One thing about reading the Ring was they respected old time fighters and re-told their legendary stories.
Thanks: 0
Likes: 0
Dislikes: 0
Array
One thing about reading the Ring was they respected old time fighters and re-told their legendary stories.
Do not let success go to your head and do not let failure get to your heart.
The great Harry greb...and with one eye blind!
Shame theres no fight footage of him![]()
Array
Array
Array
I have a real interest in Georges Carpentier, probably most well known for his fight with the great Jack Dempsey, but a very good champion in his own right.
He was more a forties fighter but I think Willie Pep is our sports No.1.
091
Array
I know this won't sound too "boxing fan-ish", but I think had I been around for the pre-1930's crowd, I probably wouldn't have been too big a fan of boxing. I realize sports evolutionize in general.... boxing, football, basketball, etc. But I'm just not a fan of the straight forward, plodding, style that used to be the norm in those days. There were great champions to be sure, but they were among fighters of the same style, same movements. Take a time machine, and send back a great boxer-puncher from the 60's or later... and the guy would be an undefeated beast. I could be wrong and I'm not dissing the fighters from that era. It just wasn't my cup of tea. Then again, I think the same way about other sports as well.
You're generalizing to a shocking extent, not everyone was a straight forward brawler as you suggest ESPECIALLY in the 1920's-1930's there were great and I mean GREAT pure boxers in those eras.
Benny Leonard
Gene Tunney
Barney Ross
Kid Chocolate
Tony Canzoneri
There were plenty of slick boxers and defensive specialists in the old times, defense and counter punching didn't JUST come around in the 1960's.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Bookmarks