BoxRec

Two guys who died tragically at ages 24 and 21 respectively, yet had they lived might have been considered two of the greatest fighters of all time.

What would have happened had they faced each other over 20 or 15 rounds ?

Stanley Ketchel http://www.boxrec.com/boxer_display.php ... c952c0a096

Les Darcy http://www.boxrec.com/boxer_display.php ... 2910f409ad

Ketchel had plenty of skill...besides, Philly Jack O'Brien was one of the most skilled ever and Ketchel put it all over him as well as many other "skilled" boxers.

Darcy was very good, but Ketchel would have eventually beat him up, breaking down Darcy's defense. Ketchel was a lion in the ring and over 20 rounds he would evetually catch up to Darcy and knock him cold, just like he did almost everyone he fought...regardless of skill!

Since there's no Darcy footage and very little of Ketchel, it's impossible to say

Having said that, Darcy by TKO in round 11

Darcy footage exists, I have some clips of him in action in a mini-documentary. Don't know which fight I have a clip of since the narrotor speaks of him in general over different clips and pics. It might be his fight with George Chip.
As for the matchup, I'd pick Darcy to outpoint Ketchell. Darcy was the better boxer of the two. Historically though, Ketchell is the greater fighter.

-KOKid-

This Darcy clip - it wouldn't be stored on your pc would it now? (hint hint). If so, swap ya for very average quality footage of Pancho Villa

Sorry, no it's on an old tape and in poor quality. Besides, it only lasts for about 30 seconds. My argument was only that Darcy footage does in fact exist.

Of course, if, or rather when, I get around to converting all my 400+ tapes over to DVD, I'll certainly upload any footage I have that might be of interest to other boxing fans. I am not the type who wishes to keep rare fights or footage to myself. Hardcore boxing fans are a dying breed, keeping things of interest away from other fans, only for the sake of having something few others have, will only speed up that process.

I'll go on record here saying that as long as it doesn't cost me more than a little effort (meaning $), I'll gladly share oddities and things of interest from my collection with my fellow boxing fan for free.

-KOKid-

Was only joshing ya. Didn't think any Darcy footage existed and an not surprised it's horrible quality

Just the other day went to upload a couple of short clips of Laszlo Papp as a pro - mysteriously disappeard off the pc . Very odd indeed. I still have no idea where they got to

two great middles.ketchel was as tough as they come and hit harder than almost anybody p4p.the other thing is he carried his power late in a fight.i agree with barry and would say eventually ketchel gets to him say around 14 rounds.darcy may have been more skilled but apparently so was o'brien who had only been stopped once in 150 fights.you can dismiss ketchels skills decagon but not his results.

I think Ketchel would beat Darcy. Ketchel had a 3" height advantage, but one must also consider the style of fighting Darcy specialized in. In Australia, low blows were called frequently. Darcy used his strength to overpower guys on the inside and sort of adapted a hold and hit style from the newspaper reports I've read. He basically overpowered people with clinching and smothering punches on the inside, and most of his challengers were welterweights moving up that he had the strength advantage on. Ketchel would be stronger than Darcy, that style wouldn't work on him, and Darcy would have to respect the power. That's why I give Ketchel the edge.

>>>Yeah. Ketchell was basically a 160-pound John Ruiz. I never saw what the big deal was about him.<<<

That's about as silly a response as I have ever heard. Why don't you actually do a little research on the man before making ridiculous remarks that make you look clueless...and I'm not saying that to be a smart-ass!

you wouldn't be related to the guy that shot him by any chance?lol.

dnahar32 wrote:I think Ketchel would beat Darcy. Ketchel had a 3" height advantage, but one must also consider the style of fighting Darcy specialized in. In Australia, low blows were called frequently. Darcy used his strength to overpower guys on the inside and sort of adapted a hold and hit style from the newspaper reports I've read. He basically overpowered people with clinching and smothering punches on the inside, and most of his challengers were welterweights moving up that he had the strength advantage on. Ketchel would be stronger than Darcy, that style wouldn't work on him, and Darcy would have to respect the power. That's why I give Ketchel the edge.

Darcy won the Oz welterweight title as a teenager of 17 so fighting some welters is no surprise. Like Fitzsimmons he worked as a blacksmith, which explains reports of his strength

He also won the local HW title and defended that against some guys weighing just over the middleweight limit (according to the database)

The fella was an early sporting hero and is still a sporting icon today, and well remembered down here. And so he should be

bollox wrote:

dnahar32 wrote:I think Ketchel would beat Darcy. Ketchel had a 3" height advantage, but one must also consider the style of fighting Darcy specialized in. In Australia, low blows were called frequently. Darcy used his strength to overpower guys on the inside and sort of adapted a hold and hit style from the newspaper reports I've read. He basically overpowered people with clinching and smothering punches on the inside, and most of his challengers were welterweights moving up that he had the strength advantage on. Ketchel would be stronger than Darcy, that style wouldn't work on him, and Darcy would have to respect the power. That's why I give Ketchel the edge.

Darcy won the Oz welterweight title as a teenager of 17 so fighting some welters is no surprise. Like Fitzsimmons he worked as a blacksmith, which explains reports of his strength

He also won the local HW title and defended that against some guys weighing just over the middleweight limit (according to the database)

The fella was an early sporting hero and is still a sporting icon today, and well remembered down here. And so he should be

What I meant to say is that he fought a lot of welters in his Australian middleweight defenses. Guys like Fred Dyer, Fighting Billy Murray, Eddie McGoorty, and Jimmy Clabby were all welters moving up when they fought Darcy for the Australian World Middleweight Title. Mick King wasn't very good, and Jeff Smith and George Chip were the best actual middleweights he fought in his defenses. While the challengers weren't the greatest, Darcy himself was an excellent fighter.

I'm basing my statement of Darcy's style on some Sydney newspapers I read through. I'm not knocking him at all, just giving some idea of how he fought. He was very physical, and the blacksmith job supports that. The newspaper articles would differentiate between the "American" style of guys like Clabby and Jeff Smith when they fought Australian fighters. It must have been a factor in the refereeing. Darcy was a great fighter, and they were trying to make a Mike Gibbons-Les Darcy match in America to no avail. That would have been a true superfight.

It's all good

There must have been a lot of confusion in those days as to who the real world champs were. Some countries crowned their own national champ as the world champ (eg Australian version of the world middleweight champion) if the guy happened to beat a well known fighter. No real surprise considering the times and the somewhat disjointed nature of international boxing

Hey, that last statement sounds like what's happening today, although for different reasons

I have 2 Darcy fights, both fights, going about 4-5 or so round each.

I think Darcy could beat Ketchal personal, I not going to fight against Ket winning, but Darcy was a fine boxer, and pretty tough, and he could move well.

Oh there's plenty of film of Darcy: A blacksmith's huge upper-body beautifully balanced and rocking back and forth in a snake-like action and then sliding deftly in for a fast left from a slightly pivoting waist delvered hard and straight forward, followed on the instant by a picture-perfect right that Tunney might have copied.

He's 19-20 and already a Master Boxer with an excellent reach who could take a punch and as handsome as a sportsman could ever be, and just a lovely person.

No wonder over 1000 sportsmen on foot and on horse in San Francisco escorted his coffin to the ship taking him back to Sydney (some estimate the crowd in the street at 100,000) even though he never fought once in the US. Rickard said at the time that he was the finest pound for pound to ever put on a glove, and he may not have been exaggerating all too much.

Fighting Billy Murray was a middleweight during the middle
1910s, not a welterweight. By the way, it looked like
Murray was going to break into the top ranks of the
middleweight division during much of 1914, but
couldn't handle George Chip. Before Jack Dempsey,
Murray was Jack Kearn's biggest meal ticket.

- Chuck Johnston

when darcy beat smith, smith claimed the middleweight championship and thats where darcy got his claim, boxing in australia before world war 1 was a lot less complicated then in the US because we had one central governing body, while the americans had individual state bodies and no decision fights, darcy beat some good fighters, mainly chip, mcgoorty and clabby, the smith fights were both controversial and a rubber match was set-up in the US but darcy died in training
on the fight, i am going to pick darcy to win this fight, i know you will all call me biased and thats fair enough, because i am, but i cant see ketchel doing enough over 20 rounds to beat darcy on points or landing enough to stop darcy and he would need more then 1 punch against darcy because les had an iron chin, darcy also fought at his best against come-forward fighters who threatened him, like mcgoorty

ps- on footage of darcy, there are clips of the mcgoorty, clabby and chip fights that i have seen little bits of, there is definately footage of him, his promoters made a fortune on him by selling the film of his fights

I always liked the explanation put forth of the Ketchell shooting. "He was shot in the back by the common - Law husband of the woman who was cooking his breakfast". Great stuff.

bollox wrote:This Darcy clip - it wouldn't be stored on your pc would it now? (hint hint). If so, swap ya for very average quality footage of Pancho Villa

I have seen this same footage it was years ago it showed 2 of Darcys fights. My misses seen it at the local Library and brought it home for me.

there is footage available of the mcgoorty, brown, chip and clabby fights that i know of

Aus guys - there's a dvd I bought from JB Hi Fi not long ago named 'That's Boxing'. It's a historical Oz boxing dvd and gives Les a decent amount of time. It chronicles his beginnings through to being called a slacker for not enlisting in WW1. Well worth the 20 bucks

As for Les V Ketchel - who the hell knows I do know one thing........at 21 there were still quite a few mountains to climb for Les and by all accounts he was well up to it

bollox wrote:Aus guys - there's a dvd I bought from JB Hi Fi not long ago named 'That's Boxing'. It's a historical Oz boxing dvd and gives Les a decent amount of time. It chronicles his beginnings through to being called a slacker for not enlisting in WW1. Well worth the 20 bucks

As for Les V Ketchel - who the hell knows I do know one thing........at 21 there were still quite a few mountains to climb for Les and by all accounts he was well up to it

yeh got that dvd bollox 'Thats Boxing' yer worth the 20 bux and gives you a good insight and history of australian boxing