Colin Lynes, and it wasn't Colin Lynes left jab that was the problem, it was that he just came to survive.

re: MAB vs Naz. You have have to remember that one fighter was at his peak whilst the other was considerably past his. The naz of 5 years earlier would have absolutely smashed him.

The line that I always trot out almost the the point of cliche, is that you take an orthodox fighter and an ingle fighter with the same ability, temperament and experience and stick them in the ring together, 90% of the time the Ingle fighter will run rings about them and look a different class.

fair points, taken in order:

(2) i always thought, yes, Naz in his earlier fitter harder-training days, could have beaten MAB. not confident enough that i'd say absolutely smashed him, tho

(3) i disagree. take Witter with Bradley who had less experience, possibly even less ability than Witter. he didn't get rings ran around him, quite the contrary, it was his orthodox skills, lovely stuff like keeping his handsround his face and throwing the occasional jab, that meant Witter's unorthodoxy was blunted

i know what you mean but to me when orthodox fighters get stood on their head by Ingle fighters, its precisely because they (the ingle fighters) ARE more talented than their opponents, IMO. especially with footspeed, if an orthodox fighter is a lot slower, then yes he gets rings run around him

something like Adnan Amar - Mark LLoyd or the mooted figth that never happend Amar - Matty Hatton, would be the kind of schooling you describe i think, and they are not strictly comparable fighters talentwise, not like say Graham - McCallum or Mab/Naz