BoxRec

This fighter has the record for most cons. KOs and 1st round KOs for a HW, but how much of him was all hype? Has anyone seen film of him fight? It seems like he went against total tomato cans for over 40 fights and once he stepped up slightly, he was demolished. Cassius Clay knocked him out with under 10 pro fights under his belt, and he was also knocked out by Pete Rademacher.

Thoughts, recollections? Did he have any skills or was he just a glass-jawed guy with a punch?

I would group Clark and Butterbean in the same category...though I would probably give Clark a little edge over fat-ass. All anyone has to do is know how to jab a little and Butterbean is in trouble. As far as skill, they both are D Level...Clark was probably a little more sound than Butterball, but his knockout percentage is very deceiving...he was not the big puncher that his record would suggest. As to quality of competition…they are about equal!

I would group Clark and Butterbean in the same category...though I would probably give Clark a little edge over fat-ass. All anyone has to do is know how to jab a little and Butterbean is in trouble. As far as skill, they both are D Level...Clark was probably a little more sound than Butterball, but his knockout percentage is very deceiving...he was not the big puncher that his record would suggest. As to quality of competition…they are about equal!

Lamar Clark was considered a great puncher, hell he had 6 KO's in a single night albiet over unknown fighters. I would say he was a bit more hype than fighter, he was even considered the favorite I think when he faced Muhammad Ali back in 1961, but was bombed out in 2 rounds.

As far as barry's comments that he would rank Clark with Esch, is utter bullshit. Clark had WORSE opponents than what Esch has had. Least most of Esch's opponents had a few fights under their belt or some amateur/Toughman fights, most the men Clark fought had no record or amateur experience to speak of.

I'd class Clark as being a F grade fighter, with Esch being between a D and a C (I give the 'Bean' greater credit than most do).

Samuel and I agree......can't be long till Hell freezes over.

Has anyone seen film of him?

Thats the first time I have ever checked out Lamar Clarks record. He may be the most built up fighter in history . Its a peculiar record in that he fought so many guys that had no fights at all and never fought again. Who are these people? Who approved these fights. He had himself 40 fights or so and he was fighting guys with 0 fights ..and in matches scheduled for 8 rounds. I cant understand why the guy was so protected because he had what looks like a good amateur background. Sometimes you will see guys fighting some easy ones to get a little expierience when they have little amateur background , but that was not the case in Clarks career. Ultimately it didnt work out at all to build him up like that . The first time he stepped it up even a little , out he went.

>>>To score that many KO's he must have had some real power, but I suspect that almost any top 20 guy in todays division could accomplish the same feat if he fought 44 guys in a row who had never boxed before<<<

Since when did anyone ever consider Clark to be top twenty...or is it that you consider Butterbean a top twenty fighter?

Glad to see that there are still some fantasists out there who think Butterbean is more than hype...I bet you probably think Butterbean could have given Tyson a run for his money?

I’ve seen very few people that have ever tried to even slightly make Butterbean seem somewhat legit, even against the likes of a Lamar Clark, whose category Butterbean would be very lucky to be in…because at least Clark knew how to jab and as anyone who has ever watched Butterbean knows...anyone who has even a piss-poor jab can beat Butterbean's big melon head like a drum, but those fantasists, well they fall into two groups. Family and friends of Butterbean are one group and the other people that just simply have no clue about what they are talking about! What group are you in Rufus? I already know what group Samuel is in…LOL!!!

And by the way…no one ever considered Clark to be a brutal puncher…except maybe the people from his hometown, but no serious, or educated follower of boxing have ever considered Clark to be anything other than the exact same kind of hype that Butterbean was and the only people that considered Clark otherwise are those exact same kind that try to say that…”At least Butterbean fought this guy, or that guy…”

I would like to hear some more praise about Butterbean though…that kind of speak doesn’t even need anyone to point out how silly it is…Butterbean praise speaks for itself…LOL!

Just for the record, the records of Clarks opponents on our database may very well be incomplete.

However this doesn't mean that some had never fought before or after their respective bouts with Clark.

Yes , I sholuld have considered that before I made that post of mine. Thanks.

Kojo makes a good point, I'll counterbalance it by saying that even if many of them did have limited careers beyond the published info they probaby were not significant. And with as much research as has gone on here my guess is that a fair amount of these "opponents" were truly "one hit wonders".

Lamar Clark 43 - 0 -1 41 kos

vs.

Kooey Garcia 0_0_0


8 rounds


That one would look a little shaky on the marquee in front of the arena.

Hmm Well a good publicist could work with it....

I'd go with.......... Clark Vs Garcia.....Which of Garcia's 0's is gonna go?

You wonder exactly how if in fact it was Garcias first fight just how he was approached to take it .

Was it "listen Kooey Ive seen you in the gym and I think you are ready to take a shot at 500 - 0 500 kos fighter.""

Or was it ," hey Kooey let me get ya another drink , by the way your a pretty big guy you should try proffesional boxing . I can get you a fight next week if you want. "

If my instincts are right, I'm guessin Garcia is Kelly Wiggins Grand Dad on MCB's mother's side of the family. That could explain it completely. The idea of mixing it up with an established pro with no pro fights in your history seems to run in that family's blood.

You are on to something there. And it looks like Utah is the place to go if New Jerseys Athletic Commision gives anybody any grief about taking that early big step.

Ok this is an astonishing statistic. When Lamar Clark walked away from his career after Ali closed his show, his record was 47-2-1. The current published record of all his COMBINED opponents including Clay up to the moment they tangled with Lamar was 39-57-5. I'll say it again.

Lamar Clark entire career........................................................47-2-1
All 50 of his opponents combined at the time they fought.......39-57-5

It looks like one single quality winning fighter taking on one poor quality clubfighter. My guess is you'll never find another set of statistics that can match it. That is 2 fights for each opponent on average. In Marciano's 49 fight career I'll bet he fought one opponent with more total experience. In fact Ezzard or Archie would have had more total fights than all of Lamar's opponents put together.

There is the real story of Lamar Clark. I hope we can enshrine this thread as there have been a few threads on this guy over the years, and that statistic tells the whole story. I'd be willing to bet you'll find more experience in just 2 Butterbean opponents using the same formula if you use Larry Holmes as one of the opponents.

I think Lamar may take the trophy for "padded records".

A big percentage of the bouts from Clarks era are pretty complete...well not complete, but there has been a ton of data from the era entered into the database and I would about bet that the records of Clark's opponents are pretty much correct unless the only bouts entered for Utah are in fact Clarks, which very well could be the case, but it doesn't matter one way, or the other...his competition was very, very, very weak...just like Butterbean! Just because the fighters Butterbean fought had a couple of fights it sure as hell does not make the competition any better, which is pretty obvious to anyone who has seen them fight!

As to Clark, well he was a pretty big attraction in Utah and it would be a pretty good guess to say that even his bouts against the likes of Kooey Garcia were sell-outs in his home state...kind of like Butterbean...people certainly did not come to see Butterbean because he was a top boxer...they came because he was a side-show act, which although he did not have Butterbean's looks Clark was pretty much the same thing during his time with the nights that he knocked out 2, 3 and 6 fighters! If it had been allowed today Butterbean would have been doing the exact same thing, but one thing differs between the two...Clark never lost to any of the complete bums he faced...Butterbean did!

I have a few articles on Clark from some of the magazine of the time though I do not recall the date, or the magazines that they were in...I know The Ring and Boxing and Wrestling and probably Boxing Illustrated. If anyone is interested I'll make note to write down the issues when I run accross them again.

I have a hard time finding the curiousity to wonder which one of these Icons could get the better of the other. But I suppose if they faced off someone would have to win. I would likely favor Clark just because he stayed in some semblance of shape and seemed to understand the basic fundamentals of boxing. Butterbean is just a toughman with gloves.

>>>I would likely favor Clark just because he stayed in some semblance of shape and seemed to understand the basic fundamentals of boxing.<<<


I agree!

I would favor him also since it appears Clark was a fairly accomplished amateur , He must have had some decent skills.

i agree with barry here

I'm sorry but I don't agree with everyone just going on and on (well mostly its been Barry) that Butterbean is worse than Clark. Least Bean has beaten people with records all over the world---he wasn't some oddity that just fought in his home state like, for instance, Monte Masters.

I'm not saying Esch is just a great fighter, but I believe he is better than what most people would give him credit for. I mean ffs, when he was supposed to face off with Bob Mirovic he was the betting favorite, and Mirovic was the former champion of Australia and fought for the British title.

I am not saying Esch would be top ten, top twenty or even 30 material, but I do believe he could beat some more "accomplished" boxers. He is unfairly judged on appearance alone cus he's a fat man, and he has, despite having over 80 fights, fought mostly 4 rounders.

The four rounders bit isn't really his fault, he got the moniker "KING OF THE FOUR ROUNDERS" from Art Dore, and that was what made him marketable---he tried to break free of that stigma two times, once against Peter McNeeley and the other against Larry Holmes, as well as a scheduled 8 round fight against a Tyrone Muex.

It wasn't cus he didn't want to, it's because he was put into that box. Hell give the man some credit, he's called out everybody, even Tyson but nobody give him a shot.

That's pretty sad considering Tyson picked McNeeley to fight with and he was himself a hyped up Heavyweight, yet wouldnt take the Bean on.

I'd say Esch could prolly beat Heavyweights in the top 50 down. But of course he's getting older, and his time may very well be done to prove himself.

Hell everybody called Foreman a sideshow for "fighting guys who should be on respirators" in his comeback---maybe thats not the best example, but just because there is hype or a circus atmosphere doesnt exactly mean someone is a complete and utter failure either.

Like BoxBuzz said, Clark's complete opponent record more or less made up a record of a tomato can journeyman---least Esch's would like more like a veteran's record.

I won't say Esch is great, but he's come a long way from what he was, and hell he's far more active than the top ten guys, and he's more entertaining anyways. If there was such a thing as a "heart to skill" ratio in boxing, the Bean would be champion, cus he has alot of heart.

Clark gave up after he was stopped by true opponents, which shows he had no heart and ffs...who the hell matches a 0-0-0 fighter against a 40-0 fighter? You got to know somewhere there was a fix. Nobody makes fights like that.

Tantum---I sincerely apologize, but I deleted that f-ing spider photo...I am terrified of spiders and I'll be lucky to not have bad dreams about that awful picture. I just wanted to let you know that it was not deleted out of spite, but instead out of necessity!

As to Butterbean...LOL...he is, as someone said, nothing more than a glorified toughman...though there are still plenty of delusions that Butterbean could actually compete with true boxers. It's like this...out of 100 people...if there are 50 who think a fighter can fight and then there are 50 who think he can't then the fighter more than likely can as you have those who like him and those who don't, but when you have 95 to 98 people that don't think a fighter is any good compared to 2, or 5 people that thinks he is...well, what does that tell you other than the fact that the fighter is a joke?

Sorry, Rufus, but I'm not the only person who feels this way, though you are in a very, very small club of Butterbean fantasists, but in reality around 90 to 95 percent of the boxing community feel the same and I would bet everything that I have...98 to 100 percent of knowledgable boxing writers feel the same way! It does not take any kind of science to figure out that a fighter with a decent...no, not even a decent...just a useable jab can box Butterbean's ears off him and has been seen time and again, which is why Butterbean always fought the weakest of competition...because he was not good enough to beat anyone with even a true sense, no matter how weak, of how to box, which is essentially only the jab that I am speaking of...and it was Butterbean who proclaimed himself the King of the Four Rounders...don't blame it on Art Dore...Dore just found a way to market his four round toughman, which was against the weakest opposition available!

But the spider was attacking the butterbean nuthugger, not you barry.... not you!!