Posted: 20 Dec 2007, 22:20
Basilio had him down when Carmen was fighting for Gavilan's title. Gavilan took a knee.delisa wrote:Was Kid Gavilan ever knocked down in 143 fights_
Basilio had him down when Carmen was fighting for Gavilan's title. Gavilan took a knee.delisa wrote:Was Kid Gavilan ever knocked down in 143 fights_
Nardico had him down. Only fighter to do it.Seamus wrote:I thought Bob Murphy dropped LaMotta, but the only knockdown I noticed on his resume was Danny Nardico near the end of his career.
Seamus wrote:I thought Bob Murphy dropped LaMotta, but the only knockdown I noticed on his resume was Danny Nardico near the end of his career.
Billy Graham was a puzzling fighter.Expug wrote:Billy Graham had well over a hundred fights and I think he was never down.
Helluva fighter this guy was although he was well before my time .
Id enjoy seeing footage if its out there.
Some older fight guys I have known talk about how great this guy was.
Absolutely right.DaveV17 wrote:Oliver McCall. Never been down in a fight, never been down in hundreds of rounds of sparring with the prime Mike Tyson. I've never seen him stunned or hurt.
Even when McCall had the breakdown after literally walking out of drug rehab and into the ring with Lennox Lewis he didn't go down. Lewis was hitting him cleanly as McCall walked around with his hands down and Lewis couldn't hurt him. McCall has the best chin I have seen.
Ring magazine had an article many years ago about "Hiroshima Bombers with Dresden Jaws." It related to big hitters who never got to the top because of their suspect mandibles. I am sure Roland La Starza was mentioned.dempseyfire wrote:But to be fair look at who he'd fought. LaStarza and Kid Matthews wern't really know as big Heavyweight hitters.HomicideHenry wrote:Up until Walcott, Marciano wasn't ever knocked down as a professional. At the time Marciano had 42 fights. 42 fights without so much as a knockdown is pretty impressive.
Brute wrote:Ring magazine had an article many years ago about "Hiroshima Bombers with Dresden Jaws." It related to big hitters who never got to the top because of their suspect mandibles. I am sure Roland La Starza was mentioned.dempseyfire wrote:But to be fair look at who he'd fought. LaStarza and Kid Matthews wern't really know as big Heavyweight hitters.HomicideHenry wrote:Up until Walcott, Marciano wasn't ever knocked down as a professional. At the time Marciano had 42 fights. 42 fights without so much as a knockdown is pretty impressive.
It's pearls like these that make the "granberry wait" worth it. He's like old faithful...or the clock that that is stopped that is guaranteed to be right twice a day..(if it is analog). I think he has an interesting take on Billy Graham's boxing and I choose to believe him on this one.granberry wrote:Billy Graham was a puzzling fighter.Expug wrote:Billy Graham had well over a hundred fights and I think he was never down.
Helluva fighter this guy was although he was well before my time .
Id enjoy seeing footage if its out there.
Some older fight guys I have known talk about how great this guy was.
He had a characteristic that only the very best have---a judgement of distance that was top level.
He was an expert at timing your punch at him and countering immediately afterward, almost as you had hardly thrown your punch.
He had a powerful neck and thick calves.
He was all left hand.
His jab was so heavy that seemed to stop other aspects of his fighting.
When I saw him throw a right hand the first time I said to myself, "He must be joking." He looked like someone imitating a 12 year old girl doing everything wrong in throwing a right hand. He actually would throw a right hand at times with his right foot off the floor. It made no sense.
With everything else he knew, why couldn't he throw an adequate right hand?
There was much to learn from watching him--his timing with counters, his great left jab. He definitely had a great chin.
Later he was a referee, and I am sure a good one.
There is a film of his fight witrh a young Carmen Basilio.
Years later Basilio was much better.
buzz steps in it yet again.BoxBuzz wrote: granberry seems to have "selective faith".
Example A. He assumes Billy was a good ref based on...... uh...well nothing at all. He's just "sure" period. I suppose he is assuming the best from someone he just simply appreciates in other areas of endeavor. (Just as if one were to assume that George Foreman would be a good salesman just because he was a great KO artist.) Yet he will bellow and wail at others for doing the same thing regarding other topics. (I'm not saying Billy was good or bad as a ref...I'm just pointing out that granberry is "sure" for no reason other than his dependency on his own "good judgement".)
However granberry demonstrates little if any faith in some situations that he seems to arbitrarily decide is unworthy of same. Thus is the mystery of the inconsisitent nature of our resident "expert", The Royal "Granduker of Pugilia" otherwise known as granberry.
Your most hypocritical comment so far, crankberry.granberry wrote:buzz steps in it yet again.BoxBuzz wrote: granberry seems to have "selective faith".
Example A. He assumes Billy was a good ref based on...... uh...well nothing at all. He's just "sure" period. I suppose he is assuming the best from someone he just simply appreciates in other areas of endeavor. (Just as if one were to assume that George Foreman would be a good salesman just because he was a great KO artist.) Yet he will bellow and wail at others for doing the same thing regarding other topics. (I'm not saying Billy was good or bad as a ref...I'm just pointing out that granberry is "sure" for no reason other than his dependency on his own "good judgement".)
However granberry demonstrates little if any faith in some situations that he seems to arbitrarily decide is unworthy of same. Thus is the mystery of the inconsisitent nature of our resident "expert", The Royal "Granduker of Pugilia" otherwise known as granberry.
Feminine spite will get you nowhere, buzz.
Buzz has never seen Billy Graham referee.
I doubt if buzz is competent enough when it comes to boxing to determine which of the three figures in the ring is the referee.
I saw Billy Graham referee the Jimmy Young-Wendell Bailey fight.
This was a grotesquely fat Jimmy Young who looked liked he needed a bra fighting Baltimore's Wendell Bailey, a strongly built heavyweight who was getting his big chance---
a chance to get a win hopefully on his record over a fighter who had once beaten Ali, Foreman and Ron Lyle.
In the first round Bailey landed a right hand which made Young take a step back (remember Young's chin was so good he was never knocked down by Foreman, Ali, Lyle (two fights).
Young didn't like that. He didn't do anything the rest of the round.
Part way through the second round he started hitting Bailey with body shots. Bailey had a bodybuilder's physique (like Ken Norton) with a tiny midsection---completely wrong for boxing, which requires a thickly muscled (not fat) midsection to take body shots.
The body shots were bothering Bailey.
In the third round Young continued the body beating and mixed in combinations to the head--left hook--right hand--left hook.
(He NEVER threw combinations against Ali, Foreman, Lyle)
In the gym he was the best combination puncher of any heavyweight I ever saw.
Here he wanted to get rid of Bailey so he pulled out the combinations.
Young dropped Bailey and clueless Larry Merchant IMMEDIATELY said, "I didn't see any punch."
Young had just been clobbering Bailey with a variety of head shots.
What is interesting is that those were the exact words Howard Cosell said when Jimmy Young knocked Foreman down in the 12th and final round of their fight.
Young landed 6 right hands in a row and on the last one Foreman went down and Cosell IMMEDIATELY said, "I didn't see any punch."
Bailey got up and Young hit him again with the pinpoint combinations and Bailey fell into the ropes and referee Graham stopped the fight.
Bailey did not object.
Apparently referee Billy Graham, with HIS background in boxing,
did "see a punch."
What would compel a spiteful, low mentality halfwit like buzz to scout around boxrec offering nothing more than his pathetic ignorance of boxing, combined with his sicko attempts to snipe at another poster?
.
buzz' buttboy collins shows up on cue.Collins2000 wrote:Your most hypocritical comment so far, crankberry.granberry wrote:buzz steps in it yet again.BoxBuzz wrote: granberry seems to have "selective faith".
Example A. He assumes Billy was a good ref based on...... uh...well nothing at all. He's just "sure" period. I suppose he is assuming the best from someone he just simply appreciates in other areas of endeavor. (Just as if one were to assume that George Foreman would be a good salesman just because he was a great KO artist.) Yet he will bellow and wail at others for doing the same thing regarding other topics. (I'm not saying Billy was good or bad as a ref...I'm just pointing out that granberry is "sure" for no reason other than his dependency on his own "good judgement".)
However granberry demonstrates little if any faith in some situations that he seems to arbitrarily decide is unworthy of same. Thus is the mystery of the inconsisitent nature of our resident "expert", The Royal "Granduker of Pugilia" otherwise known as granberry.
Feminine spite will get you nowhere, buzz.
Buzz has never seen Billy Graham referee.
I doubt if buzz is competent enough when it comes to boxing to determine which of the three figures in the ring is the referee.
I saw Billy Graham referee the Jimmy Young-Wendell Bailey fight.
This was a grotesquely fat Jimmy Young who looked liked he needed a bra fighting Baltimore's Wendell Bailey, a strongly built heavyweight who was getting his big chance---
a chance to get a win hopefully on his record over a fighter who had once beaten Ali, Foreman and Ron Lyle.
In the first round Bailey landed a right hand which made Young take a step back (remember Young's chin was so good he was never knocked down by Foreman, Ali, Lyle (two fights).
Young didn't like that. He didn't do anything the rest of the round.
Part way through the second round he started hitting Bailey with body shots. Bailey had a bodybuilder's physique (like Ken Norton) with a tiny midsection---completely wrong for boxing, which requires a thickly muscled (not fat) midsection to take body shots.
The body shots were bothering Bailey.
In the third round Young continued the body beating and mixed in combinations to the head--left hook--right hand--left hook.
(He NEVER threw combinations against Ali, Foreman, Lyle)
In the gym he was the best combination puncher of any heavyweight I ever saw.
Here he wanted to get rid of Bailey so he pulled out the combinations.
Young dropped Bailey and clueless Larry Merchant IMMEDIATELY said, "I didn't see any punch."
Young had just been clobbering Bailey with a variety of head shots.
What is interesting is that those were the exact words Howard Cosell said when Jimmy Young knocked Foreman down in the 12th and final round of their fight.
Young landed 6 right hands in a row and on the last one Foreman went down and Cosell IMMEDIATELY said, "I didn't see any punch."
Bailey got up and Young hit him again with the pinpoint combinations and Bailey fell into the ropes and referee Graham stopped the fight.
Bailey did not object.
Apparently referee Billy Graham, with HIS background in boxing,
did "see a punch."
What would compel a spiteful, low mentality halfwit like buzz to scout around boxrec offering nothing more than his pathetic ignorance of boxing, combined with his sicko attempts to snipe at another poster?
.
How come you aren't posting as RABID these days?
Aha...so you really just want me to quit commenting here? Why didn't you just say so! Think of me as the "truth squad" you can say anything you like...and all I'll do is ask you questions like...."from what source?".....and "how do you know that to be true"?.....and "where did you get your information".? Questions that any humble student would ask. Otherwise anyone could just wander in and say anything.....anytime and people might just go along with it......you know....like the lemmings you like to refer to.granberry wrote:buzz fills up boxrec with the stench of his petty fixation on one poster.
Poor buzz' mentality is so low that he thinks if he fills of space with his petty fixation and his non boxing comments he is somehow posting on "boxing."
The buzzes of this world don't belong around boxing.
But the internet enables them, at least in their own pathetic minds, to have some "connection" with boxing.
Lemmings? You mean like Dave and RABID?BoxBuzz wrote:Aha...so you really just want me to quit commenting here? Why didn't you just say so! Think of me as the "truth squad" you can say anything you like...and all I'll do is ask you questions like...."from what source?".....and "how do you know that to be true"?.....and "where did you get your information".? Questions that any humble student would ask. Otherwise anyone could just wander in and say anything.....anytime and people might just go along with it......you know....like the lemmings you like to refer to.granberry wrote:buzz fills up boxrec with the stench of his petty fixation on one poster.
Poor buzz' mentality is so low that he thinks if he fills of space with his petty fixation and his non boxing comments he is somehow posting on "boxing."
The buzzes of this world don't belong around boxing.
But the internet enables them, at least in their own pathetic minds, to have some "connection" with boxing.