BoxRec

The story about Billy Miske, a fighter in the 1920s, is a story for the ages, and transcends boxing.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/inside ... of_reilly/

I guess he had a lot of heart.

rip billy but this is the most played out story in boxing

I apologize. I'm new here and didn't do a search first.

I run by his old house when I'm doing roadwork getting ready for a fight. Gives me a little boost.

Billy Miske is a bit of a forgotten man.

He had a lot of fights with great fighters of hsi era, won some, drew some and lost some.

He beat

Mike O'Dowd
Jack Dillon (x3)
Tommy Gibbons
Battling Levinsky (x2)

as well as a number of solid contenders

He got draws with

Greb
Dillon
Dempsey
Gibbons

These guys were all elite fighters of their era. Does Miske get overlooked these days?

Does he deserve more respect and a higher ranking?

Any new thoughts? It seems to me that a whole raft of fighters from back then never even get mentioned. In around Miske's weight there is...

Levinsky
Stribling
Slattery
Dillon

But Miske himself has some fine wins. In fact an ex-middleweight beating guys who would be Cruisers today...is similar to Hopkins.

Ezzard wrote:Any new thoughts? It seems to me that a whole raft of fighters from back then never even get mentioned. In around Miske's weight there is...

Levinsky
Stribling
Slattery
Dillon

But Miske himself has some fine wins. In fact an ex-middleweight beating guys who would be Cruisers today...is similar to Hopkins.

Totally overrated. Should not be in the HOF.

klompton wrote:

Ezzard wrote:Any new thoughts? It seems to me that a whole raft of fighters from back then never even get mentioned. In around Miske's weight there is...

Levinsky
Stribling
Slattery
Dillon

But Miske himself has some fine wins. In fact an ex-middleweight beating guys who would be Cruisers today...is similar to Hopkins.

Totally overrated. Should not be in the HOF.

Klompton, you are the one guy I was hoping would respond.

What is your understanding? All I have is the Boxrec record and snippets from the internet (after a cursory search)... It seemed that mostly, even in defeat, he was competitive with almost all of his opponents.

He was just a good solid fighter. Kind of vanilla. Nothing special about him beyond the story thats been hyped up about his death.

Something that I have always found curious about him is the story that he was already dying when he fought Dempsey for the title. That seems strange given that he was able to beat Brennan after the Dempsey fight.

I guess it's possible that he really was in bad condition for the Demspey fight, then his health improved some after the Dempsey fight, and then after the Brennan fight he had a relapse, but you wonder if that is what happened.

He was definately already dying when he fought Dempsey. The illness he had is known for periods of remission. Beating Bill Brennan at that point was not as impressive as some might think. Bill Brennan was essentially sitting on his "rating" hoping for a third fight with Dempsey and not really fighting anyone threatening. In reality his last hurrah was his stoppage loss to Dempsey in 1920 when he nearly upset the champion. Their final fight together, just before Miske died was a joke. I wouldnt put much stock in that "victory" at all. Brennan should have never been allowed to fight after Firpo nearly killed him but he showed up to fight Miske in horrible condition and even then most people thought he took a dive. His performance was so bad that they withheld his purse.

Interesting. Concerning his remission, I thought perhaps that his condition may have went up and down, but didn't know for sure.

Miske had a pretty darn good record. Beat quite a few top guys. Drew with others. Maybe if he had fought Greb in St Paul instead of Pittsburgh he would've got the newspaper decision.

Maybe he would have gotten the newspaper decision against everyone he lost to if he fought them at home. Maybe he only lost every fight he lost because he was robbed...

Geez. You don't think a hometown boy is going to get just a wee bit more credit than an out-of-towner? Just because it was your idol the Great and Powerful Greb doesn't mean he was unbeatable. Until film pops up to show otherwise, descriptions I've read lead me to think he was a windmill of open gloves and elbows, with a few thumbs and forearms thrown in for good measure. Refs were a helluva lot more lenient in Greb's day.

For a small heavyweight, Miske fared pretty well, and was considered one of the top men in his day.

They fought three times cap. The first time they fought Greb took the fight on short notice and earned a draw... in PHILLY. Hometown decision? I think not. The second time they fought was in Pittsburgh and Miske won a controversial nd in Grebs hometown after Greb domijated the first 8 rounds. Its why your comment is uneducated and irresponsible. Their third fight, also in Pittsburgh, was an easy win for Greb. Just like Miske's loss to Norfolk in Pitts. and his other to Norfolk in Boston, or his loss to Levinsky in Ohio. Hell, miske couldnt even beat all his opponents in his hometown. The bottom line is some people have a soft spot for Miske but it doesnt change the fact that he wasnt a great fighter and fighting at home with friendly (biased) officials wouldnt change that.

klompton wrote:

Ezzard wrote:Any new thoughts? It seems to me that a whole raft of fighters from back then never even get mentioned. In around Miske's weight there is...

Levinsky
Stribling
Slattery
Dillon

But Miske himself has some fine wins. In fact an ex-middleweight beating guys who would be Cruisers today...is similar to Hopkins.

Totally overrated. Should not be in the HOF.

Klomp I've never heard you say anything positive about any fighter other than Greb . . . .

klompton wrote:They fought three times cap. The first time they fought Greb took the fight on short notice and earned a draw... in PHILLY. Hometown decision? I think not. The second time they fought was in Pittsburgh and Miske won a controversial nd in Grebs hometown after Greb domijated the first 8 rounds. Its why your comment is uneducated and irresponsible. Their third fight, also in Pittsburgh, was an easy win for Greb. Just like Miske's loss to Norfolk in Pitts. and his other to Norfolk in Boston, or his loss to Levinsky in Ohio. Hell, miske couldnt even beat all his opponents in his hometown. The bottom line is some people have a soft spot for Miske but it doesnt change the fact that he wasnt a great fighter and fighting at home with friendly (biased) officials wouldnt change that.

They did fight three times according to Boxrec. A 6-round draw. Then Greb got two 10-rd newspaper decisions in Pittsburgh again according to Boxrec one Sept 21, 1918 the other March 31, 1919. If these records are incorrect, why not update them? As for losing to Norfolk, styles make fights. Not sure if you know this, but just because fighter A beats fighter B and fighter B beats fighter C, doesn't always mean fighter A beats fighter C. I don't say Greb was a bum or an overrated dirty fighter, he deserves a spot in the HOF. Other guys do as well.

Cap wrote:

klompton wrote:They fought three times cap. The first time they fought Greb took the fight on short notice and earned a draw... in PHILLY. Hometown decision? I think not. The second time they fought was in Pittsburgh and Miske won a controversial nd in Grebs hometown after Greb domijated the first 8 rounds. Its why your comment is uneducated and irresponsible. Their third fight, also in Pittsburgh, was an easy win for Greb. Just like Miske's loss to Norfolk in Pitts. and his other to Norfolk in Boston, or his loss to Levinsky in Ohio. Hell, miske couldnt even beat all his opponents in his hometown. The bottom line is some people have a soft spot for Miske but it doesnt change the fact that he wasnt a great fighter and fighting at home with friendly (biased) officials wouldnt change that.

They did fight three times according to Boxrec. A 6-round draw. Then Greb got two 10-rd newspaper decisions in Pittsburgh again according to Boxrec one Sept 21, 1918 the other March 31, 1919. If these records are incorrect, why not update them? As for losing to Norfolk, styles make fights. Not sure if you know this, but just because fighter A beats fighter B and fighter B beats fighter C, doesn't always mean fighter A beats fighter C. I don't say Greb was a bum or an overrated dirty fighter, he deserves a spot in the HOF. Other guys do as well.

Boxrec isnt infallible. If that is the beginning and end of your research into the subject and what you base your argument on then we can agree to disagree. Youre building your case on quicksand. Why would Miske deserve his HOF spot, even if he was "a solid contender"? Should EVERY "solid contender" get into the HOF? Under exactly what criteria would Miske qualify under any other HOF standards (except the ridiculously lax standards the IBHOF has)? He wasnt exceptionally famous during his day, he wasnt the most formidible opponent in any weight class he ever participated (not even close), He doesnt have any convincing signature wins, he didnt do anything exceptional to advance the sport, so on and so forth. The ONLY reason anyone remembers Miske today is because of the story "The Last Christmas" which I would argue is a more compelling argument for the AUTHORS entry, not the subjects. Like I said, Miske was a solid but unexceptional contender who won some and lost some. He wasnt a spectacular performer in any way shape or form. Pretty vanilla and completely overrated today by people who have a soft spot for fighters stories as opposed to their actual accomplishments (see: Jim Braddock). The insinuation you make, that maybe Miske would have beaten Greb had their bouts been on Miske's home turf is ridiculous because presupposes that Greb ONLY defeated Miske based on friendly officiating or that Miske would have defeated Greb had he had biased judges. In reality neither is true as I pointed out. Let me guess, you go to boxrec and see that Miske "Drew" with Dempsey in St. Paul and your impressed... What Boxrec doesnt tell you is that 5 of the newspapers present voted for Dempsey. Only 1 voted for Miske. Three had it a draw. So even if you give Miske every benefit of the doubt you still have a victory for Dempsey. Thats always been a nice feather in Miske's cap but its not a feather based on fact. When one leaves sentiment out of the equation and looks strictly at the facts there wasnt anything overly impressive about him or his record. Then people say "well, what he did after 1920 was impressive for a dying man." Fine, elect him to the invalid hall of fame. Beating retreads and past their prime leftovers doesnt qualify one for greatness as far as Im concerned. As for the comment "just because fighter A beats fighter B and fighter B beats fighter C, doesn't always mean fighter A beats fighter C" Maybe thats true but Greb was the far more consistent fighter, beat nearly every fighter that beat Miske or held him even, and drew with Miske on short notice, then beat him for 8 rounds before Miske was given a ND over him using fuzzy math (which was questioned at the time), before Greb finally beat him easily in their final match. Nevermind the fact that Miske outweighed Greb in every one of these engagements and by significant margins in the last two. Im a big fan of Kid Norfolk, who was clearly better than Miske, and I dont feel Norfolk deserves to be in the HOF. If Norfolk doesnt deserve it Miske shouldnt even be under discussion.

dempseyfire wrote:

klompton wrote:

Ezzard wrote:Any new thoughts? It seems to me that a whole raft of fighters from back then never even get mentioned. In around Miske's weight there is...

Levinsky
Stribling
Slattery
Dillon

But Miske himself has some fine wins. In fact an ex-middleweight beating guys who would be Cruisers today...is similar to Hopkins.

Totally overrated. Should not be in the HOF.

Klomp I've never heard you say anything positive about any fighter other than Greb . . . .

Then go back and look over more of my posts.

Even you have to admit there was a big city bias back then (even more than today) against fighters from "Hicksville" bergs like St. Paul. Greb was a big name in a city trying to compete with New York and Chicago, so of course the sportswriters of the day looked down their noses at guys like Miske and would only have eyes for Greb.

Do you have any film of Miske in action? I've heard even his family have almost nothing.

Lol. The Twin Cities being considered a hick town. Tell that to the numerous boxers from Miske's area that became some of the most highly regarded fighters of the day... all time even. Miske didnt achieve those heights because he wasnt that good. Not because there was a bias against him. In fact Miske got more opportunities than most during that era. far disproportionate to his skill or standing, up to and including a totally undeserved shot at the grearest prize in the sport. laughable to suggest that miske didnt get the breaks he deserved because of bias or any oher reason.

I would also point out that the twin cities, at the time in question, where comparable in size (slightly larger actually) than Pittsburgh and likely had more top fighters in more divisions than Pittsburgh including some of the biggest, most bankable names in the sport. Hardly the provincial hick town compared to Pittsburgh you make them out to be.

Il Duce, could you please tell me how good was Billy Miske? This include skills, left jabs, left hook, right hand, power, power punch, body attack, durability, footwork, defense and chin.

Il Duce, could you please tell me how good was Billy Miske when he wasn't sick from Bright's Disease? This include skills, left jabs, left hook, right hand, power, power punch, body attack, durability, footwork, defense and chin.

Il Duce,

Before you reply to other post including mine, could you please tell me how good was Billy Miske? This include his skills, left jabs, left hook, right hand, power, power punch, body attack, durability, footwork, defense and chin.

Come on Il Duce could you please just tell me how good was Billy Miske?