BoxRec

http://news.boxrec.com/news/2009/retros ... ish-battle

It's a boxrec article - of a top quality fight.

I'd hope to see fights of this quality- well matched battles- for the British title again on a regular basis.

But yeah- this thread is for people to post about really good British title fights- well made match ups where both fighters had earned their shot, both men gave their all in a well matched battle.

notice too, that in those days (1966) a guy who lost the World title would have no qualrms fighting for his British- none of this "I'm baove that any more, I'll hang around for a shot at one of the 6 or 7 "World" belts that I somehow feel I rightfully deserve" nonsence.


Also, McGowan's career progess was through the titles- Scottish area, British, commonwealth and European title, then World. No "skipping" levels , no "intrim" or "international" type belts either.

Damn, that was a good write up!

I remember as a kid in the 80s reading about Walter McGowan through the fantastic Gilbert Odd who
wrote about his battles with Chartai Chinoi - a soldier who earned 7p a day in the Thai army as a private
and who won the world title off McGowan in front of the King of Siam in Bangkok in 1967. I would love to
read more of these articles please!

Whast the deal with the 1/2 point scoring?

was it just 1 point for the winner of the round and 1/2 for the loser

or 1/2 each for a Draw round?

Gazmac81 wrote:Whast the deal with the 1/2 point scoring?

was it just 1 point for the winner of the round and 1/2 for the loser

or 1/2 each for a Draw round?

Winner got 10, loser got 9 1/2 .

Just like now, but instead of calling it 9, they called it 9 1/2.

Draw round was 10-10

So eg 79 -78 would be 4 round to 2 with 2 drawn.

So my Guess was totally wrong

Cheers for clearing that up for me

whicker wrote:

Gazmac81 wrote:Whast the deal with the 1/2 point scoring?

was it just 1 point for the winner of the round and 1/2 for the loser

or 1/2 each for a Draw round?

Winner got 10, loser got 9 1/2 .

Just like now, but instead of calling it 9, they called it 9 1/2.

Draw round was 10-10

whicker wrote:http://news.boxrec.com/news/2009/retros ... ish-battle

It's a boxrec article - of a top quality fight.

I'd hope to see fights of this quality- well matched battles- for the British title again on a regular basis.

But yeah- this thread is for people to post about really good British title fights- well made match ups where both fighters had earned their shot, both men gave their all in a well matched battle.

notice too, that in those days (1966) a guy who lost the World title would have no qualrms fighting for his British- none of this "I'm baove that any more, I'll hang around for a shot at one of the 6 or 7 "World" belts that I somehow feel I rightfully deserve" nonsence.


Also, McGowan's career progess was through the titles- Scottish area, British, commonwealth and European title, then World. No "skipping" levels , no "intrim" or "international" type belts either.

I actually wrote that article, glad you liked it. Was a terrific scrap of high quality. Now i am not being disrespectful here but nowadays we dont have fighters of there quality fightign for the titles. Its not taht we dont have the fighters its that they are the 'level above' the British title. Now Rudkin was a leading contender for the World Bantamweight tile and had already fought for it losing to Harada. In their first fight McGowan was World Champion can you imagine that today? Carl Froch fighting Paul Smith for the British !!!

Both guys were very high quality fighters and two of my favrouites. I actually sent a copy of this article to Alan Rudkin but i havent heard back however his son said he enjoyed it.

Damn, that was a good write up!

I remember as a kid in the 80s reading about Walter McGowan through the fantastic Gilbert Odd who
wrote about his battles with Chartai Chinoi - a soldier who earned 7p a day in the Thai army as a private
and who won the world title off McGowan in front of the King of Siam in Bangkok in 1967. I would love to
read more of these articles please!

Me and Ian was discussing this and i will do a series of articles called Retrospect, if there is any fight you guys are wanting i'm open for suggestions as i would like to do some of these on guys some fans havent heard of.

BTW i have film of this bout but it is only HL's from every round but still what a fight

napoles7 wrote: Now i am not being disrespectful here but nowadays we dont have fighters of there quality fightign for the titles. Its not taht we dont have the fighters its that they are the 'level above' the British title. Now Rudkin was a leading contender for the World Bantamweight tile and had already fought for it losing to Harada. In their first fight McGowan was World Champion can you imagine that today? Carl Froch fighting Paul Smith for the British !!!

Yeah, I agree.

With just one World title, the British did carry a lot more prestige.

The way belts are "given up" now too, discredits the title.

In the past, someone would challenge for the European title, or World title AS champion of their country.

yeh its a shame in the way as it decrdits the British title as the best brit aint always Brit champ

Boxing is no different to most sports.
It has to generate enough cash to keep everyone taking a slice of the pie happy.
That led to the proliferation of belts.
It ain't that long ago in football that the Champions League was a knock out tournament and you took your chance.
Now you don't even have to be the Champions of your own league to get in and are guaranteed at least 6 pointless games in a mini league.
Why ?
Because we pay to attend, or watch it on Channels that we have to pay to watch - in the main.
Does it discredit the Premier League when Liverpool win the Champions League and can't win their domestic League ?
No one gives a fook.