scorpio83 wrote: ↑27 Apr 2018, 05:24
Yes, Duane Bobick was overhyped and Ken Norton exposed him by knocking him out in the first round. Even there was an episode of Saturday Night Live showing the footage of Norton knocking Bobick out over and over again as part of their joke.
If Ken Norton hit you in the THROAT I don't think anyone is getting up. That's why I generally overlook the loss. His subsequent losses following that came when he was all but a full blown alcoholic.
Duane getting trashed before he got hit in the throat... He repeated the performance with John Tate.
Nobody should underestimate Duane's mental and emotional weaknesses... Boxing was the wrong game for him... Both Bobick's were dead-end kids - the promising but misled losers James Dean played when he was a hot actor.
Re: How good were the Bobick brothers?
Posted: 27 Apr 2018, 23:03
by Dart340
This thread inspired me to rewatch the Bobick's fights on YouTube. Seems like the biggest problem is that neither, while seemingly well schooled fighters, had the requisite athletic ability. Deliberate and mechanical.
Duane getting trashed before he got hit in the throat... He repeated the performance with John Tate.
Nobody should underestimate Duane's mental and emotional weaknesses... Boxing was the wrong game for him... Both Bobick's were dead-end kids - the promising but misled losers James Dean played when he was a hot actor.
The Tate fight was when he was a full blown alcoholic. Mental and emotional weaknesses? If I got clocked in the throat by Ken Norton, had SNL make fun of me every week for over a year, lost my brother in a car crash, and got divorced by my wife... I don't think anyone would mentally or emotionally recover from that.
Duane getting trashed before he got hit in the throat... He repeated the performance with John Tate.
Nobody should underestimate Duane's mental and emotional weaknesses... Boxing was the wrong game for him... Both Bobick's were dead-end kids - the promising but misled losers James Dean played when he was a hot actor.
The Tate fight was when he was a full blown alcoholic. Mental and emotional weaknesses? If I got clocked in the throat by Ken Norton, had SNL make fun of me every week for over a year, lost my brother in a car crash, and got divorced by my wife... I don't think anyone would mentally or emotionally recover from that.
Well...there's an easy solution - first thing is, don't watch SNL...... Find a girl friend..... Learn how to box one Hell of a lot better, get your head back and straighten up your stance... Find a good strength trainer and find a nutritionist... and pray for your brother's soul every night... A lot of boxing is common sense. Turning to the bottle makes no sense - is that going to help your brother or make your alimony payments any easier?
Why is it so hard to do the smart thing instead of the easy thing? The easy thing is to grab a bottle or crack pipe... That way you get temporary relief and put off all your problems for one more day -- while they get worse and worse.
Everyone has problems and they're not evenly distributed... Do people ever look at the bright side? ... If you're a tall, good looking, blue eyed white guy living in America you don't have to box to make a living... You can get your shoulders back, stand up straighter, relax yourself, get yourself a better haircut, put on a nice looking suit, and go find yourself a job in corporate America.. Who wants to get their face punched in for a living? Even if you're good at it.
Re: How good were the Bobick brothers?
Posted: 28 Apr 2018, 00:53
by HomicideHenry
You're absolutely heartless.
Re: How good were the Bobick brothers?
Posted: 28 Apr 2018, 02:32
by Kalan
I'm not heartless... I've lost several family members. I've been divorced. I've suffered massive financial reversals.
I feel for people who are treated unjustly such as Sonny Liston... Alexander Povetkin... Jack Johnson... Harry Wills... Vitali Klitschko... Marvis Frazier... Ike Ibeabuchi... Hurricane Carter... and many others... The world seems heartless.
Duane Bobick shouldn't have been matched with Ken Norton and I wouldn't have done it.. Marvis Frazier shouldn't have been matched with Larry Holmes.. Rodney Bobick didn't need to matched with Larry Holmes. Many mismatches I see are criminal. Gerry Cooney scored two 1-round KO's in a row... Then he didn't fight in over a year before he fought Holmes... That kind of activity level is not going to prepare you for your 1st fight at that magnitude..
But I believe however bad your circumstances, you have to show courage and help yourself. I'm critical of those who don't. You're not a beggar on the streets of Calcutta. You’re not a staving child in Africa. You’re not confined to a wheelchair or an iron lung. Don’t feel sorry for yourself when there’s so much suffering in the world. Don’t seek the solace of the bottle or drugs. Pray and you’ll find a way.
Re: How good were the Bobick brothers?
Posted: 28 Apr 2018, 03:24
by sweetviolenturge
Kalan wrote: ↑28 Apr 2018, 02:32
I'm not heartless... I've lost several family members. I've been divorced. I've suffered massive financial reversals.
I feel for people who are treated unjustly such as Sonny Liston... Alexander Povetkin... Jack Johnson... Harry Wills... Vitali Klitschko... Marvis Frazier... Ike Ibeabuchi... Hurricane Carter... and many others... The world seems heartless.
Duane Bobick shouldn't have been matched with Ken Norton and I wouldn't have done it.. Marvis Frazier shouldn't have been matched with Larry Holmes.. Rodney Bobick didn't need to matched with Larry Holmes. Many mismatches I see are criminal. Gerry Cooney scored two 1-round KO's in a row... Then he didn't fight in over a year before he fought Holmes... That kind of activity level is not going to prepare you for your 1st fight at that magnitude..
But I believe however bad your circumstances, you have to show courage and help yourself. I'm critical of those who don't. You're not a beggar on the streets of Calcutta. You’re not a staving child in Africa. You’re not confined to a wheelchair or an iron lung. Don’t feel sorry for yourself when there’s so much suffering in the world. Don’t seek the solace of the bottle or drugs. Pray and you’ll find a way.
[/quote
Re: How good were the Bobick brothers?
Posted: 28 Apr 2018, 03:29
by sweetviolenturge
Kalan wrote: ↑27 Apr 2018, 02:32
Excuse me, but Norton, Knoetze & Tate weren't great punchers... Bobick couldn't get through 5 rounds of action with the 3 of them... They couldn't hit like Foreman, Tyson, Lewis, Joshua, or the Klitschko's and they wiped Bobick out.
Ali would not have to knock Bobick out or put him down... He'd beat him to trash like he did Quarry... For the amount of amateur and professional experience Bobick had, he was one of the more unsophisticated boxers to ever reach a high ranking in the Top-10... He had no stance. His head was forward... He had no footwork or jab. If you were a very weak puncher Duane could stay on you and keep throwing... Even when he won he got punched right in the face... He was a puncher's dream.. He was a boxer's dream.. He was a boxer-puncher's dream.
Where did I say that they were punchers on par with Foreman, Tyson, Lewis et al?
They weren't. But, Norton, Knoetze & Tate were all very solid punchers. Very good punchers, in fact. And, to imply that they weren't is just silly.
scorpio83 wrote: ↑27 Apr 2018, 05:24
Yes, Duane Bobick was overhyped and Ken Norton exposed him by knocking him out in the first round. Even there was an episode of Saturday Night Live showing the footage of Norton knocking Bobick out over and over again as part of their joke.
If Ken Norton hit you in the THROAT I don't think anyone is getting up. That's why I generally overlook the loss. His subsequent losses following that came when he was all but a full blown alcoholic.
Duane getting trashed before he got hit in the throat... He repeated the performance with John Tate.
Nobody should underestimate Duane's mental and emotional weaknesses... Boxing was the wrong game for him... Both Bobick's were dead-end kids - the promising but misled losers James Dean played when he was a hot actor.
Jeeze, give the Bobicks a break will ya. Rodney was a solid pro with a good winning record, a fringe contender and better than the vast majority of heavyweights. Duane was a world class amateur and a contender in the pro ranks. He only lost 4 fights, two of them to future world champs. He had a successful career in boxing by any account even though he didn't have it in him to become a world champion. If the Bobicks were bums then so are about 99% of all fighters.
Re: How good were the Bobick brothers?
Posted: 28 Apr 2018, 17:06
by Caractacus
scorpio83 wrote: ↑27 Apr 2018, 05:24
Yes, Duane Bobick was overhyped and Ken Norton exposed him by knocking him out in the first round. Even there was an episode of Saturday Night Live showing the footage of Norton knocking Bobick out over and over again as part of their joke.
you know,I have heard that for the past 30 years especially ,that Duane Bobick was "over-hyped"
Over-Hyped by Whom exactly ?
Because his photograph had appeared in the pages of LIFE MAGAZINE in August 1972 ?
well so did everyone else that was an American who was going to the Olympics(including Mark Spitz)
Up until about his 25th pro fight, I don't think any of his professional boxing matches were ever even shown on tv .
If Ken Norton hit you in the THROAT I don't think anyone is getting up. That's why I generally overlook the loss. His subsequent losses following that came when he was all but a full blown alcoholic.
Duane getting trashed before he got hit in the throat... He repeated the performance with John Tate.
Nobody should underestimate Duane's mental and emotional weaknesses... Boxing was the wrong game for him... Both Bobick's were dead-end kids - the promising but misled losers James Dean played when he was a hot actor.
Jeeze, give the Bobicks a break will ya. Rodney was a solid pro with a good winning record, a fringe contender and better than the vast majority of heavyweights. Duane was a world class amateur and a contender in the pro ranks. He only lost 4 fights, two of them to future world champs. He had a successful career in boxing by any account even though he didn't have it in him to become a world champion. If the Bobicks were bums then so are about 99% of all fighters.
scorpio83 wrote: ↑27 Apr 2018, 05:24
Yes, Duane Bobick was overhyped and Ken Norton exposed him by knocking him out in the first round. Even there was an episode of Saturday Night Live showing the footage of Norton knocking Bobick out over and over again as part of their joke.
you know,I have heard that for the past 30 years especially ,that Duane Bobick was "over-hyped"
Over-Hyped by Whom exactly ?
Because his photograph had appeared in the pages of LIFE MAGAZINE in August 1972 ?
well so did everyone else that was an American who was going to the Olympics(including Mark Spitz)
Up until about his 25th pro fight, I don't think any of his professional boxing matches were ever even shown on tv .
Exactly. Very good points.
Hell, I wasn't even a Bobick fan back in the day but I could recognize that he was a better than average fighter with a big heart. He just happened to run into a couple/three guys that were able to get him out of there early. Which, at the end of the day exposed him somewhat but to call him a "bum" or something similar is just lazy thinking. He was better than 48 out of 52 heavyweight fighters. Some of them good, solid fighters. I, for one, would have loved to have had a career remotely as good as Duane's.
scorpio83 wrote: ↑27 Apr 2018, 05:24
Yes, Duane Bobick was overhyped and Ken Norton exposed him by knocking him out in the first round. Even there was an episode of Saturday Night Live showing the footage of Norton knocking Bobick out over and over again as part of their joke.
you know,I have heard that for the past 30 years especially ,that Duane Bobick was "over-hyped"
Over-Hyped by Whom exactly ?
Because his photograph had appeared in the pages of LIFE MAGAZINE in August 1972 ?
well so did everyone else that was an American who was going to the Olympics(including Mark Spitz)
Up until about his 25th pro fight, I don't think any of his professional boxing matches were ever even shown on tv .
Exactly. Very good points.
Hell, I wasn't even a Bobick fan back in the day but I could recognize that he was a better than average fighter with a big heart. He just happened to run into a couple/three guys that were able to get him out of there early. Which, at the end of the day exposed him somewhat but to call him a "bum" or something similar is just lazy thinking. He was better than 48 out of 52 heavyweight fighters. Some of them good, solid fighters. I, for one, would have loved to have had a career remotely as good as Duane's.
Wow... Would that be your goal??? ..... To be made fun of and ridiculed for your clumsiness and ineptitude on SNL???
Comparing yourself to the average is the wrong way to look at things. Compare yourself to best and you'll see that you have a much longer way to go. It's not matter of what the average person does because the average guy doesn't try...
If you're Marvis Frazier and your daddy wants to match you with Larry Homes -- you need to speak up.., "Listen up Pops... I'm 10-0 and Larry is 44-0... I respect everything you've done for me, but I need more fights and I need a much higher level of skill before I can possibly have an honest chance to win a fight like this... so I'm respectfully declining to take this fight."
If you're Duane Bobick it's a different story...
You've had 38 fights and you're still a shitt fighter... If you're honest with yourself you know you don't have any potential.. You know you're not going to beat Ken Norton.. You know damned well Norton, Frazier, and Futch are great friends.. It's up to you to put 2 and 2 together.. Were those guys in your dressing room before the fight or were they off talking to Norton?? At that point you say... "You guys aren't in my dressing room for my most important fight so I'm walking.. You bastards can ESABATM... It's been a good ride but I'm out... I'm not fighting Norton or anybody else... FU I'm done."
`
Re: How good were the Bobick brothers?
Posted: 29 Apr 2018, 00:23
by HomicideHenry
Again, Bobick was clocked in the throat... anyone, and I mean anyone, would not recover from that... The referee should have called it a no-contest after that blatant foul.
Then throw in the non-stop blooper reel from SNL and other programs for over a year. Then throw in Rodney dying. Then throw in the divorce.
Lorne Michael's and the SNL crew and production team, in my view, are responsible in a way for his alcohol and drug addiction. They humiliated him without mercy. Then again, we're talking about a group of assholes who sang Christmas carols about Gary Gilmore getting executed.... So they had no moral compass and they were absolutely positively awful individuals by and large.
A few years later SNL would do the same exact thing to Gerry Cooney. Absolutely pointless.
Re: How good were the Bobick brothers?
Posted: 29 Apr 2018, 00:53
by Kalan
HomicideHenry wrote: ↑29 Apr 2018, 00:23
Again, Bobick was clocked in the throat... anyone, and I mean anyone, would not recover from that... The referee should have called it a no-contest after that blatant foul.
Then throw in the non-stop blooper reel from SNL and other programs for over a year. Then throw in Rodney dying. Then throw in the divorce.
Lorne Michael's and the SNL crew and production team, in my view, are responsible in a way for his alcohol and drug addiction. They humiliated him without mercy. Then again, we're talking about a group of assholes who sang Christmas carols about Gary Gilmore getting executed.... So they had no moral compass and they were absolutely positively awful individuals by and large.
A few years later SNL would do the same exact thing to Gerry Cooney. Absolutely pointless.
You don't know Boxing... Hitting somebody in the throat is NOT a foul... In the back of the neck or head would be a foul if it were deliberate... What knocked Bobick out was his shitty defense... Norton was throwing haymakers and Bobick had no defense whatever... he was getting clocked by every bomb Norton threw.
If you're a public figure you're open to public ridicule. Goes with the territory.. Norton was ripped to shreds for his shitty showing against Foreman -- that was the 2nd time Norton was blasted out... He didn't let that slow him down.. Most of the millions Norton made from Boxing came after the was smashed out by both Garcia and Foreman... He lost more fights than Bobick did, but didn't get hurt as much... He made a Hell of a lot more money... Bobick couldn't defend himself.
Re: How good were the Bobick brothers?
Posted: 29 Apr 2018, 00:58
by HomicideHenry
Getting hit in the throat is NOT a foul you say? well shit.... Why haven't more people used this devastating punch to win fights? Surely ONE PUNCH to the throat would make even George Foreman cry like a bitch.
Re: How good were the Bobick brothers?
Posted: 29 Apr 2018, 01:00
by Kalan
Read the rules kid... The front of the neck is a fair target... You need to keep your chin down.
scorpio83 wrote: ↑27 Apr 2018, 05:24
Yes, Duane Bobick was overhyped and Ken Norton exposed him by knocking him out in the first round. Even there was an episode of Saturday Night Live showing the footage of Norton knocking Bobick out over and over again as part of their joke.
you know,I have heard that for the past 30 years especially ,that Duane Bobick was "over-hyped"
Over-Hyped by Whom exactly ?
Because his photograph had appeared in the pages of LIFE MAGAZINE in August 1972 ?
well so did everyone else that was an American who was going to the Olympics(including Mark Spitz)
Up until about his 25th pro fight, I don't think any of his professional boxing matches were ever even shown on tv .
Exactly. Very good points.
Hell, I wasn't even a Bobick fan back in the day but I could recognize that he was a better than average fighter with a big heart. He just happened to run into a couple/three guys that were able to get him out of there early. Which, at the end of the day exposed him somewhat but to call him a "bum" or something similar is just lazy thinking. He was better than 48 out of 52 heavyweight fighters. Some of them good, solid fighters. I, for one, would have loved to have had a career remotely as good as Duane's.
Caractacus wrote: ↑28 Apr 2018, 17:06
you know,I have heard that for the past 30 years especially ,that Duane Bobick was "over-hyped"
Over-Hyped by Whom exactly ?
Because his photograph had appeared in the pages of LIFE MAGAZINE in August 1972 ?
well so did everyone else that was an American who was going to the Olympics(including Mark Spitz)
Up until about his 25th pro fight, I don't think any of his professional boxing matches were ever even shown on tv .
Exactly. Very good points.
Hell, I wasn't even a Bobick fan back in the day but I could recognize that he was a better than average fighter with a big heart. He just happened to run into a couple/three guys that were able to get him out of there early. Which, at the end of the day exposed him somewhat but to call him a "bum" or something similar is just lazy thinking. He was better than 48 out of 52 heavyweight fighters. Some of them good, solid fighters. I, for one, would have loved to have had a career remotely as good as Duane's.
and how could a "bum" win 100 amateur fights ?
Spot on.
A "bum" couldn't have won over 100 amateur fights in which he beat men like Larry Holmes & Teofilo Stevenson. Nor could a "bum" have earned his way to represent the USA in the Olympic Games or, as I said previously, beaten 48 of 52 men as a professional.
Yeah, for all his amateur status & his build up as a pro, Duane Bobick did flame out when he stepped up his level of opposition. That can't be denied. But, he definitely wasn't a "bum". Nor was he a totally built up fighter the likes of a Lamar Clark, Don Steele or J.D. Chapman. Those men could have never beaten the likes of Mike Weaver, Billy Daniels, Scott Ledoux, Mike Schutte, Pat Duncan, Randy Neumann, Larry Middleton or even guys like Harold Carter, "Cookie" Wallace or Raul Gorosito.
Exactly. Very good points.
Hell, I wasn't even a Bobick fan back in the day but I could recognize that he was a better than average fighter with a big heart. He just happened to run into a couple/three guys that were able to get him out of there early. Which, at the end of the day exposed him somewhat but to call him a "bum" or something similar is just lazy thinking. He was better than 48 out of 52 heavyweight fighters. Some of them good, solid fighters. I, for one, would have loved to have had a career remotely as good as Duane's.
and how could a "bum" win 100 amateur fights ?
Spot on.
A "bum" couldn't have won over 100 amateur fights in which he beat men like Larry Holmes & Teofilo Stevenson. Nor could a "bum" have earned his way to represent the USA in the Olympic Games or, as I said previously, beaten 48 of 52 men as a professional.
Yeah, for all his amateur status & his build up as a pro, Duane Bobick did flame out when he stepped up his level of opposition. That can't be denied. But, he definitely wasn't a "bum". Nor was he a totally built up fighter the likes of a Lamar Clark, Don Steele or J.D. Chapman. Those men could have never beaten the likes of Mike Weaver, Billy Daniels, Scott Ledoux, Mike Schutte, Pat Duncan, Randy Neumann, Larry Middleton or even guys like Harold Carter, "Cookie" Wallace or Raul Gorosito.
Yeah....but from where he was as an amateur he didn't make it very far.
Bobick beat Mike Weaver when Weaver was 6-5.... Remember that because Weaver got a lot better... Weaver got a lot more out of his potential than Bobick got... Weaver didn't have size or strength but he built himself up with weight training, running, sprinting, pushups, pullups, anything he could to get stronger... Norton nicknamed him Hercules because he started looking so powerful... Anyone who boxed Weaver remarked on his strength and endurance.
John Tate was 6'4" X 240.. He ran over Duane Bobick like a tank running over a flowerbed... Weaver knocked Tate out cold after surviving onslaught after onslaught... Not only that but Mike wrecked Tate he hit him so hard in the 15th... Weaver became a Heavyweight Champion with one devastating left hook.. Some people were shocked---but if you notice he was bigger and stronger than when he faced Holmes.. He had a lot of drive.
Weaver attributed his success to the fact everybody has 24 hours in a day... He said he decided to use his 24 hours better than most boxers... He never got discouraged by his early losses.. He suffered many losses.. He felt he was getting better every day... Like if you don't have any sparring you shadow box extra rounds... you hit the heavy bag more... work the double end bags.. work on your form more... Then get to the weight gym and lift for an hour...Take any fight you can get against any fighter. Take a fight on 24-hours notice... It's not this fight or the next fight that will make you, but maybe a fight 3 or 4 years down the road will make you ... and whatever you do today makes you more ready for that fight.
Re: How good were the Bobick brothers?
Posted: 01 May 2018, 06:21
by sweetviolenturge
Of course, the Mike Weaver that Bobick faced & stopped on cuts in seven rounds was far from a finished product. But, despite his mediocre 6-5 record at the time, he still had raw talent & a big punch. He wasn't a pushover & despite the timing of it, I daresay that it's the biggest victory of Duane's career.
Re: How good were the Bobick brothers?
Posted: 01 May 2018, 08:20
by The Great John L
Kalan wrote: ↑27 Apr 2018, 02:32
Excuse me, but Norton, Knoetze & Tate weren't great punchers...
Actually Knoetze was a very hard puncher, just not a very good fighter. Norton and Tate were both decent punchers but very good offensive fighters who could put punches together.
Re: How good were the Bobick brothers?
Posted: 01 May 2018, 08:25
by The Great John L
Kalan wrote: ↑29 Apr 2018, 00:53What knocked Bobick out was his shitty defense... Norton was throwing haymakers and Bobick had no defense whatever... he was getting clocked by every bomb Norton threw.
Exactly right. His chin actually wasn't that bad, but when almost anyone who got hit with that many clean, solid power shots would have been stopped.
Kalan wrote: ↑29 Apr 2018, 00:53What knocked Bobick out was his shitty defense... Norton was throwing haymakers and Bobick had no defense whatever... he was getting clocked by every bomb Norton threw.
Exactly right. His chin actually wasn't that bad, but when almost anyone who got hit with that many clean, solid power shots would have been stopped.
Can I just say, it's a pleasure to have you back, mate.
Re: How good were the Bobick brothers?
Posted: 01 May 2018, 10:11
by DrDuke
Duane was obviously a better of them. He was decent, however, wasn't anything special. He became an another one prospect, who wasn't able to compete on the elite level. His biggest achievement was a victory over green Larry Holmes in the amateurs with dropping iron-chinned Larry.
anyone, and I mean anyone, would not recover from that... The referee should have called it a no-contest after that blatant foul.