Underachievers?

[Cap]

Anyone have any fighters who are performing much worse than expected? Abe Simon is 2-5-0 in my AU, and that's after I picked a soft-touch for him last night. Gonna have to recheck his stats. In real life he was 14-0 at the start before he dropped a six to Lou Nova. Then ran off 4 straight KOs before being stopped by another big guy, Buddy Baer. He beat some pretty decent heavies in his prime. At 6' 4" and 17 stone 12 pounds (250) he was no toe-dancer, though he probably mashed a few in the ring. He could thump some too, as he had a lot of kayos in 6 rounds or under.

Another couple of guys I have who are doing less than expected are Red Burman, Bud Gorman and Roscoe Toles. Part of it is 3-round fights, I think. Strange things can happen in a short bout.

Cap

[Brooks TVB]

Bob Armstrong is doing quite poorly in my uni. He is 6-6-1 with 2 knockouts. Five of his wins were against TCs and the other against Marvin Hart. The win verse Hart is his career highlight so far.

[Tosti]

Bob Fitzsimmons did well as a Heavy in my universe (Briefly a World Champ).

But since his move down to Middleweight, where I thought he would clean up, he has been dissapointing.

End of this year (1889) he will be moving back up to Heavy.

[Cap]

I notice also that some guys known primarily as boxers have very few KOs, sometimes only 2 or 3 out of 20-plus matches. Don't know if it's because the quality of the opposition is better (fewer third-rate guys) in my AU or what. Fer instink, Tommy Gibbons has just 1 knockout in 22 wins out of 26 fights. In real life he had 47 knockouts in about 106 fights. I see boxers beat guys all over the ring, put them down two or three times, but no knockout. (one reason I mandated the 3-knockdown rule.)

Cap

[sabotai]

Originally Posted by Cap

I notice also that some guys known primarily as boxers have very few KOs, sometimes only 2 or 3 out of 20-plus matches. Don't know if it's because the quality of the opposition is better (fewer third-rate guys) in my AU or what.

Think this would be a fair assumption. I populated my universe with some TCs but considering what the real life ratio of TC to "real thing" must be, it's a very small number in mine, and most likely everyone else's uni as well.

As for mine, a few jump out as kind of disappointing (just started over and am a few years in)

Paddy Ryan is 11-8-0 (10 KOs). Most of his wins are against TCs.
Harry Gilmore is 8-5-1 (8 KOs). Another who seems to just not be able to win the big fights.

[Cap]

Yeah, some of these guys can really bug you. On paper they should be tigers, but something is missing.

When I examine Gibbons' real record more closely now, most of his knockouts came in 1921 and 1922 when he packed on more weight. Some of the names during this stretch don't stand out at all, some were small heavies, some, like Porky Flynn and Al Reich were past their best. His fights with top guys either ended up with the judges (including a loss to Harry Greb and a DQ to Billy Miske) or as No Decisions. But in my AU he can't even put away the pork 'n bean brigade.

Cap

[hamed]

Yup, Joe Calzaghe has an 8-5 record in my world.

[Cap]

What's the competition like?

Cap

[Jim_Kidd]

I changed the original Joe Walcott's ratings back to the way there were in previous versions TB - with a nice range of 3 point punches after his knockout percentage against average fighters was minimal. Paper clippings contradict the ratings in the game in my opinion.

Also, I added a MW version of Bob Fitzsimmons that isn't in the original game. From the research I've done, he may have very well been the very best Middleweight of them all. He had "Foreman-like" power at that weight and seemed to be a very cagey boxer as well.

It's too bad that most modern boxing historians don't seem to give him the credit those who saw him and other fighters all the way through the 1950's did.

[hamed]

Originally Posted by Cap

What's the competition like? Cap

Mostly bums but Joe's had bad luck in those, cuts, etc. His toughest fight was aganst James Toney & Toney knocked him out in the 10th. Based on what I saw Sat. night, Toney might win a decision over Joe but I doubt he'd be able to KO Joe.

[Tosti]

Originally Posted by Jim_Kidd

I changed the original Joe Walcott's ratings back to the way there were in previous versions TB - with a nice range of 3 point punches after his knockout percentage against average fighters was minimal. Paper clippings contradict the ratings in the game in my opinion.

Also, I added a MW version of Bob Fitzsimmons that isn't in the original game. From the research I've done, he may have very well been the very best Middleweight of them all. He had "Foreman-like" power at that weight and seemed to be a very cagey boxer as well.

It's too bad that most modern boxing historians don't seem to give him the credit those who saw him and other fighters all the way through the 1950's did.

Jim I would love to see your Fitz at Middleweight if possible.

[mh2365]

Originally Posted by Tosti

Jim I would love to see your Fitz at Middleweight if possible.

I bet it's the one I used ... but I'm not sure what it was now because I changed it when he moved to LHW and I don't remember what I changed. Wasn't using the rating records then. From now on I am going to.

[Jim_Kidd]

Here's the "The Real" Ruby Robert - Bob Fitzsimmons based upon different sources that can be summed up by this article by Monte Cox:

Bob Fitzsimmons was a tall, lanky and explosive middleweight puncher. He was boxing’s first triple-crown champion gaining the world’s middleweight (1891-1897), light-heavyweight (1903-1905) and heavyweight (1897-1899) crowns during a career that spanned a long 34 years. His record was 55-8-16 7 ND with 48 knockouts, although he claimed to have as many as 300 fights all unrecorded.

Despite being no more than a middleweight he carried a heavyweight’s upper body build and a heavyweight’s strong punch. He was experienced and clever. As an excellent feinter he knew how to draw his opponent’s into his deadly blows. He was steadfast, patient and had excellent accuracy in striking vital points.

Early ring historian Sandy Griswold said in the Dec 24, 1904 National Police Gazette, “He knows all the vulnerable spots of the human anatomy as well as the most erudite surgeon in the business and has a greater variety of effective blows than any fighter who ever lived.”

There is no question that Fitzsimmons had a heavyweights punching power. In 1893, he knocked out seven men in one night and accomplished the feat in under nineteen rounds. All men weighed over 200 pounds. One stood 6-7 and weighed in at 240 pounds according to Carpenter (1964, p 8). The fact that a middleweight could knock out a man the size of Lennox Lewis demonstrates his worth as a hitter. Fitzsimmons actually defeated top heavyweight contenders Peter Maher, Gus Ruhlin and Tom Sharkey all by knockout.

Nat Fleischer, founder of The Ring Magazine, regarded Fitzsimmons as the greatest pound for pound knockout puncher in boxing history. He also considered Fitz as the best-left hooker, and the best body puncher among heavyweights.
\
David Willoughby (1970, p 357), concurred saying that “Fitzsimmons had perhaps the hardest punch ever possessed by a boxer of his size.”

Joe Gans, lightweight champion 1902-1908, stated, Feb. 2, 1908 NY Times, “I consider Bob Fitzsimmons as one of the greatest exponents of straight hitting that the prize ring has ever known. Fitz was a wonderful fighter and all of his straight punches were very effective. Until age set in and his hands went back on him, there were few fighters able to withstand that famous shift of his. When Fitz delivered a blow he carried the whole weight of his body with it.”
McCallum wrote, (Encyclopedia p 8), “He moved with a shuffling gate. He stood flatfooted. His timing was perfect. He had a superb sense of distance. His punching therefore was deadly accurate.”

One was never safe until the final bell with Fitzsimmons. Durant noted, (The Heavyweight Champions p. 40), “He was ring-wise and crafty. He would sometimes lure an opponent into being careless by pretending to be hurt and then shoot over a knockout punch.”

Fleischer stated (Enigma Chpt. 13), “Fitzsimmons, who took the crown from Corbett, was not a slugger of the Sullivan type, nor did he approach Corbett in boxing skill. Yet he was the greatest strategist in the ring's history, a man of wonderful vitality, and the most accurate and deadliest hitter of the class. To reach Jim Corbett in the pit of the stomach with knockout force was a feat for a magician, and Fitz was a magician. Where others signally failed, Fitz succeeded through strategic feinting to induce Corbett to raise his guard and open the way for a left shift and a crashing blow to the solar plexus.”

I do not believe as many of the old-timers did that Fitzsimmons should be rated among the top heavyweights. He hit like a heavyweight but was still only a middleweight, in my view, this means he should be ranked with the 160-pounders. Charley Rose, in fact, did not rate him as a heavyweight. Rose rated him as a light-heavyweight, however he was light-heavyweight champion at the end of his career and was quite old.

It is my contention that Fitzsimmons should be rated among the all time greats as a middleweight and he, in fact, was a middleweight for most of his career. The idea that Fitzsimmons was anything more than a middleweight is a myth. Fitzsimmons began boxing professionally in 1883 and when he won the middleweight championship of the world in 1891 by knocking out the “Nonpareil” Jack Dempsey he weighed 150 ½ pounds. For his 1894 championship defense against Dan Creedon, for example, he weighed 155 ½ according to the Oct. 13, 1894 National Police Gazette. When he fought for the heavyweight title he was stripped down and privately weighed on the morning of Mar 17, 1897, the day of his fight with champion James J. Corbett, and “tipped the scale at 156 ½ pounds” according to Bob Davis a reporter and friend who was following Fitzsimmons (See Book of Boxing p 71). Further the San Francisco Chronicle reported the day before the second Jim Jeffries fight that “Fitzsimmons claims to weigh only 160 pounds and hardly looked that heavy.”

Gene Tunney wrote, (1940), that Fitz always considered himself a middleweight, “Fitz, incidentally, was funny about his weight, for, after defeating Corbett, while alone in a Turkish bath with Jim Coffroth, he kept repeating, 'eavyweight champion of the world--and I’m only a bleeding middleweight.”

While I have no doubt his vigor and durability would allow him to survive any middleweight’s punch, against the bigger and more modern heavyweights one has to question Nat Fleischer’s 1958 # 3 ranking at heavyweight for Fitzsimmons.

Consider that James Corbett, a small heavyweight who was not known for his power, bloodied Fitz’s lip with a sturdy left jab and floored the middleweight champion in the 6th round. If Corbett’s jab could tear up Fitz what would Joe Louis jab and right hand do? Or Muhammad Ali?

Fitz was down against Joe Choyinski, a light-heavyweight, in their draw fight. The June 30, 1894 Police Gazette reported, “Fitzsimmons finally tried for the wind and received a straight jab in the face. He came in again and was caught over the left eye so hard his that his head flew back. Keeping after Choyinski he let go for the wind. Choyinski shot his right across him full on the neck. Down he went like a falling chimney…the referee began to count but before he cried out “ten” Fitzsimmons was up. Fitzsimmons was up smiling like a sick man trying to make someone believe he feels better than he really does. He staggered about the ring and Choyinski went after him hard and furious. He could not however, get his right in for a knockout.”

Choynski was a great light-heavyweight hitter, but he was still only a light-heavyweight. Fitz was badly staggered, careening around the ring, and barely beat a ten count. He came back to put Choynski down as well, but what if it had been a great heavyweight finisher like Joe Louis, Jack Dempsey, or Mike Tyson instead of Joe Choysnki?

In describing Jim Jeffries title winning effort against Fitzsimmons the National Police Gazette wrote on July 1, 1899 “Jeffries was as firm and steady as the proverbial rock, fighting a carefully planned battle. He had demonstrated his ability to hit the champion and likewise demonstrated he had nothing to fear from the latter’s punches.”

Jeffries, a modern sized heavyweight, had little trouble in breaking down the smaller Fitzsimmons and knocking him out in their first fight. In the rematch, it has been contended that Fitzsimmons had loaded gloves (although this has never been proven) and he gave Big Jeff quite a beating, but a single blow from the heavyweight champion eventually knocked him out.

Bob Fitzsimmons has been described as a physical oddity, a middleweight puncher who destroyed heavyweights. He definitely had a heavyweight’s offensive prowess and could dish out punishment with the best of them, but his small frame, and fact that he was hurt by small heavyweights and light-heavyweights and was easily knocked out by a big heavyweight, means that he would be a vast underdog against any of the all time big men.

As a middleweight Fitzsimmons was nearly unbeatable. He was without challenge the hardest punching middleweight of all time. He was a highly accurate place puncher and a master at setting up knockout blows. Perhaps historian and writer Edgar Lee Masters said it best, "For courage, for power, for skill, for fighting will, there is nothing on record that holds a candle to Fitz" (Book of Boxing p. 233). At 160 pounds Fitz’s incredible gift of amazing power combined with his cleverness, ring experience and proven success against much larger opponents demonstrates that he should be rated among the elite of the greatest middleweight of all time.

Nat Fleischer as mentioned rated Fitzsimmons # 3 at heavyweight. Charley Rose rated him # 1 at light-heavyweight. Historian Tracy Callis also rates him # 1 at middleweight. Fitz was a true middlweight for most of his career. Cox's Corner rates him # 2 all time in the middleweight division.


References:

Carpenter. H. 1964. Masters of Boxing. New York: A.S. Barnes and Co., Inc.
Davis, Robert. Corbett-Fitzsimmons In The Book of Boxing. Heinz, W.C. and Nathan Ward. 1999. Bishops Books. NY, NY.
Durant, J. 1976. The Heavyweight Champions. New York: Hastings House Publishers
Nat Fleischer. Gene Tunney - The Enigma of the Ring Chapter 13. In http://www.genetunney.org/enigma13.html
Fleischer, Nat. 1958. 50 Years at Ringside. Fleet Publishing Corp. NY
Masters, Edgar Lee. The Time of Ruby Robert. In The Book of Boxing. Heinz, W.C. and Nathan Ward. 1999. Bishops Books. NY, NY.
McCallum. J. 1975. The Encyclopedia of World Boxing Champions. Radnor, Pa: Chilton Book Co.
Tunney, Gene. 1940. Champion is a State of Mind. The Saturday Evening Post Magazine February 10, 1940. In Sport U.S.A. The Best From The Saturday Evening Post, Edited by Harry T. Paxton Thomas Nelson & Sons. New York, Edinburgh, Toronto. 1961 Willoughby, D. 1970. The Super Athletes. Cranbury, NJ: A.S. Barnes and Co., Inc.

[Tosti]

Thanks

[Jim_Kidd]

I love finding those "rare" insights from the old-timers and those who saw some of these guys who fought in the early 20th century. Some fight fans dismiss these guys as being crude unscientific. But many who saw fighters from 1900 to 1950 suggest otherwise.

[wildhawke11]

I have always considered Fitz as one of the hardest punchers P4P in the history of boxing. The hardest ever, maybe little Jim Wilde might get my vote on that one. But Bob is right there up with him.

Of course the top prize in any era is the HWs so you have to go for that one if at all you can. But as a MW Fitz must have been a little special even more so if Gans himself said so. As a MW i would give him great power but i would have to juggle his Control Factor around because although out of this world as a MW in the real old days. I think the better to come and the more modern fighter around the 40s and 50s might have the ringcraft to take a win against him. As for Fitz being able to claim a number two spot in the MW division that really i think is to high to place him. Considering we have the well proven usual Monzon, Hagler, Greb, Robinson etc etc. Then if we consider Fitz as a MW we of course have to also bring in and compare how we think others like Billy Conn. Langford etc etc might have done against Fitz. Have to think on this one as i cannot recollect it off hand but did not Ez Charles that great LHW and pretty good HW also at one time pass through the MWs. Of course there have been other great fighters who also passed through that division on there way up. Now its a different ball game i fear with so many greats on the park.

What is needed to keep in mind also is that its only human nature to want to believe that in the era you lived you saw the best fighters ever. Those who saw Joe Louis fight will always believe that he was the best HW ever. On the other hand those who were around in Ali's time will never agree. If the old guys who saw Jim Jeffries and Jack Johnson or Dempsey fight they would also probably place them close to or better then Ali and Louis. So although yes take there views into consideration we also must take a step back from there views.

Jim
I would love to have a look at how you rate Fitz at MW then we can play around with his ratings and see what we come up with. Its not important who we think has got him about right the main thing is we all agree on a rating for him. I also disagree with Joe Walcotts punching power in that game, although not looking on paper as good as many others who had more KOs to their name. We need to take onto consideration who Walcott took on and gave weight away to. By all accounts he was a great puncher.

[Jim_Kidd]

I uploaded Fitz's file with the article.

Sometimes I wonder if the pre-1920 fighters would have given the best of the 40's and 50's problem "because" of their styles. While not appearing very impressive at times due to the "choppy" film speeds of the day, you have to wonder whether or not their styles would have given a more modern style of ring movement and punch delivery some problems.

There were so many great middleweights - you could spend hours deliberating who places where on the all-time list. However, with Fitz's awkwardness and unusual power, (coupled with the now lost-art of body punching) he may have come up with some very big (and unexpected) victories along the way.

Originally Posted by wildhawke11

I have always considered Fitz as one of the hardest punchers P4P in the history of boxing. The hardest ever, maybe little Jim Wilde might get my vote on that one. But Bob is right there up with him.

Of course the top prize in any era is the HWs so you have to go for that one if at all you can. But as a MW Fitz must have been a little special even more so if Gans himself said so. As a MW i would give him great power but i would have to juggle his Control Factor around because although out of this world as a MW in the real old days. I think the better to come and the more modern fighter around the 40s and 50s might have the ringcraft to take a win against him. As for Fitz being able to claim a number two spot in the MW division that really i think is to high to place him. Considering we have the well proven usual Monzon, Hagler, Greb, Robinson etc etc. Then if we consider Fitz as a MW we of course have to also bring in and compare how we think others like Billy Conn. Langford etc etc might have done against Fitz. Have to think on this one as i cannot recollect it off hand but did not Ez Charles that great LHW and pretty good HW also at one time pass through the MWs. Of course there have been other great fighters who also passed through that division on there way up. Now its a different ball game i fear with so many greats on the park.

What is needed to keep in mind also is that its only human nature to want to believe that in the era you lived you saw the best fighters ever. Those who saw Joe Louis fight will always believe that he was the best HW ever. On the other hand those who were around in Ali's time will never agree. If the old guys who saw Jim Jeffries and Jack Johnson or Dempsey fight they would also probably place them close to or better then Ali and Louis. So although yes take there views into consideration we also must take a step back from there views.

Jim
I would love to have a look at how you rate Fitz at MW then we can play around with his ratings and see what we come up with. Its not important who we think has got him about right the main thing is we all agree on a rating for him. I also disagree with Joe Walcotts punching power in that game, although not looking on paper as good as many others who had more KOs to their name. We need to take onto consideration who Walcott took on and gave weight away to. By all accounts he was a great puncher.

[Cap]

Big Jim Jeffries, the ferocious body-puncher, beat on Tom Sharkey for about 40 rounds all told, and couldn't put him away. Little 160 pound Fitz put Sharkey out twice with body blows (I disregard the Earp disqualification), once in just two rounds.

Cap

[wildhawke11]

NEED YOUR HELP EXPERTS Bob Fitzsimmons as MW fighting the below fighters all at prime of course. Please give your vote on 10 fights between them. Example 6- 4 Tyson if Mike had been a MW. Its for the computer simulation as i want to get your thought on he would perform as a MW

Carlos Monzon
Marvin Hagler
Marcel Cerdan
Mickey Walker
Stanley Ketchel
Charley Burley
Holman Williams
Ray Robinson

I have thrown the above fantasy fights onto the cyberzone boxing site. To get there thoughts on this one. To not influence anyone i said nothing on my own thoughts. Be interesting anyway at the very least. Note i threw in 3 boxers

PS CAP i need your mail address please nothing bad LOL or just send me a blank mail.

[Cap]

Set the limit at 25 rounds with skin-tight gloves and no gumshield. Not my favourite weight class, but...

Fitz could survive a big heavyweight punch. I'd see him beating Mickey Walker, Holman Williams and Stanley Ketchel 8 or 9 times out of ten. He'd be 50-50 with Hagler, Burley and Cerdan. He'd be 40-60 with Monzon and Robinson. Just educated guesses. On a given day, Fitz might beat any one of them.

Cap