Page 2 of 3
Re: Closest to unbeatable
Posted: 25 Dec 2014, 16:51
by Tomasino
Jerry Quarry at CW
Re: Closest to unbeatable
Posted: 27 Dec 2014, 17:23
by p4p1
Tomasino wrote:Jerry Quarry at CW
Silly statement, Quarry never fought at CW.
Ali, Frazier, Patterson, Marciano and a long list of better HWs than Quarry could make 200lbs if they wished.
Re: Closest to unbeatable
Posted: 28 Dec 2014, 05:29
by macaca
Monzon, prime and for that matter most of his latter career
Re: Closest to unbeatable
Posted: 28 Dec 2014, 06:30
by Tomasino
p4p1 wrote:Tomasino wrote:Jerry Quarry at CW
Silly statement, Quarry never fought at CW.
Ali, Frazier, Patterson, Marciano and a long list of better HWs than Quarry could make 200lbs if they wished.
I posted it as a joke as Jerry fanatics always post that kind of shit. I agree with you.
Re: Closest to unbeatable
Posted: 28 Dec 2014, 07:07
by evrenb
Watched Ali vs Liston 2 last night - a mint live copy with great audio which really helps you appreciate the footage best ; and Ali is just stunning. Aside from the controversy of the end part, Ali's movement, speed, elusiveness are just breathtaking. Ali was also built real well at this point - fighters of this era obviously trained to be light as this was the trend I suppose. Quite a few of that era could make late 220lbs easily. . . and did later on in their careers. . Ali, Liston, Chuvalo, Cleveland Williams come to mind. .
Re: Closest to unbeatable
Posted: 28 Dec 2014, 07:14
by Tuan_Jim
Sugar Ray Robinson at middleweight, in his prime, 120-1, when he gored the Raging Bull. That performance, and that record, and that talent on display in the ring, is mind boggling.
I would direct the chappies in this thread mentioning silly names like Roy Jones and Joe Calzaghe to go watch the video of that fluid artistic massacre.
Re: Closest to unbeatable
Posted: 28 Dec 2014, 07:17
by evrenb
Tuan_Jim wrote:Sugar Ray Robinson at middleweight, in his prime, 120-1, when he gored the Raging Bull. That performance, and that record, and that talent on display in the ring, is mind boggling.
I would direct the chappies in this thread mentioning silly names like Roy Jones and Joe Calzaghe to go watch the video of that fluid artistic massacre.
Yes thats a good one. I also watched last night Robbie against Bobby Dykes. While it wasn't his best performance and Dykes was a very very decent fighter, you could see that he was oozing class. . .
Re: Closest to unbeatable
Posted: 28 Dec 2014, 07:21
by Tuan_Jim
evrenb wrote:Watched Ali vs Liston 2 last night - a mint live copy with great audio which really helps you appreciate the footage best ; and Ali is just stunning. Aside from the controversy of the end part, Ali's movement, speed, elusiveness are just breathtaking. Ali was also built real well at this point - fighters of this era obviously trained to be light as this was the trend I suppose. Quite a few of that era could make late 220lbs easily. . . and did later on in their careers. . Ali, Liston, Chuvalo, Cleveland Williams come to mind. .
I have that live copy too - well done for finding it!
It is strange when we talk of the brilliant heavyweights of that era and we almost have to make 'apologies' for their lower weights, as if they with their peak physical fitness might somehow be at a disadvantage against the gasping sweaty 240lb Overweights of today. God, what an advantage that 40lbs was to Buster Mathis against Smokin' Joe! It certainly swung the fight in my opinion.
The pace and punchcount of those classic fights is astonishing.
Re: Closest to unbeatable
Posted: 28 Dec 2014, 07:23
by evrenb
Tuan_Jim wrote:evrenb wrote:Watched Ali vs Liston 2 last night - a mint live copy with great audio which really helps you appreciate the footage best ; and Ali is just stunning. Aside from the controversy of the end part, Ali's movement, speed, elusiveness are just breathtaking. Ali was also built real well at this point - fighters of this era obviously trained to be light as this was the trend I suppose. Quite a few of that era could make late 220lbs easily. . . and did later on in their careers. . Ali, Liston, Chuvalo, Cleveland Williams come to mind. .
I have that live copy too - well done for finding it!
It is strange when we talk of the brilliant heavyweights of that era and we almost have to make 'apologies' for their lower weights, as if they with their peak physical fitness they might still somehow be at a disadvantage against the gasping sweaty 240lb Overweights of today. God, what an advantage that 40lbs was to Buster Mathis against Smokin' Joe! It certainly swung the fight in my opinion.
The pace and punchcount of those classic fights is astonishing.
This is true, I almost have to make my apologies and excuses in advance before the lardass lovers come to the attack!
Re: Closest to unbeatable
Posted: 28 Dec 2014, 07:23
by Tuan_Jim
evrenb wrote:Tuan_Jim wrote:Sugar Ray Robinson at middleweight, in his prime, 120-1, when he gored the Raging Bull. That performance, and that record, and that talent on display in the ring, is mind boggling.
I would direct the chappies in this thread mentioning silly names like Roy Jones and Joe Calzaghe to go watch the video of that fluid artistic massacre.
Yes thats a good one. I also watched last night Robbie against Bobby Dykes. While it wasn't his best performance and Dykes was a very very decent fighter, you could see that he was oozing class. . .
I gaze at him in amazement every time. Even at 40, which must have been about 60 in that torrid era, he's whacking top class middleweights senseless.
Re: Closest to unbeatable
Posted: 28 Dec 2014, 07:32
by evrenb
Tuan_Jim wrote:evrenb wrote:Tuan_Jim wrote:Sugar Ray Robinson at middleweight, in his prime, 120-1, when he gored the Raging Bull. That performance, and that record, and that talent on display in the ring, is mind boggling.
I would direct the chappies in this thread mentioning silly names like Roy Jones and Joe Calzaghe to go watch the video of that fluid artistic massacre.
Yes thats a good one. I also watched last night Robbie against Bobby Dykes. While it wasn't his best performance and Dykes was a very very decent fighter, you could see that he was oozing class. . .
I gaze at him in amazement every time. Even at 40, which must have been about 60 in that torrid era, he's whacking top class middleweights senseless.
Watched the second Fullmer fight last night. The punch of the century I reckon!
Re: Closest to unbeatable
Posted: 28 Dec 2014, 16:40
by HomicideHenry
One issue I have also is with fighters who, A) never lost, B) rarely lost.
Very hard to get a clear view of them. Jeffries, for instance, in maybe any other era would of not had the success that he had. He was strictly a fighter of his own generation. But he wouldn't of made that transition into more modern eras.
Gene Tunney, at LHW, was practically unbeatable. The only fly in the ointment was Greb, and he's another one who seldom ever lost regardless how big the opponent was. The only issue with Tunney, though, was at LHW he never tried to make fights with guys like Siki and Berlenbach, Carpentier and McTigue. Most of Tunney's opponents at LHW were unknown European stock fighters, or fringe guys. Ezzard Charles on the other hand, beat every able bodied LHW there was--- except for the champion.
Hell, the greatest boxer of all time Sam Langford lost now and then between 135 and heavyweight. So this is a rather hard question to ask--- I'd also throw in Jimmy Wilde's name into the mix, because he was unbeaten for so long. Only issue or problem, though, with Wilde is either A) he fought unknowns, B) there is a lack of knowledge concerning his era and the men he fought to really understand what his overall worth is. Alot of guys, sadly, fall into that latter category and get passed over by modern fans and 'experts'.
Bob Fitzsimmons, as a middleweight, may very well of been unbeatable. Only man I can really see having the edge over him on the P4P level and MW level is probably Robinson. A middleweight with the power of a super-heavyweight, tough as nails, and with the skills to match--- I think almost elevates him to the point of being unbeatable, even after 100+ years of 'evolution' in the sport.
Re: Closest to unbeatable
Posted: 28 Dec 2014, 22:59
by Ambling Alp II
After reading this meandering post, I guess I will limit myself to your ridiculous comments about Gene Tunney.
First, he did fight Carpentier and beat him convincingly. Once again, you didn't do your research.
Of course he wanted title fights against any light heavyweight champion, but couldn't get them.
Care to name all of the "unknown European stock fighters" that Tunney was feasting on at light heavyweight? Sounds like yet another comment that you pulled out of thin air.
Tunney beat some very good competition. Besides Carpentier and Greb, he also beat Battling Levinsky, and Tommy Gibbons.
Re: Closest to unbeatable
Posted: 29 Dec 2014, 10:25
by Counter-puncher
Ambling Alp II wrote:After reading this meandering post, I guess I will limit myself to your ridiculous comments about Gene Tunney.
First, he did fight Carpentier and beat him convincingly. Once again, you didn't do your research.
Of course he wanted title fights against any light heavyweight champion, but couldn't get them.
Care to name all of the "unknown European stock fighters" that Tunney was feasting on at light heavyweight? Sounds like yet another comment that you pulled out of thin air.
Tunney beat some very good competition. Besides Carpentier and Greb, he also beat Battling Levinsky, and Tommy Gibbons.
yeah, but, apart from them, ummmm....
Re: Closest to unbeatable
Posted: 29 Dec 2014, 14:48
by p4p1
Tomasino wrote:p4p1 wrote:Tomasino wrote:Jerry Quarry at CW
Silly statement, Quarry never fought at CW.
Ali, Frazier, Patterson, Marciano and a long list of better HWs than Quarry could make 200lbs if they wished.
I posted it as a joke as Jerry fanatics always post that kind of poo. I agree with you.
Re: Closest to unbeatable
Posted: 29 Dec 2014, 14:51
by palooka
Mike McCallum at light middle?
Re: Closest to unbeatable
Posted: 29 Dec 2014, 18:14
by HomicideHenry
Ambling Alp II wrote:After reading this meandering post, I guess I will limit myself to your ridiculous comments about Gene Tunney.
First, he did fight Carpentier and beat him convincingly. Once again, you didn't do your research.
Of course he wanted title fights against any light heavyweight champion, but couldn't get them.
Care to name all of the "unknown European stock fighters" that Tunney was feasting on at light heavyweight? Sounds like yet another comment that you pulled out of thin air.
Tunney beat some very good competition. Besides Carpentier and Greb, he also beat Battling Levinsky, and Tommy Gibbons.
Not to make excuses but I have been sick... so, I wasn't thinking. My bad @ Tunney/Carpentier.
And... didnt Levinsky and Gibbons come near the end of Tunney's LHW days, or after he abandoned the weight?
Re: Closest to unbeatable
Posted: 30 Dec 2014, 08:55
by Counter-puncher
palooka wrote:Wilfredo Gomez at super bantam, Zarate at bantam - supremely skilled boxers and destructive punchers.
think you are greatly over-rating Gomez's boxing ability there, mate. he wasn't quite a one-dimensional slugger, perhaps, but he was far from rounded IMO
Re: Closest to unbeatable
Posted: 30 Dec 2014, 10:23
by Broomhall
Counter-puncher wrote:palooka wrote:Wilfredo Gomez at super bantam, Zarate at bantam - supremely skilled boxers and destructive punchers.
think you are greatly over-rating Gomez's boxing ability there, mate. he wasn't quite a one-dimensional slugger, perhaps, but he was far from rounded IMO
What you talkin bout willis? Sluggers can be unbeatable too. That isnt the domain of the silky smooth. I think also on certain nights there are times when everything just clicks and even the not so great fighters can have a night when it would be very hard to beat them.
Aggressive fighters generally have shorter careers but some of them do burn very brightly. Zamora, Olivares, Julian Jackson would all be examples of fighters who when they were firing on all cylinders would give the sweetest boxers a torrid time.
Re: Closest to unbeatable
Posted: 30 Dec 2014, 10:35
by Counter-puncher
i thought it was pretty clear?
our friend palooka said Gomez was a supremely skilled boxer
he wasn't (IMO)
Re: Closest to unbeatable
Posted: 30 Dec 2014, 10:36
by Counter-puncher
Counter-puncher wrote:palooka wrote:Wilfredo Gomez at super bantam, Zarate at bantam - supremely skilled boxers and destructive punchers.
think you are greatly over-rating Gomez's boxing ability there, mate. he wasn't quite a one-dimensional slugger, perhaps, but he was far from rounded IMO
Re: Closest to unbeatable
Posted: 30 Dec 2014, 10:46
by Ezzard
Both Leonard and Hearns appeared unbeatable at 147.
Monzon in Argentina?
Re: Closest to unbeatable
Posted: 30 Dec 2014, 10:52
by Counter-puncher
evrenb wrote:
Watched the second Fullmer fight last night. The punch of the century I reckon!
given who it is he smokes with that shot, it can't be far off
Re: Closest to unbeatable
Posted: 30 Dec 2014, 10:53
by expe
Ezzard wrote:Both Leonard and Hearns appeared unbeatable at 147.
Monzon in Argentina?
Sven Ottke in Germany?
Re: Closest to unbeatable
Posted: 30 Dec 2014, 11:00
by Broomhall
Counter-puncher wrote:i thought it was pretty clear?
our friend palooka said Gomez was a supremely skilled boxer
he wasn't (IMO)
No perhaps not ,but I just watched a clip of him fighting Carlos Zarate and the guy could box and move, a good box-fighter with very good skills imo. The definition of supremely skilled is subjective. I would say Marciano was extremely skilled at how he used the tools he had. It isnt just about using the jab, it can also be about moving the guy into position, it can be about strategy and body shots. It can be about pressure
I wouldnt say Azumah Nelson was a classically skilled boxer, but the pressure he could put on people with his feet and his aggression and pressure was incredibly skillful.