BoxRec

There is two types of these fighters. One, either built by easy wins throughout their entire career. Two, by dives. Sometimes the two intermingle. But by and large that is the two ways of describing someone who is a manufactured fighter. I am going to put up two examples from each, and would like others to post their own examples.

Makin' It The Easy Way:

Lamar Clark, who holds the world record for the most consecutive knockouts in history. Most of his opponents were miners, lumberjacks, and pro wrestlers. When he stepped up against Pete Rademacher and Muhammad Ali he was destroyed.

Makin' It on Broadway:

Billy 'Blackjack' Fox, just how many of his fights were fixes may never be known, but we do know that before rematching Lesnevich (KO1st loss for Fox) he 'won' a fixed fight over Jake LaMotta, being the first man to stop him.

HomicideHenry wrote:Billy 'Blackjack' Fox, we do know that he 'won' a fixed fight over Jake LaMotta.

That is just an opinion, not something that was proven.

Lou Saverese was brought along quite slowly and carefully matched for what seemed like forever.

Il Duce wrote:Some think Duane Bobick was a 'manufactured fighter'.

He was protected, and never got that much better after his Amateur Career.

He actually looked much better as an Amateur in 1971/1972 than he did
as a Professional in 1974/1975.

Duane never looked comfortable and/or happy that he was in the ring.

Hardly manufactured as the guy was a top am star and leading up to his drubbing on national TV he beat Neumann, Middleton, LeDoux, Bunny Johnson, Wepner and Young Sanford. While there are no top 5 guys on there, that's a pretty good string of wins.

He certainly got an over abundance of media attention, but he was a good fighter.

How about Humphrey McBride? I think he was one of Pat O'Grady's creations.

Il Duce wrote:"Big Jim" James J. Beattie

Definitely a 'manufactured fighter' who only won because of his size and being matched against
a steady flow of 'Class C-Level' opponents.

He did develop some boxing skills over his run, but the boxing experts knew he was nowhere near
a World Class level fighter.

? Beattie was a regional GG champ, and lost 3 of his first 20 fights. Also shows in the Mathis film that he was a decent boxer. So I don't see how he was in any sense 'manufactured'

I think manufactured is the wrong term to use here. "Protected" might be more appropriate. Guys who built up impressive records over a long string of tomato cans would fit that bill, like Clark and the infamous Don "Man of" Steele. You could throw in Brian Nielson in there too.

Monte Masters

giacomino wrote:Monte Masters

Wasn't he another Pat O'Grady creation?

The Great John L wrote:

giacomino wrote:Monte Masters

Wasn't he another Pat O'Grady creation?

Yes. WAA "heavyweight champion" too.

Michael Grant. HBO really wanted him to succeed.

Roy Jones. Between the steroids, the cherry picking, titles being handed to him for nothing, and HBOs sweet heart deal he is sort of a perfect example of how fighters are manufactured today. He is an awful example of everything that has become wrong with the sport over the last 50 years.

klompton wrote:Michael Grant. HBO really wanted him to succeed.

Media hype, yes, but he was far from being manufactured. He fought and beat quite a few good fighters before getting humbled by Lennox, who had a habit of humbling big aggressive guys.

Chuck Davey: TV darling of the '50s

Senya13 wrote:

HomicideHenry wrote:Billy 'Blackjack' Fox, we do know that he 'won' a fixed fight over Jake LaMotta.

That is just an opinion, not something that was proven.

The proof is in the way LaMotta fought Fox. Rather than employ his usual tactics of getting in on the inside and breaking people down, he was lackluster and hardly did anything to defend himself from the start. The proof is also on the betting odds going into the fight. LaMotta was the odds on favorite and the day of the fight the odds switched heavily in favor of Fox. Rumors of a fix were going on for days and several weeks after the fight---- so much so that purses were with held and the DA did it's probe of the fight. The proof is also in Fox's record, here was a man who destroyed the invincible LaMotta, yet was blown away in one round easily by Gus Lesnevich? No dispresepct to Lesnevich, but ffs there is no way he would have did that kind of damage unless Fox was never really a proven fighter on his own.

HomicideHenry wrote:The proof is in the way LaMotta fought Fox. Rather than employ his usual tactics of getting in on the inside and breaking people down, he was lackluster and hardly did anything to defend himself from the start. The proof is also on the betting odds going into the fight. LaMotta was the odds on favorite and the day of the fight the odds switched heavily in favor of Fox. Rumors of a fix were going on for days and several weeks after the fight---- so much so that purses were with held and the DA did it's probe of the fight. The proof is also in Fox's record, here was a man who destroyed the invincible LaMotta, yet was blown away in one round easily by Gus Lesnevich? No dispresepct to Lesnevich, but ffs there is no way he would have did that kind of damage unless Fox was never really a proven fighter on his own.

LaMotta had an injury that would affect the way he fought against any opponent, even a fifth-rater, he'd look unimpressive and might lose to somebody like Reggie Strickland with that injury.
The change of odds don't prove anything, as was pointed out by one of Ring magazine writers at the time, where odds changed very similarly before Fox's first fight with Lesnevich, which he lost.
Lesnevich wasn't a nonentity, a loss to him is a loss to world-class fighter, it was a significant step up in level of opponent for Fox (LaMotta not being able to test him due to injury).

dempseyfire wrote:

Il Duce wrote:"Big Jim" James J. Beattie

Definitely a 'manufactured fighter' who only won because of his size and being matched against
a steady flow of 'Class C-Level' opponents.

He did develop some boxing skills over his run, but the boxing experts knew he was nowhere near
a World Class level fighter.

? Beattie was a regional GG champ, and lost 3 of his first 20 fights. Also shows in the Mathis film that he was a decent boxer. So I don't see how he was in any sense 'manufactured'

I think manufactured is the wrong term to use here. "Protected" might be more appropriate. Guys who built up impressive records over a long string of tomato cans would fit that bill, like Clark and the infamous Don "Man of" Steele. You could throw in Brian Nielson in there too.

Worth noting that Nielsen was an Olympic and European Championship's bronze medal winner. As a pro he had beaten a shot to shit Bonecrusher, Tony Tubbs, Carlos De Leon, Phil Jackson, Mike Hunter and an old Holmes. Hardly fair to compare him with Steele.

Deontay Wilder appears to be heading down this route despite his amateur achievements. Ali Raymi deserves a special mention as well, "The Yemeni Valero".

...come on, senya......lamotta tanked it against fox and did it so badly that the jacobs beach boys laughed at what an obvious job he did of it. plus..lamotta testified under oath that he threw it.


as for grant, he was a manufactured fighter in the sense that he could look good and even win, but as soon as he got tagged he forgot all he learned because he had no real fighter instincts to call upon. i'm sure grant thought he was a legit fighter and i'm sure there were no dives by his opponents but he just didn't have it and his build up was way above his true abilities.

Like I said, it's an opinion, that is shared by many. As no actual evidence was brought up, other than Jake's own testimony, and as all suspicious things about that bout have another likely explanation, I'll go by Occam's razor.

How about Peter McNeeley, who fought a bunch of tomato cans while being built up for Tyson and getting to #9.

Boxing Prospect wrote:Deontay Wilder appears to be heading down this route despite his amateur achievements. Ali Raymi deserves a special mention as well, "The Yemeni Valero".

Let's wait on Wilder.
As for the Yemeni Valero (Valero actually fought and beat good comp), gotta mention Tyrone Brunson then.

iamasadlittleboy wrote:

dempseyfire wrote:

Il Duce wrote:"Big Jim" James J. Beattie

Definitely a 'manufactured fighter' who only won because of his size and being matched against
a steady flow of 'Class C-Level' opponents.

He did develop some boxing skills over his run, but the boxing experts knew he was nowhere near
a World Class level fighter.

? Beattie was a regional GG champ, and lost 3 of his first 20 fights. Also shows in the Mathis film that he was a decent boxer. So I don't see how he was in any sense 'manufactured'

I think manufactured is the wrong term to use here. "Protected" might be more appropriate. Guys who built up impressive records over a long string of tomato cans would fit that bill, like Clark and the infamous Don "Man of" Steele. You could throw in Brian Nielson in there too.

Worth noting that Nielsen was an Olympic and European Championship's bronze medal winner. As a pro he had beaten a shot to poo Bonecrusher, Tony Tubbs, Carlos De Leon, Phil Jackson, Mike Hunter and an old Holmes. Hardly fair to compare him with Steele.

I definitely consider Steele manufactured, but I agree on Nielsen, though I'm glad he lost before he went 49-0.

Valero's opponents through 12 were-
47-67-7

Take out the record of Roque Cassiani and you're left with Valero's opponents, through 11, being 26-54-5 with 5 opponents not having a win between them. That's not THAT much better than Raymi's opponents through 12.

Boxing Prospect wrote:Valero's opponents through 12 were-
47-67-7

Take out the record of Roque Cassiani and you're left with Valero's opponents, through 11, being 26-54-5 with 5 opponents not having a win between them. That's not THAT much better than Raymi's opponents through 12.

But you're only looking at a part of his career. He wound up being a top five fighter in two divisions and a top three lightweight. Lots of fighters who turn out to be excellent have soft touches early. I didn't see this thread as being about that. Brunson for instance feasted on crap to pad his record and then got smoked when he stepped up.

Rover wrote:

Boxing Prospect wrote:Valero's opponents through 12 were-
47-67-7

Take out the record of Roque Cassiani and you're left with Valero's opponents, through 11, being 26-54-5 with 5 opponents not having a win between them. That's not THAT much better than Raymi's opponents through 12.

But you're only looking at a part of his career. He wound up being a top five fighter in two divisions and a top three lightweight. Lots of fighters who turn out to be excellent have soft touches early. I didn't see this thread as being about that. Brunson for instance feasted on crap to pad his record and then got smoked when he stepped up.

The jokey moniker of "The Yemeni Valero" is more about the 1st round KO's than anything else actually comparing the two. The "Yemeni Valero" sounds much better than "The Yemeni Brunson".

Boxing Prospect wrote:

Rover wrote:

Boxing Prospect wrote:Valero's opponents through 12 were-
47-67-7

Take out the record of Roque Cassiani and you're left with Valero's opponents, through 11, being 26-54-5 with 5 opponents not having a win between them. That's not THAT much better than Raymi's opponents through 12.

But you're only looking at a part of his career. He wound up being a top five fighter in two divisions and a top three lightweight. Lots of fighters who turn out to be excellent have soft touches early. I didn't see this thread as being about that. Brunson for instance feasted on crap to pad his record and then got smoked when he stepped up.

The jokey moniker of "The Yemeni Valero" is more about the 1st round KO's than anything else actually comparing the two. The "Yemeni Valero" sounds much better than "The Yemeni Brunson".

It indeed does.