BoxRec

I thought this was worth bringing up, especially for anyone who has never seen this fight and is curious about it.

The Gavilan-Graham fight has come to be almost synonymous with bad decisions. People everywhere have called it a blatant fix, one of the worst decisions ever, and so forth. Graham was known as the "Uncrowned Welterweight Champion" after this fight, and his status as that was the main reason for his getting into the Hall of Fame.

I have the Gavilan-Graham fight on tape, and I've watched it numerous times. I've never thought Graham won it. In fact, I've always thought Gavilan was a clear cut winner, by about a 3 round margin. I've always been totally perplexed by the "controversy" over this decision. Frankly, I think its reputation is total bullsh*t.

I'm glad ESPN is showing this fight. If anyone has already seen this fight, or if anyone watches it tonight (at midnight, EST), I'd be very interested in seeing other people's thoughts on it. I don't really know too many other people who have seen this fight. I just hope ESPN shows the fight in its entirety.

I have not seen this fight...I would like to see it, BUT, I do not have ESPNClassic :) :x :x :x

I saw Gavilan vs Gil Turner fight and it was a thrilling war. Not many people talk about that fight. I think it was the great Kid Gavilan's FINEST HOUR.

I agree that the reputation of a "robbery" is puzzling. It was hardly that-it was a competitive bout, where Keed got off to a good start, & Graham came on down the stretch. A great, tactical fight, with momentum swings. Graham was a terrific fighter, & would've held the title today.

A robbery, it is not. For anyone to call it one, I question if they have ever seen the bout. If anyone wants to see a robbery involved with Gavilan, they should go to the Saxton footage. A DULL affair, but Gavilan did enough IMHO.

Going from memory, I believe there was a riot at the end due to the decision in Gavilan/Graham.

elmersalsa wrote:. . .

I saw Gavilan vs Gil Turner fight and it was a thrilling war. Not many people talk about that fight. I think it was the great Kid Gavilan's FINEST HOUR.

Gil Turner overtrained for that fight, sparring 12 rounds at a time in the gym. He left his fight in the gym and ran out of gas in the later rounds.

Hearns did the same routine (ovetraining) for his first fight with Leonard. Copied Gil Turner to the letter.

Well, the fight shown tonight was a different version than the one I have on tape. The one I have is a closer up view from a different angle, and has the original audio and commentary.

Still, my opinion of the fight is the same. Gavilan simply outworked Graham for most of it. Graham did well to frustrate Gavilan's attack and make him look bad, but he didn't do enough actual fighting himself (except in the clinches) to win. Unless you score rabbit punches, I don't see how you could give this fight to Graham.

The commentator for ESPN's version was Gene Ward, a reported for the New York Daily News who was at ringside for the Gavilan-Graham fight when it took place, and was one of the sportswriters who thought Graham was robbed. Ward originally had Graham winning 10-3-2 in rounds, which was absolutely absurd IMO. Ward always had a weird way of scoring fights. He refrained from giving his scorecard while he was doing the commentary (thankfully), but his bias for Graham was obvious throughout the fight. He kept applauding Graham for slipping/blocking Gavilan's punches, but he made very little mention of the long stretches in which Graham was hardly doing anything in return. And he kept applauding Graham's punching in the clinches, which I don't see how you can score points for. At one point, he asks, "Did the judges take note of these [rabbit] punches and score them?" My answer was, should they?

It's as if the people who scored for Graham scored it on technique alone, rather than actual fighting.

elmersalsa wrote:I saw Gavilan vs Gil Turner fight and it was a thrilling war. Not many people talk about that fight. I think it was the great Kid Gavilan's FINEST HOUR.

Agreed.

nobudius wrote:I agree that the reputation of a "robbery" is puzzling. It was hardly that-it was a competitive bout, where Keed got off to a good start, & Graham came on down the stretch. A great, tactical fight, with momentum swings. Graham was a terrific fighter, & would've held the title today.

A robbery, it is not. For anyone to call it one, I question if they have ever seen the bout. If anyone wants to see a robbery involved with Gavilan, they should go to the Saxton footage. A DULL affair, but Gavilan did enough IMHO.

Going from memory, I believe there was a riot at the end due to the decision in Gavilan/Graham.

Practically every single word of this post is DEAD ON, IMO.

And yes, there was a riot at the end of Gavilan-Graham. The referee (who had cast the deciding vote in favor of Gavilan) was attacked as he left the arena, and policemen had to swoop in around him and escort him out.