BoxRec

Billy Papke was considered a top Middleweight for decades but doesn't get much web space these days.

Anybody want to chip in on this semi-forgotten fighter?

Does he, or should he, make the top10, 20, 30 at 160?

Papke knocked out Stanley Ketchel, but the word is in that fight, Papke belted Stanley on the chin when the two came out to touch gloves at the start of the fight. Ketchel couldnt recover from the punch and caught a beating the rest of the way.
In the rematch,Ketchel beat the hell out of Papke knocking him out.
Papke beat alot of good fighters and was probably one tough middleweight.
However,he met an ignominious end by killing his wife and committing suicide long after his retirement.

The guy is a sucker throat puncher, the only way he could beat Ketchel. He did beat Carpentier. His ending could also be a reason why he isn't brought up often.

There was no sucker punch. That's a myth.

I thought Ketchel and Pake both did it in their first and 2nd fights, hence the reciprocity?

It's actually a 1/2 myth. It is true that Papke refused to acknowledge Ketchel's outstretched arm and touch gloves at the start of the bout, but he didn't exactly sucker punch Ketchel either. The Chicago Tribune ringside account says Papke went after Ketchel from the opening gong, ignoring Ketchel's attempt to touch gloves, and forcing Ketchel to sidestep. But Ketchel actually landed the first punch before Papke connected with the punch that resulted in four or five knockdowns in the first round - a punch from which Ketchel never really recovered.

Papke refused to touch gloves because he claimed Ketchel had refused before their previous fight in Milwaukee. The Tribune makes it sound as if Papke publicly stated before the fight he would not touch gloves at the first bell - so Ketchel may have already known Papke's bad intentions.

raylawpc wrote:It's actually a 1/2 myth. It is true that Papke refused to acknowledge Ketchel's outstretched arm and touch gloves at the start of the bout, but he didn't exactly sucker punch Ketchel either. The Chicago Tribune ringside account says Papke went after Ketchel from the opening gong, ignoring Ketchel's attempt to touch gloves, and forcing Ketchel to sidestep. But Ketchel actually landed the first punch before Papke connected with the punch that resulted in four or five knockdowns in the first round - a punch from which Ketchel never really recovered.

Papke refused to touch gloves because he claimed Ketchel had refused before their previous fight in Milwaukee. The Tribune makes it sound as if Papke publicly stated before the fight he would not touch gloves at the first bell - so Ketchel may have already known Papke's bad intentions.

Very interesting Tom.Thanks for that.

The referee isnt joking when he tells you to "protect yourself at all times".

George Phair of Milwaukee Sentinel wrote in next-day report that they shook hands at the start of the first round (1st fight).

Expug wrote:

raylawpc wrote:It's actually a 1/2 myth. It is true that Papke refused to acknowledge Ketchel's outstretched arm and touch gloves at the start of the bout, but he didn't exactly sucker punch Ketchel either. The Chicago Tribune ringside account says Papke went after Ketchel from the opening gong, ignoring Ketchel's attempt to touch gloves, and forcing Ketchel to sidestep. But Ketchel actually landed the first punch before Papke connected with the punch that resulted in four or five knockdowns in the first round - a punch from which Ketchel never really recovered.

Papke refused to touch gloves because he claimed Ketchel had refused before their previous fight in Milwaukee. The Tribune makes it sound as if Papke publicly stated before the fight he would not touch gloves at the first bell - so Ketchel may have already known Papke's bad intentions.

Very interesting Tom.Thanks for that.

The referee isnt joking when he tells you to "protect yourself at all times".

That statement and the equally famous "shake hands now and come out fighting" supposedly have their genesis from the Ketchel-Papke encounters . . .

I think that "protect yourself at all times" (although worded differently, perhaps) was used by referees long before that.

Senya13 wrote:I think that "protect yourself at all times" (although worded differently, perhaps) was used by referees long before that.

Maybe . . . can you recall ever seeing it used before 1908?

My memory may be wrong, but I seem to recall the referees giving such instructions in NY City either in the 80s or the 90s.

Senya13 wrote:My memory may be wrong, but I seem to recall the referees giving such instructions in NY City either in the 80s or the 90s.

I did a quick check of my databases (by no means exhaustive research), and I couldn't find any reference to the phrase before 1908. I did find a circa 1915 reference to "protect yourself at all times" as being "an established rule of British prizefighting."

I don't think it that significant to look for the earliest mention, but here's what a quick search returned for me:
1904-03-02 The Philadelphia Inquirer (page 10)

In style Hanlon is much like Terry McGovern. He bores in with the same determined purpose, taking all that is coming at him for the sake of pounding away on the body at close quarters. The conditions of the match, protect yourself at all times greatly favored Hanlon's style and was a handicap to Decker.

Senya13 wrote:I don't think it that significant to look for the earliest mention, but here's what a quick search returned for me:
1904-03-02 The Philadelphia Inquirer (page 10)

In style Hanlon is much like Terry McGovern. He bores in with the same determined purpose, taking all that is coming at him for the sake of pounding away on the body at close quarters. The conditions of the match, protect yourself at all times greatly favored Hanlon's style and was a handicap to Decker.

Good find! I didn't find anything before 1915 in my database.

Ezzard wrote:Billy Papke was considered a top Middleweight for decades but doesn't get much web space these days.

Anybody want to chip in on this semi-forgotten fighter?

Does he, or should he, make the top10, 20, 30 at 160?

I think top 20 or 30 is a bit of a stretch. May be top 40. However he was a very good fighter who is underrated.