Thsi isnt the worse era in HW Boxing History?

225px-Zuri_Lawrence.jpg


Meh.
 
My vote goes to 1980-1986. I'm sorry but outside of Larry Holmes there really wasn't another great HW until Tyson. Berbick couldn't win a belt today even, and he was probably the next best guy in that time period.
 
It really just reflects poorly on him, if anything.
 
TKDhasBin said:
Funny the Ring would call 1928-1937 the worst period. That's when Joe Louis was emerging as one of the greatest........but had just been dribbled like a basketball in 1936 by Herr Schmeling.

For my money the worst heavyweight period was probably 1900 thru 1908........Jim Jeffries was a big lug who would've made a good wrestler. All strength and little technique.....Fitzsimmons and Corbett were heading for the exits.........Tommy Burns and Marvin Hart ?.........Give me a break. Jack Johnson came along and threw some excitement into the division and put boxing back on the front pages.
Click to expand...

so much fail in one post. Jim Jeffries is the catalyst for what modern boxing became. He was the first fighter to have any kind of pure training camp for every fight, he kept himself in peak physical condition, he trained like a mad man, he would study his opponents by talking to former sparring partners and watching whatever film he could get his hands on. He also had a fantastic body attack and great defensive footwork. Nice try.

Back on the front pages? Jeffries fights before his retirement in '05 were front page stories. He was a MUCH bigger star than Corbett and Sullivan before him.

post Dempsey-Tunney, and before Louis won it in 37', is the worst era in hw boxing. Only shining light was Braddock beat Baer, and that was viewed more as a novelty
 
Summoner10 said:
so much fail in one post. Jim Jeffries is the catalyst for what modern boxing became. He was the first fighter to have any kind of pure training camp for every fight, he kept himself in peak physical condition, he trained like a mad man, he would study his opponents by talking to former sparring partners and watching whatever film he could get his hands on. He also had a fantastic body attack and great defensive footwork. Nice try.

Back on the front pages? Jeffries fights before his retirement in '05 were front page stories. He was a MUCH bigger star than Corbett and Sullivan before him.

post Dempsey-Tunney, and before Louis won it in 37', is the worst era in hw boxing. Only shining light was Braddock beat Baer, and that was viewed more as a novelty
Click to expand...

it's phail, not fail

:icon_chee that's my outstanding contribution
 
I would say this has got to be the worst era in HW boxing. Maybe the talent level is better than other eras...but it's gotten to the point where hardly anyone cares about HW boxing. People used to know who the HW champ was but now I'd be surprised if a quarter of the people I ran into knew who Wladimir K. was. When was the last big HW PPV? I really can't think of any big PPV fights since Lewis dismantled Tyson. Jones vs. Ruiz?
 
Summoner10 said:
so much fail in one post. Jim Jeffries is the catalyst for what modern boxing became. He was the first fighter to have any kind of pure training camp for every fight, he kept himself in peak physical condition, he trained like a mad man, he would study his opponents by talking to former sparring partners and watching whatever film he could get his hands on. He also had a fantastic body attack and great defensive footwork. Nice try.

Back on the front pages? Jeffries fights before his retirement in '05 were front page stories. He was a MUCH bigger star than Corbett and Sullivan before him.

post Dempsey-Tunney, and before Louis won it in 37', is the worst era in hw boxing. Only shining light was Braddock beat Baer, and that was viewed more as a novelty
Click to expand...

Summy......Good to see you back........I think you and I have gone round and round about Jeffries in the past....

Great defensive footwork ?!?!?!?!.......You do realize that Bob Fitzsimmons broke both of his hands beating on Jeffries face during one of their bouts ?....And Tom Sharkey turned his face into hamburger meat........Jeffries was tough....and yes, he had great conditioning........But defensive footwork ?.....uhn uhn.....When you think of great defensive fighters Jeffries is the last guy that comes to mind........can't sell those tickets
 
prontostar said:
I would say this has got to be the worst era in HW boxing. Maybe the talent level is better than other eras...but it's gotten to the point where hardly anyone cares about HW boxing. People used to know who the HW champ was but now I'd be surprised if a quarter of the people I ran into knew who Wladimir K. was. When was the last big HW PPV? I really can't think of any big PPV fights since Lewis dismantled Tyson. Jones vs. Ruiz?
Click to expand...

seeing is I'm a big boxing fan and I can't tell you who has which title, yeah, I'd say it's a pretty fucking weak crop right now. (that and I'm an ignoramous)
 
TKDhasBin said:
Summy......Good to see you back........I think you and I have gone round and round about Jeffries in the past....

Great defensive footwork ?!?!?!?!.......You do realize that Bob Fitzsimmons broke both of his hands beating on Jeffries face during one of their bouts ?....And Tom Sharkey turned his face into hamburger meat........Jeffries was tough....and yes, he had great conditioning........But defensive footwork ?.....uhn uhn.....When you think of great defensive fighters Jeffries is the last guy that comes to mind........can't sell those tickets
Click to expand...

You do realize Fitz had incredibly fragile hands? Didn't do him any favors since he punched hard as hell, and you're bringing up both of Jeffries horrific wars. In that fight (i believe the second) Jeffries also broke his left hand and broke fitz's ribs.


Jeffries took alot of punishment because his big flaw was his lack of head movement, but his footwork was fantastic. It was commented many times that he had the perfect ability of keeping himself with range for his vicious left hook and right to the body, while also staying far enough away to where if he was hurt, which happened alittle too often, his opponent could not put him away. Even though it was a shorter fight, the second Fitz fight was the most brutal with Fitz supposidly landing quite alot, yet once Jeffries was hurt Fitz could not manuever him in for the finish. His movement was fantastic.
 
I never thought much of Jefferies. A big, lumbering lump of a man, with massive physical advantages of his opponents in a still developing sport.

But there is actually a considrable divide between historians as to how good he really was. I've seen a couple of writers (members of the IBRO) rank Jefferies as high as #1, all-time.
 
Historians are tough to deal with. They re-write history.

I remember reading that the lion's share of historians had Jack Dempsey as the greatest fighter of the first half century. As time passes seems like he lost a lot of luster.

Not saying it's right or wrong, but interesting how so called consensus opinion evolves over time.

But having followed this sport for some time I do see how people who did not live through certain eras of fighting have a distorted view of history.

Seems that stats and the written record doesn't quite do justice to those who lived through something and paid close attention to it.
 
Very well said. I agree completely by the way.
 
CEROVFC said:
Historians are tough to deal with. They re-write history.

I remember reading that the lion's share of historians had Jack Dempsey as the greatest fighter of the first half century. As time passes seems like he lost a lot of luster.

Not saying it's right or wrong, but interesting how so called consensus opinion evolves over time.

But having followed this sport for some time I do see how people who did not live through certain eras of fighting have a distorted view of history.

Seems that stats and the written record doesn't quite do justice to those who lived through something and paid close attention to it.
Click to expand...

I think I read the same thing you did, but what it was was they called him the greatest sports figure of the first half of the century (which is true). Greatest fighter acculades have always gone to guys like Greb, Louis etc etc
 
CEROVFC said:
Historians are tough to deal with. They re-write history.

I remember reading that the lion's share of historians had Jack Dempsey as the greatest fighter of the first half century. As time passes seems like he lost a lot of luster.

Not saying it's right or wrong, but interesting how so called consensus opinion evolves over time.

But having followed this sport for some time I do see how people who did not live through certain eras of fighting have a distorted view of history.

Seems that stats and the written record doesn't quite do justice to those who lived through something and paid close attention to it.
Click to expand...

very true. The most modern example of that I believe, is Roberto Duran. He is slowly being forgotten by alot of fair weather fight fans. A friend I was talking to a few months ago online about boxing didn't even realize he fought Sugar Ray twice and thoroughly won the first. He only knew of the "No Mas" fight.
 
History is constsucted largely through memory. This is problematic as theree is no one, true set narrative for time. This is the inherent problem that faces every fan of the game, as they look back and admire past fighters.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,237,062
Messages
55,464,288
Members
174,785
Latest member
JoyceOuthw

Share this page

Back
Top