BoxRec

OK gentlemen, I'm going to give this a trial run on this forum.
Fairly simple idea, each week we look at a particular fight or fighter and chose a fight or 3 to watch, discuss, rate or score, any input is welcome.

This week, I've chosen to start with a fighter I have criminally ignored, when it comes to viewing old fights, Henry Armstrong.

The footage is incomplete I suspect, but I'm less bothered about scoring it here than elsewhere, more focus will likely go to the quality of the fight/fighter I would think. But it was a controversial draw in Armstrongs failed attempt to snatch a 4th weight class crown, so attempts at scoring may be interesting

1940 FOTY Armstrong vs Ceferino Gracia II fior the middleweight title

https://youtu.be/Rp7kzhvdAfU

Previous weeks bouts
Week 1 - Leonard/Hearns.- http://boxrec.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=207995
Week 2 - Olivarez/Castillo 1 - http://boxrec.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=208158
Week 3 - Emile Griffith vs Nino Benvenuti - http://boxrec.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=208339
Week 4 - Salvador Sanchez vs Danny Lopez - http://boxrec.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=208467
Week 5 - Joe Louis vs Max Schmeling - http://boxrec.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=208651

Main thread - http://boxrec.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f ... e#p4571725

Supplementary bouts

vs Barney Ross
https://youtu.be/GweXjdZ8eKI

second fight with Lou Ambers (in 3 parts)
https://youtu.be/3rzJGETxwp0
https://youtu.be/pEuZqccjJI8
https://youtu.be/SFKq520Raio

davie wrote:OK gentlemen, I'm going to give this a trial run on this forum.
Fairly simple idea, each week we look at a particular fight or fighter and chose a fight or 3 to watch, discuss, rate or score, any input is welcome.

This week, I've chosen to start with a fighter I have criminally ignored, when it comes to viewing old fights, Henry Armstrong.

The footage is incomplete I suspect, but I'm less bothered about scoring it here than elsewhere, more focus will likely go to the quality of the fight/fighter I would think. But it was a controversial draw in Armstrongs failed attempt to snatch a 4th weight class crown, so attempts at scoring may be interesting

1940 FOTY Armstrong vs Ceferino Gracia II fior the middleweight title

https://youtu.be/Rp7kzhvdAfU

It was an outrageous fraud of a title fight.. Garcia wasn't a real Middleweight and weighed 153. He was only recognized as 160 champ in California.. It was a bald-faced attempt to manufacture a 4th Divisional Title for Armstrong.. About a year earlier Garcia was a Welterweight losing to Armstrong -- and a year before that he was a Welterweight losing to Barney Ross---which was his 128th fight which included 17 losses.

Watch the fight... Armstrong was allowed to push, shove, shoulder, and head butt flagrantly and continuously throughout the fight... Two referees disqualified Armstrong so they generally made sure he got friendly referees---because all he did was foul... You warned Armstrong and he kept fouling and fouling, sometimes accumulating 4 and 5 fouls. When he fought skilled fighters like Ray Robinson and Beau Jack he didn't do very much but get the trash beaten out of him.

He was actually recognized as Midleweight champ by more than just California.....only this particular fight was only recognized by California.

The bigger point is the way Armstrong fought.. Forearms, elbows, shoulders, and head.. Pushing, shoving, and illegal head use are all fouls.. Low blows as well.. They could have put a 3rd glove on his head because that was his main weapon.. Joe Frazier was Mr Clean in comparison.

In his second bout with Ceferino Garcia, Henry Armstrong was an extremely aggressive infighter who had his head on Garcia's chest or shoulders for much of the time. While the draw decision was controversial, but based on the footage that I just saw of the bout, I have seen worse verdicts. I still would give an edge to Armstrong.

The referee of the bout was George Blake, who has quite a career as a boxing man. He was the boxing instructor at the Los Angeles Athletic Club, a noted referee and the manager of a number of professional boxers, notably Fidel LaBarba during his entire career as a professional boxer.

The bout was staged at Gilmore Stadium, which was located in the city of Los Angeles. The matchmaker of the bout was Charley MacDonald, who was in charge of the professional boxing shows, matchmaking being one of his duties, at Hollywood Legion Stadium for about a decade-and-a-half starting in the early 1930s. During his tenure, the Hollywood Legion Stadium was by far the most successful and most stable professional boxing venue in California.

Until 1940, black boxers were barred from fighting at Hollywood Legion Stadium, which was a venue for weekly boxing cards starting in 1921. Yet while the second version of the stadium was being build during the late 1930s, black boxers were fighting in bouts on cards staged by the Hollywood American Legion at Gilmore Stadium. When the second bout between Garcia and Armstrong was scheduled to take place under the auspices of the Hollywood American Legion at Gilmore Stadium during 1940, it was pointed out that black boxers were not permitted to fight at the Legion Stadium. In fact, Armstrong had never fought at the Legion Stadium up to that time. As a result of the controversy at the time of the second Garcia-Armstrong bout, a large number of black boxers, including Armstrong, would fight at the Hollywood Legion Stadium afterwards.

- Chuck Johnston

Just admit that pushing, shoving, and leveraging with your head, shoulder, forearms, and hands is illegal under Queensberry Rules...

That was Armstrong's whole game.. Although he was DQ'd a couple times, had numerous points taken, and was admonished many times, he never stopped.. I don't think he'd be successful today because he would never be allowed to fight like that.

These treads were not seeing a lot of traffic over on the UK forum, which is exactly why I brought them here.

I knew I could rely on 2 things, expert opinion enriching all our knowledge on fighter some of us don't know enough about......... and Kalan starting an argument in an empty room

Decided too watch them in chronilogical order.

The Barney Ross bout was impressive for starters. Armstrong, a featherweight champion, weighing inside the lightweight limit and mercilessly pummeling the welterweight champion of the world. Ross is highly ranked in our top 10's recently at both lightweight (9th) and welterweight (tied 5th), a genuine ATG and he was beaten comprehensively here by Armstrong.

A remarkable feat.

Was he dirty, yes indeed, his style was rough and his tactics employed a low head and liberal use of the shoulder. But it's nothing I haven't seen modern fighters routinely get away with and I don't think he would simply get disqualified in todays game on that showing.
Take into acount there are high profile bouts that he had 4 or 5 points deducted, dropped some decisions in big fights on points lost and even got disqualified, I think the trend of making out the lenient referees of yesteryear were responsible for his success is simply a case of historical revisionism.

Rough house tactics aside he out boxed the great Ross and out muscled and out fought the considerably bigger man.
His head movement when working on the outside made Ross miss regularly and made him reluctant to let go of much more than pawing jabs at times. His power punching was extremely accurate and his workrate was relentless.

I'll watch the Ambers and Garcia fights later (with good reason to believe they might be a tad more dirty)
But going on this performance alone, Armstrong was a tremendous fighter and it's a disservice to him to focus solely on the ugly side of his game

I'd seen the Ambers fight before but just watched it again.
Closer fight than the Ross fight. Not sure if Ambers like to fight like that or if he was forced into it by Armstrong's perseverance, but he looked more comfortable in close than Barney had.

Armstrong lost that one as a result of deducted points, having earlier beaten Ambers despite also dropping rounds in the first fight.
I never saw a lot of obvious fouls and never saw the ref deduct points. I'd be interested to hear how they did that in those days? Did the ref wait until the end of the round and deduct a round for persistent fouling?

Anyway, as previously mentioned, I don't think it's entirely fair to denigrate Armstrongs status as an ATG as a result of his rough house style. If anything, his record looks worse as a result of his fouling, not better.
From the footage there, despite being a close fight, I had Armstrong getting the better of things and the fouls lost him one of his highest profile fights. It would be a different matter if he was cheating his way to wins, but for me, he was only cheating himself.

Chuck1052 wrote:In his second bout with Ceferino Garcia, Henry Armstrong was an extremely aggressive infighter who had his head on Garcia's chest or shoulders for much of the time. While the draw decision was controversial, but based on the footage that I just saw of the bout, I have seen worse verdicts. I still would give an edge to Armstrong.

- Chuck Johnston

I had the majority of rounds close, but up until the 7th, I don't think I had given Garcia one, on the footage I'd seen.
It's one of those where if you like one fighters work over the other you can find yourself with a very wide card and it doesn't tell the whole story of how competitive the bout was.
Towards the end I gave Garcia and 8th and struggled to split them in 9 and 10, which were barnstormers. I think it would have been interesting to see how it would have panned out if they'd have gone for the 15 round distance

As it was, a very entertaining bout.

Some modern referees may have not allowed so much infighting by Henry Armstrong and Ceferino Garcia in their second bout. Yet the two fighters rarely clinched although they often were smothering each other's punches. To his credit, Referee George Blake let them fight and seemed not to intervene until the bell rang at the end of a round.

- Chuck Johnston

- If Wiki is to be believed, Henry was half Iroquois by his mother, a bit dubious given they are a northern tribe almost always found around Canada and New York Great Lakes area. Henry was born in Mississippi, hardly a hot bed for Iroquois migration, but mixed Indian blood like Joe Louis and Jack Dempsey had were not uncommon then and go on to this very day.



Anyway, I've seen these fights before and they are very difficult to score because of so many punches inside with nobody hurt. Regardless, Armstrong was an unbelievable force of nature for a guy only 5-5 and usually giving up more than a few pounds. The uninformed think his limited style ain't boxing, but of course the Marquis of Queensbury was never in a fight and never proscribed a style, only general rules to formalize and thus legalize fighting. Shame some resident boxing experts didn't know that Garcia held a legit portion of the middle title, but as discussed, their fight was only recognized for a title in Cali. Henry's fouls were nominal fouls. He never butted people open like Son of Dog, Mr. Field, or Popkins, he just gutted them from inside out in wars of attrition.

Fighters were expected to fight in those days, so nose to nose phone booth styled bouts were the rage back then. Garcia could've boxed on the back foot but might be expected to lose a decision, so he took it into Henry's wheelhouse with the expected result. Only the self inflated Bert Sugars of the world were outraged over the decision. Ambers did periodically back off to walk Henry into good shots, but Henry always kept his chin tucked. Other than his debut where he was mismatched matched with an experienced fighter and KOed, the only other guy to KO him was the hugely bigger, stronger, and filthy dirty Zivic. Not bad for a tiny guy with over 180 bouts and over 1000 rds of high action.

Now, if I may make a suggestion, Jimmy Young's near back to back fights with Ali and Foreman are quite common, but I seriously like to see those fights view in conjunction with each other. No way Ali ever did squat against Young, but Foreman beat the hell out of him to no acclaim because he allowed himself to walk into a desperation Young right hand that dropped him in the heat and humidity of Puerto Rico, much more difficult conditions than what Ali fought under.

davie wrote:Decided too watch them in chronilogical order.

The Barney Ross bout was impressive for starters. Armstrong, a featherweight champion, weighing inside the lightweight limit and mercilessly pummeling the welterweight champion of the world. Ross is highly ranked in our top 10's recently at both lightweight (9th) and welterweight (tied 5th), a genuine ATG and he was beaten comprehensively here by Armstrong.

A remarkable feat.

Was he dirty, yes indeed, his style was rough and his tactics employed a low head and liberal use of the shoulder. But it's nothing I haven't seen modern fighters routinely get away with and I don't think he would simply get disqualified in todays game on that showing.
Take into acount there are high profile bouts that he had 4 or 5 points deducted, dropped some decisions in big fights on points lost and even got disqualified, I think the trend of making out the lenient referees of yesteryear were responsible for his success is simply a case of historical revisionism.

Rough house tactics aside he out boxed the great Ross and out muscled and out fought the considerably bigger man.
His head movement when working on the outside made Ross miss regularly and made him reluctant to let go of much more than pawing jabs at times. His power punching was extremely accurate and his workrate was relentless.

I'll watch the Ambers and Garcia fights later (with good reason to believe they might be a tad more dirty)
But going on this performance alone, Armstrong was a tremendous fighter and it's a disservice to him to focus solely on the ugly side of his game

The only part of your post that was truthful was "Was he dirty, yes indeed" ... and the question I have davie, is "Who fighting today gets away with continually ramming with his head... continually sticks his head into his opponents' face... continually uses his shoulders, forearms, and even hands to push and shove and get openings???" ... ANYONE today who fought that dirty, and wouldn't stop when admonished -- would get disqualified PERIOD! -- and you haven't name ANYONE who fights that dirty or gets away with it, BECAUSE YOU CAN'T! The Armstrong team employed friendly referees who promised to "let Hank fight." The boxing game was dirty as Hell back then -- more so than today because of mafia influence.

When your opponent is getting away with bloody murder with no intervention from the referee, you're going to retaliate... but then you're fighting Armstrong's game and you're not practiced at it -- you're at a huge disadvantage. I wonder why we never see Armstrong's fights with Ray Robinson and Beau Jack??? He didn't get away with crap fighting those guys because they had great backing and were also good. This is serious issue about Armstrong's credibility as an ATG. You guys are poo pooing it as though you're freakin' blind.

Chuck1052 wrote:Some modern referees may have not allowed so much infighting by Henry Armstrong and Ceferino Garcia in their second bout. Yet the two fighters rarely clinched although they often were smothering each other's punches. To his credit, Referee George Blake let them fight and seemed not to intervene until the bell rang at the end of a round.

- Chuck Johnston

Garcia complained, but the referee did nothing except admonish Armstrong a couple times without calling time. Garcia had no choice but to retaliate, but as I said above, Garcia wasn't as practiced at pushing, shoving, and ramming with his head for leverage as Armstrong, because that's all Armstrong ever did.

There's nothing you can do when a shorter man walking straight in... and shoving, butting, and shouldering you all over the ring... with impunity from the referee... but to push back and put your head and shoulders on him. But again, you're forced to his fight and perhaps you're no expert at dirty fighting.

Chuck1052 wrote:Some modern referees may have not allowed so much infighting by Henry Armstrong and Ceferino Garcia in their second bout. Yet the two fighters rarely clinched although they often were smothering each other's punches. To his credit, Referee George Blake let them fight and seemed not to intervene until the bell rang at the end of a round.

- Chuck Johnston

Let's just say I preferred Salvadore Sanchez's infighting skills against the much shorter and undefeated ATG Wilfredo Gomez... Sanchez didn't cheat and he stayed with Gomez inside without clinching, actually delivered good liver shots, and brutalized Gomez without shoving him around with his noggin.. Skilled infighters today are Golovkin, Chocolatito, Lomachenko, and Usyk, who is very tall for his weight division. They not only fight cleanly inside, they actually get people out... and a lot more often than Armstrong did to top level fighters.

And let's face it. Armstrong fought some tough opponents, but the vast majority of guys he fought were ham-n-eggers with very poor skills. When he did fight a Ray Robinson or Beau Jack he had little chance to win. He was a lot dirtier than Zivic BTW -- but what Zivic did was give it back to him.

Kalan wrote:

Chuck1052 wrote:Some modern referees may have not allowed so much infighting by Henry Armstrong and Ceferino Garcia in their second bout. Yet the two fighters rarely clinched although they often were smothering each other's punches. To his credit, Referee George Blake let them fight and seemed not to intervene until the bell rang at the end of a round.

- Chuck Johnston

Garcia complained, but the referee did nothing except admonish Armstrong a couple times without calling time. Garcia had no choice but to retaliate, but as I said above, Garcia wasn't as practiced at pushing, shoving, and ramming with his head for leverage as Armstrong, because that's all Armstrong ever did.

There's nothing you can do when a shorter man walking straight in... and shoving, butting, and shouldering you all over the ring... with impunity from the referee... but to push back and put your head and shoulders on him. But again, you're forced to his fight and perhaps you're no expert at dirty fighting.

Are you saying that Referee George Blake favored Henry Armstrong in some way when the latter fought Ceferino Garcia for a second time? Many people thought that Armstrong was robbed when Blake, the sole ring official in the bout, rendered a draw verdict.

- Chuck Johnston

davie wrote:OK gentlemen, I'm going to give this a trial run on this forum.
Fairly simple idea, each week we look at a particular fight or fighter and chose a fight or 3 to watch, discuss, rate or score, any input is welcome.

This week, I've chosen to start with a fighter I have criminally ignored, when it comes to viewing old fights, Henry Armstrong.

The footage is incomplete I suspect, but I'm less bothered about scoring it here than elsewhere, more focus will likely go to the quality of the fight/fighter I would think. But it was a controversial draw in Armstrongs failed attempt to snatch a 4th weight class crown, so attempts at scoring may be interesting

1940 FOTY Armstrong vs Ceferino Gracia II fior the middleweight title

https://youtu.be/Rp7kzhvdAfU

Thanks for posting this and starting this thread!
You don't see a lot of fights like this. Both guys wanted to fight on the inside. It was very intense. Yet it was a very clean fight, and there was almost no holding.

I scored it 6-4 for Armstrong, but it was very close. Almost every round could be scored either way. I think some people might think that Armstrong was more in control because Garcia was on the ropes from time to time. However Garcia sometimes was able to catch Artmstrong coming in andwas fairly effective at fighting off the ropes.
This was a quality fight. Garcia fought well and may be underrated.

Ambling Alp II wrote:
Thanks for posting this and starting this thread!
You don't see a lot of fights like this. Both guys wanted to fight on the inside. It was very intense. Yet it was a very clean fight, and there was almost no holding.

I scored it 6-4 for Armstrong, but it was very close. Almost every round could be scored either way. I think some people might think that Armstrong was more in control because Garcia was on the ropes from time to time. However Garcia sometimes was able to catch Artmstrong coming in andwas fairly effective at fighting off the ropes.
This was a quality fight. Garcia fought well and may be underrated.

I wouldn't go as far as Kalan regards the fouling but I wouldn't describe the fight as clean, as such. Yes there was no holding and they got on with just hitting each other.
My one criticism of Henry would be the use of the head and that was more pronounced in this bout as it was a taller opponent. But I enjoyed this one, it had plenty action and I did think many rounds were close. I think the other thing that swung it for Armstrong was he looked like he hurt Garcia, I think in the 6th and 7th. Garcia landed some solid shots late in the fight and Armstrong never missed a beat. In fact in the 3 fights posted I don't think I seen Henry hurt once, he came forward relentlessly and walked through everything. Tough little fella!

Kalan wrote: The only part of your post that was truthful was "Was he dirty, yes indeed" ... and the question I have davie, is "Who fighting today gets away with continually ramming with his head... continually sticks his head into his opponents' face... continually uses his shoulders, forearms, and even hands to push and shove and get openings???" ... ANYONE today who fought that dirty, and wouldn't stop when admonished -- would get disqualified PERIOD! -- and you haven't name ANYONE who fights that dirty or gets away with it, BECAUSE YOU CAN'T! The Armstrong team employed friendly referees who promised to "let Hank fight." The boxing game was dirty as Hell back then -- more so than today because of mafia influence.

So in one paragraph, you demand I name some dirty fighters then boast that I haven't came up with any answers yet.
Christ man, let me answer the question.

Mayweather employed plenty of foul play, spoiling, use of forearms and elbows. Has he ever lost a point?

Hopkins has employed every piece of foul play in the book. A HOF first ballot guarantee and he is one of the dirtiest fighters in history.

Joel Casamayor revelled in it.

Use of the head? Timothy Bradley? Evander Holyfield?

Pushing, pulling, holding and hitting, wrestling? Wlad Klitschko... Andre Ward. There's plenty more in that list

Going back a bit but Tyson got away with a bit.

Holmes thumbs?

Surely the common use of PEDs by countless fighters trumps any fouls in the ring.
Margaritos wraps?

Hell, Armstrong lost back to back bouts against Fritzie Zivic, regarded as one of the dirtiest in the game.

What I see here is a man who bores in with his head.
Dirty? Yes. But it's part of his style, infighter that keeps his head low. Of the 3 bouts shown in this thread, I wouldn't say the fouling was excessive to the point I'd expect a DQ in the modern game, fighters get away with murder to this day and to say Armstrong got away with more is ridiculous when you look at the number of deducted points and results that went against him as a result.

Whoa....let's not get completely carried away with facts there davie.

BoxBuzz wrote:Whoa....let's not get completely carried away with facts there davie.

What is it they say, never let them get in the way of a good story.

Kro wrote:Have you got permission from Horse for this davie?

The whole 'History' thread concept is his, and his alone.

He did give me formal approval to use his idea.
Only after I showed him my papers

davie wrote:

Kalan wrote: The only part of your post that was truthful was "Was he dirty, yes indeed" ... and the question I have davie, is "Who fighting today gets away with continually ramming with his head... continually sticks his head into his opponents' face... continually uses his shoulders, forearms, and even hands to push and shove and get openings???" ... ANYONE today who fought that dirty, and wouldn't stop when admonished -- would get disqualified PERIOD! -- and you haven't name ANYONE who fights that dirty or gets away with it, BECAUSE YOU CAN'T! The Armstrong team employed friendly referees who promised to "let Hank fight." The boxing game was dirty as Hell back then -- more so than today because of mafia influence.

So in one paragraph, you demand I name some dirty fighters then boast that I haven't came up with any answers yet.
Christ man, let me answer the question.

Mayweather employed plenty of foul play, spoiling, use of forearms and elbows. Has he ever lost a point?

Hopkins has employed every piece of foul play in the book. A HOF first ballot guarantee and he is one of the dirtiest fighters in history.

Joel Casamayor revelled in it.

Use of the head? Timothy Bradley? Evander Holyfield?

Pushing, pulling, holding and hitting, wrestling? Wlad Klitschko... Andre Ward. There's plenty more in that list

Going back a bit but Tyson got away with a bit.

Holmes thumbs?

Surely the common use of PEDs by countless fighters trumps any fouls in the ring.
Margaritos wraps?

Hell, Armstrong lost back to back bouts against Fritzie Zivic, regarded as one of the dirtiest in the game.

What I see here is a man who bores in with his head. Dirty? Yes. But it's part of his style, infighter that keeps his head low. Of the 3 bouts shown in this thread, I wouldn't say the fouling was excessive to the point I'd expect a DQ in the modern game, fighters get away with murder to this day and to say Armstrong got away with more is ridiculous when you look at the number of deducted points and results that went against him as a result.

Mayweather occasionally used an elbow or forearm... but Armstrong did it 100 times as much... Hopkins occasionally used dirty tactics... Armstrong did a ton more dirty stuff every round and he wasn't slick with it...he was flagrant with it... A referee admonished him and he immediately started fouling again at "time in".. Tim Bradley never rammed anyone with his head with the frequency and flagrancy of Armstrong.. It wasn't even 1% what Armstrong did.

True enough, Tyson bit somebody.. Then Mike had points taken... Then was DQ'd... Then he was fined...Then he was BANNED...all for his outrageous behavior. Did that sequence of events ever happen to the protected Armstrong??? Nope.

The "style" argument isn't a good reason for fouling.. "Yes he fouled a lot but that was his style." ... Maybe the referee should have let Golota keep driving shots into Bowe's testicles... "That's his style ya know...and it makes the fight more interesting.. You can't cramp somebody's style."

Klitschko and Ward fought cleanly for the most part... They got away with some clinching and Ward got away with some heading for leverage, and they had friendly refs -- but it was 1% of what Armstrong employed... Armstrong fouled 10 times a minute and Ward went several rounds without fouling.

And I agree Zivic was a dirty fighter...but not half as dirty as Armstrong.. If Zivic fouled to the extent Armstrong did he'd have 25 DQ losses.