BoxRec

Has anyone checked out the article on Alan Minter on the front page here, its not that well written (early on) but it gives a good insight into how tough this forgotton (IMO) world champion was.

http://www.boxing-central.com/modules.p ... e&sid=5705

I was actually going to make a post on Minter having just seen Minter vs Hagler in its entirety both with US and UK commentary. It was quite interesting to hear Al Bernstein talk so highly of Minter, he obviously was very well respected in the States, and with good reason. Minter could really do it all and I'm quite surprised why he is never mentioned when we talk about great Britons. Sure he wasn't in Jimmy Wildes league, or for that matter Jack Kid Berg and the two Lewis'. However, I think Minter deserves to be in the same bracket as the likes of Benn, Eubank and Conteh.

I've seen his bouts with Finnighan and boy he had some heart, those two fights really had it all Kevin Finnegan is another much forgotton boxer who actually beat a prime Tony Sibson. The fact that Minter edged him out twice (knife edge aswell) shows how good the boy was.

Minter was a very accomplished boxer and while he lacked true one punch KO power, he could bang more than two of our more remembered world champions (Watt and Buchannon).

Even his performance vs Hagler had largely been forgotton. Sure we remember the horrible scenes at the end of the bout and the mess on Minters face, but the opening two rounds were probably Minters in my opinion. I actually think Hagler was hurt in this fight more than he was in any other fight, Minter shocked Al Bernstein by backing up Hagler instead of boxing. No doubt cut or no cut Hagler would have won, because I've never seen a fighter so cool under pressure or hurt - Hagler was different class but you are talking about one of the greatest middleweights of all time (surely top 4).

Its worth remembering Minter and I for one would have loved to have seen a prime Minter vs a prime Sibson. For me the Hagler fight signal the end for Minter and I don't think their 1981 fight is a fair reflection on what would have happend when both were in their pomp.

http://www.boxrec.com/boxer_display.php?boxer_id=011467

It's true actually, Minter is a bit of a forgotten man, considering just how good he was. Had he not run into Hagler he may well have been champion for a while, though he was nearing the end as you say.

At the time, I don't remember rating Minter much, I was much more impressed with Hagler, Hearns and Leonard, back in the days when those guys were all on TV.

jamesmcdonnell wrote:It's true actually, Minter is a bit of a forgotten man, considering just how good he was. Had he not run into Hagler he may well have been champion for a while, though he was nearing the end as you say.

At the time, I don't remember rating Minter much, I was much more impressed with Hagler, Hearns and Leonard, back in the days when those guys were all on TV.

Oh yes, Minter wasn't in the class of Hagler, Hearns, or Leonard and I wouldn't except the posters and experts from accross the pond to remember him. However, I do think it is quite shocking that he is very rarely mentioned when we talk about the "Great Britons". I think there are alot of what I would call good but not great world champions (like Benn, Eubank, Conteh etc) who get mentioned - even guys who never won a world belt like Sibson. Minter very rarely gets mentioned. I would probably put him near the top of the third tier of great Britons.

1st Tier we would have the two Lewis', Berg, and Wilde

2nd tier we would have Buchannon and Hamed

3rd tier we would have the likes of Minter, McGuigan, Conteh, Benn, Eubank etc.

What about Stracey, Watt, Colin Jones, Collins?

Jack Kid Berg's achievements are really quite amazing when looked at from afar.

and catley, graham, mckenzie, all quality boxers.

Benn should arguably be in that second tier, genuine world titles and all that.

RANDOLPH TURPIN

Yes maybe, only one really significant win, however, better than anyone any other british fighter has ever beaten, including Lewis.

BETTER THAN ANYONE HAS BEATEN MATE.
theres only one sugar ray robinson.

arguably the finest win by a brit in history.

J wrote:BETTER THAN ANYONE HAS BEATEN MATE.
theres only one sugar ray robinson.

arguably the finest win by a brit in history.

On that basis you'd have to give Kirkland Laing a shout too then.

Minter still carries an air of menace today

celticwarrior wrote:

J wrote:BETTER THAN ANYONE HAS BEATEN MATE.
theres only one sugar ray robinson.

arguably the finest win by a brit in history.

On that basis you'd have to give Kirkland Laing a shout too then.

So what about Lloyd Honeyghans win over Curry??
And Benns win over McClellan and even his win over Iran Barkley have got to rate very highly.

Robinson could not keep hold of the belt for long at middleweight.

laing's wasnt for a belt.
and lloyd honeygun would be up there with mcguigan and just below benn in my book, however to liken barkley or mclellan to Sugar ray Robinson is insulting.

stujones wrote: I've seen his bouts with Finnighan and boy he had some heart, those two fights really had it all Kevin Finnegan is another much forgotton boxer who actually beat a prime Tony Sibson. The fact that Minter edged him out twice (knife edge aswell) shows how good the boy was.

Stu, Minter fought (and beat) Finnegan three times, and I agree he seems to be underrated these days.

Having met Minter, I really wouldn't want to piss him off. As said, he has an air of menace about him.

tonyevs wrote:

celticwarrior wrote:

J wrote:BETTER THAN ANYONE HAS BEATEN MATE.
theres only one sugar ray robinson.

arguably the finest win by a brit in history.

On that basis you'd have to give Kirkland Laing a shout too then.

So what about Lloyd Honeyghans win over Curry??
And Benns win over McClellan and even his win over Iran Barkley have got to rate very highly.

Robinson could not keep hold of the belt for long at middleweight.

Don Curry was a vastly overrated fighter, they thought he was going to be the next Sugar Ray, turned out to be more Sugar Shane. Laing beat an out of shape and disinterested fighter in Duran, with no belt on the line as J said.

Benn's win over McClellan was a good one, but McClellan was moving up in weight to fight him, this does not compare with Sugar Ray Robinson, who although he is perhaps a tad overrated at middleweight, was still a formidable fighting machine.

I think Benn belongs in the 2nd tier, he went to the states and thrashed some yankies, and held a genuine belt.

The article might've been even more interesting if I could understand what the hell he was on about!
Looks like someone did a botched translation on it.

I always liked Minter as a fighter, but he was pretty hard to like outside the ring - hit the headlines for beating up his wife, plus the famous racist comments etc.
I remember him staring into the eyes of Tony Sibson before their fight: definitely the eyes of a stone cold killer. Wasn't ready for Sibson's dynamite left hook though, as he nearly got his head sent into the back of the Royal Albert Hall.
Great chin though, as that was the only time he was ever down ( I think ).

He put on a masterclass against Vito in the USA - when he won, he told everyone on live TV to go out and get pissed. Bit of a cloud over his win as the British judge gave him EVERY round ( and was seen sitting with him on the plane journey back ).

Wrong tactics against Hagler: Minter seemed to think he could just walk in and blast Hager out of the way ( just like Tommy Hearns a few years later ) and walked into a world of trouble.
Think he shook up Marv in the first, for about half a second.

I agree re Benn he was class, one of my fave fighters

I agree re Benn he was class, one of my fave fighters

Just getting back to turpin, it was actaully 1951 when he beat Robsinon so Sugar ray was in his prime as a middleweight (we all know he was the best Welter to walk the earth) so it wasnt really when he had started to fade, this was only 6 months or so after the St Valentines day massacre of Jake La motta, so I dont think you should underestimate what Turpin achieved that night. In fact robinson had only lost once until Randy outpointed him and that was to la motta. So i dont think at the juncture Robinson fought Turpin the comment he struggled to hold on to the belt holds too much weight if you pardon the pun.

Stands alone for me as the single most impressive victory in British boxing history.

Robinson was on his European tour, the Turpin fight was his 4th within the month, how serious did he take it??
Look to Robinsons record at middle.

McClellan had brushed aside all put before him up until Benn, he was the favourite.
And Curry was a very good fighter up until he met Honeyghan.

Kevin wrote:Minter still carries an air of menace today

Not to me he doesn't.

An air of piss maybe !

Most of the other fighter mentioned I would class in the third tier (the likes of Benn etc). Honeyghun, Watt, Stracey, Collins, Graham, McKenzie, Honeyghun,

I don't think Jones, Cateley, Steve Robinson and the others fighter mentioned would be in that third tier.

Randolph Turpin would be very much be in the second tier, also I would say with Freddie Welsh and Freddie Mills and perhaps Jim Driscoll would be in that category. However, personally I would put old peerless very near the top of the third tier.

I don't think Nigel should make the second tier and infact I think he should be ranked behind Eubank. Sure he won a more prestigious version of the world title, but he lost to Eubank when in his prime and in reality won his WBC title against the poorest of the four champions.

I think his accomplishment vs McClellan (good article in boxing monthly this month on that fight) was excellent, but was it much better than Eubank beating Rochigianni in Germany?

Perhaps Minters' out of the ring reputation and persona mght have an influence on why he is never discussed (although 20 posts today). We do like to try and brush the Hagler fight under the carpet.

stujones wrote:Most of the other fighter mentioned I would class in the third tier (the likes of Benn etc). Honeyghun, Watt, Stracey, Collins, Graham, McKenzie, Honeyghun,

I don't think Jones, Cateley, Steve Robinson and the others fighter mentioned would be in that third tier.

Randolph Turpin would be very much be in the second tier, also I would say with Freddie Welsh and Freddie Mills and perhaps Jim Driscoll would be in that category. However, personally I would put old peerless very near the top of the third tier.

I don't think Nigel should make the second tier and infact I think he should be ranked behind Eubank. Sure he won a more prestigious version of the world title, but he lost to Eubank when in his prime and in reality won his WBC title against the poorest of the four champions.

I think his accomplishment vs McClellan (good article in boxing monthly this month on that fight) was excellent, but was it much better than Eubank beating Rochigianni in Germany?

Perhaps Minters' out of the ring reputation and persona mght have an influence on why he is never discussed (although 20 posts today). We do like to try and brush the Hagler fight under the carpet.

Yes, the article is by our own Ian 'Mr' McNeilly, well done ian, good read, but then I thought it would be.

Settling down to watch ayers v Rigby, cheers for that butch.

tonyevs wrote:Robinson was on his European tour, the Turpin fight was his 4th within the month, how serious did he take it??
Look to Robinsons record at middle.

McClellan had brushed aside all put before him up until Benn, he was the favourite.
And Curry was a very good fighter up until he met Honeyghan.

Sorry Tony no offence like but youre talking bollox mate,
first off if you knew anything about boxing in the 40 and fifties you would now this was not unusual, how else did guys like Lewis, Pep, Robinson et al have so many fights.

Secondly the 3 of the fights he had in 51 we very much against novices, with records of 5-17 or similar, the fights in belgium were not title fights and were warm ups for his world title against Turpin, so this being the only title fight one would assume he would have taken it reasonably seriously. Its not tuprins fault if Ray lost discipline and partied hard.

As for his performances at middle once again I reiterate when he fought turpin he was unbeaten as a middleweight and very much in the prime of his career still (he lost to la motta as a welter) in fact it was his only loss as a middleweight (against turpin) prior to his retirement when he lost the Light Heavy title to Joey Maxim, Robinson had three years off before returning to claim the middleweight title and lose it and regain it many times. 8)

One suggests if you refer me to a boxers record that you would have the very same yourself tony. Doesnt appear thats the case mate sorry to appear rude.

Again I reiterate this is the stand alone biggest win by an English boxer in history.

I don’t get the point that your trying to prove.
Perhaps you being such a vastly experienced veteran has clouded your eyes to other boxers,
the three boxers Robinson had met before Turpin were very experienced, take a look at their records; all but one of them had contested major titles.
True none of them were outstanding at world level, but neither was Turpin prior to this, or after for that matter.

What great fighters had Robinson beaten at middleweight up to the time of the Turpin contest, La Motta was very much an old fighter about then and still they had very hard fights.

Maybe you don’t know but Robinson was in his prime at 147lb, he never lost there you know….

Research is better than repeating what you have heard (wrongly) from other people.

The hype with Sugar Ray Robinson had him down as unbeatable, they over looked he was now fighting at a heavier weight, and he was no longer a young man.
Turpin was not expected to win, that’s what made it so amazing.

No offence but I think that proves you wrong

MightyWarrior wrote:Think he shook up Marv in the first, for about half a second.

Going from memory it was a left hook, it did seem to get Haglers attention but oh boy did Minter pay for it.