BoxRec

walshb wrote:

dr_devious wrote:The only way Toney would beat Foster is by bodysplash. Who did Toney ever beat that is in Bob Foster's league, especially at LHW?

What has this to do with it, If Toney never fought at LH and skipped to cruiser I still would give him a chance. We are talking peaks and I would go so far as to say that Toney from the Barkley night would beat Foster...

Broncano wrote:Besides Ahumada, who like Martin says beat him in the ring but not on the scorecards.. Foster was beaten at 175 lbs.. And that was accomplished by a gentleman named Mauro Mina

granberry wrote:I can see from the posts here that Jack Dillon, Philadelphia Jack O'Brien, George Carpentier, Tommy Loughran, Jack Delaney, Kid Norfolk etc etc

never existed.

LOL

bobbyd wrote:

granberry wrote:I can see from the posts here that Jack Dillon, Philadelphia Jack O'Brien, George Carpentier, Tommy Loughran, Jack Delaney, Kid Norfolk etc etc

never existed.

LOL

And Billy Conn as well.At least the 1941 version that outboxed Joe Louis for 12 rounds.As a matter of fact,On that night,I think That Conn may have been the greatest lightheavy that ever walked the planet!

dr_devious wrote:Walsh, agree that Toneys chin would keep him in the fight, and his skills would give him a chance. Just a big ask for him to beat Foster, if Jones put him on the floor then Foster might keep him there

He was actually quite badly hurt by that Johnson straight left, a better finished may have ended the fight right there.

Robinson wrote:Granberry

Im sorry we disagree, but I just dont see those old timers you listed beating the rangey Foster, with his sharp and short left hook and capable boxing style.

Carpentier seems like a brave and interesting character, but of the footage I have seen of him in his fights and of him training, he doesn't seem to have the speed and sophistication to beat Foster. He was great for his time. And will always be a legend no doubt. What does he have over Foster other than a charming smile.

Obrien, was a awesome guy for his era though he essentially was a 160-165lb fighter. Foster would tower over him and would have a long jab in his face all night long. MOst guys from Obriens era would struggle against a boxer-puncher especially a guy who can stick and move well. Whether the Burns fight was fake or not, Burns who at his peak was barely heavier than Foster managed to handle and out strength Obrien in there match up. What tools doe she have that would beat Foster ?

Loughran, who had some great wins and was a true all time great, also looked old fashioned in the late 1920s. His low guard, high chin, single punches and weighted down back foot made for a great counter puncher at the start of the 20th century. Braddock was barely out of the LHW when the pair met in a classic match. Against Foster, he would try to time the long range shots only to be dealing with a man who could throw crisp inside shots and who could use his footwoork well. Apart from great courage what does Lougran have to beat Foster ?

Delaney, like most LHW at the time chased after the HW crown, which when you are only outweighed by 10 or so pounds isn't that an elusive dream. Pawed his jab with little sting, threw his left hook just with the shoulder and no pivot. He did have a good cross which he was able to land well. Is this enough to close Fosters eyes ? He moved alot and could back up well especially in an era of flat footed stalking. What tools does he have that would defeat Foster?

Kid Norfolk, I have not seen any footage of Norfolk, and have only read articles and blotches here and there on him. What film have you seen ?
From what I can ascertain, he sounds like a old fashion Dwight Qawi. But this is just going from his build, wieghts and style description.

These are just my opinions. Im not a historian, nor am I an encyclopedia.

Im just a fan of the sport.

Whats your credentials ?

Kym

Robinson wrote:My hero Ali...when the hell did I claim Ali was my hero.

Ok...so people disagre with what I have said..Thats Great :)

Heres the thing, I have never claimed to be a boxing historian nor should a great deal many of you. I also think that alot of old timers are legends and are greats, but by modern standards there skills are vastly over rated.

Ambling Alp wrote:Just a few points:
Foster were pretty inexperienced when he fought Mina. He only had 12 previous fights and Mina was the #1 contender. This was 5 years before Foster would go on to win the lightheavyweight title. This is not strong evidence against Foster.

granberry wrote:

Broncano wrote:

granberry wrote:
Foster's best fight was his three round KO of Eddie Cotton, a top level fighter who I thought was impossible to KO.

A couple of years ago in Peru I spoke to a man by the name of Otto Salas. He must be 90 years old now and he has seen everything (and everyone) that has taken place in Peruvian rings since the 1920s. He told me that from all the foreign fighters who had visited Peru (which includes names like Loughran, Gavilan and Joe Louis (exhibitions), Charley Burley, Artie Towne, Bob Foster, etc..) his favorite by far was Eddie Cotton.
As an avid reader of boxing literature in those pre-television days he said he finally understood what American boxing scribes meant by the term "sweet science" when he saw Cotton in action.

Thanks for the comment from Otto Salas.

Eddie Cotton beat Jose Torres thouroughly for the light heavyweight title.

The decision in that fight for Torres was the worst I have ever seen, other than the Jimmy Young-Ali "decision."

Cotton broke Torres in half with body punches, which was supposed to be Torres' specialty.

Harold Johnson told me that when he saw Cotton for the first time, at the weigh-in for their bout, he knew Cotton was a good fighter because Cotton's face was unmarked.

By the way, I wonder if a film of that fight is available.

I just looked up Johnson's record on cyberboxing, and the description of Johnson there by Tracy Callis is disgusting in its ignorance of how good Johnson actually was, and its repetition of of tired, sour media talking points spouted by those who were for some reason antagonistic to Johnson.