Stanley Ketchel vs. Marvin Hagler

[cross_trainer]

Some film of Ketchel:




vs. Papke
0pVSDwPoNfs

vs. Johnson
yJ0Lufb4tUI





This guy makes Ruiz look downright clean. I have never seen this much blatant wrestling in a boxing match from the early 20th century. Ever.

[teeto]

I'll take Hagler, main reason being he would take the power coming his way, and he was brilliant in his own right.

[Flea Man]

I think Marv would be way too advanced and could box rings arounds Ketchel and damage him en route to an 8th round stoppage.

If it was allowed under Ketchel's rules it would be much closer, he could maul Hagler as much as he wanted and use his own strength to stop Marv from getting out too often. Less referee intervention means Marv has to literally pull himself away from Ketchel and try to re-establish range and generalship.

But Marv was no niceguy on the inside either, and again he seems so much more advanced and fluent. I think he would beat Ketchel on points, though he would need his stone-clad chin to do so.

[Maxmomer]

Hagler by decision. Though I think Ketchel has a better chance of stopping Hagler than vice versa.

[Russell]

Though I think Ketchel has a better chance of stopping Hagler than vice versa.

:huh:huh

[JIm Broughton]

If the fight is held under modern rules then Hagler boxes Ketchel's ears off to either a clear points win or a late round ko.If it's under the rules of Stanley's time then Ketchel has a chance to grab and maul his way to either a narrow points win or loss. Watching these old films just brings to light how boxing has evolved over the past 100 years or so. In this fight you see way too much holding, clinching and wrestling and no combination punching at all. These guys were tough and conditioned no doubt but the skill level is far from the likes of Hagler, Robinson, Hopkins, Monzon et al. No referee today would allow that much holding and clinching and the crowd would probably boo them both out of the arena.

[PowerPuncher]

This is going to look like Mayweather-Ricky Hatton

[Flea Man]

This is going to look like Mayweather-Ricky Hatton

No it isn't. Totally different styles. Hagler doesn't run and throw one shot at a time.

[he grant]

Hagler does to him what he did to Alan Minter ... mismatch ...

[mcvey]

Some film of Ketchel:




vs. Papke
0pVSDwPoNfs

vs. Johnson
yJ0Lufb4tUI


This guy makes Ruiz look downright clean. I have never seen this much blatant wrestling in a boxing match from the early 20th century. Ever.

You can't entirely rule out a man with the power of Ketchel, but he looks crude and raw on film to me.Hagler had a top chin ,fine skills great balance ,and good power himself ,he takes a dec.

[cross_trainer]

If the fight is held under modern rules then Hagler boxes Ketchel's ears off to either a clear points win or a late round ko.If it's under the rules of Stanley's time then Ketchel has a chance to grab and maul his way to either a narrow points win or loss. Watching these old films just brings to light how boxing has evolved over the past 100 years or so. In this fight you see way too much holding, clinching and wrestling and no combination punching at all. These guys were tough and conditioned no doubt but the skill level is far from the likes of Hagler, Robinson, Hopkins, Monzon et al. No referee today would allow that much holding and clinching and the crowd would probably boo them both out of the arena.

Even by early 20th century standards, the wrestling in this fight is ridiculous. That being said, I'd also pick Hagler by decision.

Under earlier rules, he might get out-wrestled on the inside and lose a decision (expect a very, very angry soundbite in the postfight interviews from Hagler). However, most refs in that era would probably break it up sooner than the guy in this video...or try to.

[dpw417]

I've been watching these highlights of Ketchel lately...and I've come to the conclusion that I've seriously underestimated Ketchel.
Some observations.

Ketchel has quicker footwork than given credit for. He has the awareness and ability to get out of the way, breaking Papke's offensive rythym. Ketchel can also close the distance quickly. Watch for Ketchel feinting with his footwork...You have to respect it, he is capable of knocking your head off.

In the highlights I've seen, he never goes against the ropes, and he is always attempting to put the opponent there. This strongly suggests that he is very aware of where he is in the ring, and is maximizing his style of fighting.

Will use a strong step jab to the body, then lean to the right side to avoid right hand counters. I'm pretty sure that Floyd Mayweather Sr. did not show him this. it also helps him to close distance to get inside.

In his era, any era for that matter, a great inside fighter. Ketchel is downright vicious, he mauls, pushes and simply uproots opponents from their base. Ketchel looks to be an expert at finding and making openings inside by making the opponent defend high and low with a varied, relentless, inside mugging. Turns his body weight into each punch with the intent to hurt.

Ketchel may look crude, but as stated before, he is great at maximizing his style. On the inside, he can completely smother an opponent. Remember how Duran would smother Palomino, and the first Leonard fight, getting his shots off then crowding. Ketchel looks adept at doing the same. Will also turn southpaw on the inside to find angles for using his left hook in the clinches.

Enough endurance to come at you bell to bell for twenty rounds.

If the fight has a referee from Ketchel's era, Hagler could definitely lose.

[flamengo]

Id prefer to see the Welterweight Tommy Hearns who destroyed Duran take on Ketchel... I think Hearns would be ashamed of himself for destroying the most over rated M/W in Boxings history within 40 seconds. Haglar would destroy Ketchell in the first round.

Gentlemen.. look at the fucking FILM... Stop fooling yourselves.. Ketchel and Papke are PATHETIC.

Where's my Bourbon.....?????

[SuzieQ49]

Stanley Ketchel believe it or not hit harder and was a far better finisher than anyone Hagler fought. If ANY middle in history can dent Haglers chin, it is Stanley Ketchel. To the posters above who compared Stanley Ketchel to Alan Minter and Ricky Hatton...well then your response is pathetic and not worthy of a reply. Ketchel had the punching power,skills, finishing ability, and handspeed of a jack dempsey on the offensive. Ketchel was a murderer. Hagler better box him and not go to war with Ketchel. DO NOT UNDERESTIMATE stanley!


Funny how some call him crude when Ketchels best film is not out there. In fact the Papke 4th fight was more of a exhibition compared to there first 3 fights. Such a shame Ketchels real film is missing. If the only Film of evander holyfield was his waltz with Vaughn Bean...I am sure people would never pick him to win any fantasy fights.

[SuzieQ49]

Bill Papke was a hall of famer. A very good middleweight in history if not great one. Very respectable resume. His best stuff is not on film. The 4th Papke-Ketchel fight was more of a exhibition. The other 3 were WARS and sadly none of them made it on film.

[flamengo]

Stanley Ketchel believe it or not hit harder and was a far better finisher than anyone Hagler fought. If ANY middle in history can dent Haglers chin, it is Stanley Ketchel. To the posters above who compared Stanley Ketchel to Alan Minter and Ricky Hatton...well then your response is pathetic and not worthy of a reply. Ketchel had the punching power,skills, finishing ability, and handspeed of a jack dempsey on the offensive. Ketchel was a murderer. Hagler better box him and not go to war with Ketchel. DO NOT UNDERESTIMATE stanley!


Funny how some call him crude when Ketchels best film is not out there. In fact the Papke 4th fight was more of a exhibition compared to there first 3 fights. Such a shame Ketchels real film is missing. If the only Film of evander holyfield was his waltz with Vaughn Bean...I am sure people would never pick him to win any fantasy fights.

Put the Bag Pipes down Suzie.... :yep

[SuzieQ49]

Ketchel has quicker footwork than given credit for. He has the awareness and ability to get out of the way, breaking Papke's offensive rythym. Ketchel can also close the distance quickly. Watch for Ketchel feinting with his footwork...You have to respect it, he is capable of knocking your head off.

In the highlights I've seen, he never goes against the ropes, and he is always attempting to put the opponent there. This strongly suggests that he is very aware of where he is in the ring, and is maximizing his style of fighting.

Will use a strong step jab to the body, then lean to the right side to avoid right hand counters. I'm pretty sure that Floyd Mayweather Sr. did not show him this. it also helps him to close distance to get inside.

In his era, any era for that matter, a great inside fighter. Ketchel is downright vicious, he mauls, pushes and simply uproots opponents from their base. Ketchel looks to be an expert at finding and making openings inside by making the opponent defend high and low with a varied, relentless, inside mugging. Turns his body weight into each punch with the intent to hurt.


Great points. I am glad I am not the only one who sees this, and that film right there is not even close to Stanleys best stuff. So he must have been one hell of a fighter. I think another thing that Ketchel gets underrated is his handspeed. Ketchel had very quick hands and his right hand was sneaky and cagey like schmeling like....It made him quite the complete finisher. The man has a very respectable knockout record for a reason.

[SuzieQ49]

Flamengo,

I guess you just do not have that keen eye for boxing. Stanley Ketchel was a Great fighter.

[Maxmomer]

I've been watching these highlights of Ketchel lately...and I've come to the conclusion that I've seriously underestimated Ketchel.

I think that if you actually closely watch the available film you'll see he's not the crude skill-less bomber many people make him out to be. Not saying he's like a MW Willie Pep, but for his style and era he had skill and an abundance of natural talent. And these fights are supposed to be some of his weaker showings.



If the fight has a referee from Ketchel's era, Hagler could definitely lose.thirty-two even

[flamengo]

Flamengo,

I guess you just do not have that keen eye for boxing. Stanley Ketchel was a Great fighter.

....and Haglars a far superior BOXER with infinite levels of skill above Ketchel...... "Oh.. but Stanley fought Jack Johnson"... Dont even bother.

[Maxmomer]

:huh:huh

I think Ketchel is as durable or even more so than Hagler and he hit harder, plus in a match-up Ketchel would be the aggressor and would likely be more actively persueing the KO.

[jones1]

Im not sure on this one. Id probably take Hagler to outbox him but Ketchel could punch. Check out Papke's man-thong in the clip :rofl.

[he grant]

So let's get this straight SQ: You have determined all these outstanding skills of Ketchels without the same film we formed our opinions on ? What a crock.

Ketchel is a classic example of a guy who's style was dated . Of course he was great in his day and had physical skills but based on what we see, please. Against Johnson Ketchel did not even have a clue on how to avoid a jab. Johnson toyed with him and still could not miss whenever he threw it. What do you think Hagler would do?

Hagler excelled against that style. Hagler was extremely fast, razor sharp, had killer power of his own and a cast iron chin. Hagler would chop him up and it would be nasty. In a street fight, that might be a different story.

[PowerPuncher]

No it isn't. Totally different styles. Hagler doesn't run and throw one shot at a time.

I was talking about a fast but wider punching wrestling brawler against a compact sharp puncher. I'm sure Ketchel wrestles Hagler a load here and brings a load of pressure. However I'm also sure Hagler picks him apart. Since when was Mayweather running against Hatton?

[flamengo]

So let's get this straight SQ: You have determined all these outstanding skills of Ketchels without the same film we formed our opinions on ? What a crock.

Ketchel is a classic example of a guy who's style was dated . Of course he was great in his day and had physical skills but based on what we see, please. Against Johnson Ketchel did not even have a clue on how to avoid a jab. Johnson toyed with him and still could not miss whenever he threw it. What do you think Hagler would do?

Hagler excelled against that style. Hagler was extremely fast, razor sharp, had killer power of his own and a cast iron chin. Hagler would chop him up and it would be nasty. In a street fight, that might be a different story.

Well said. There is not a single element of Ketchels style that would give me any inclination to believe he'd last into the second round against Haglar. Ketchels finest qualities were grit and a right hand that flattened fighters with little or no defense what so ever. The style was suited to the game of the day... walk in and throw a bomb, clinch and wrestle, hold and do it all again. Ketchels defense went 'around da house'.. In the footage Papke/Ketchel.. I'd suggest no more than 2 rounds of sparring would have been included in the training.. neither man had any range.. lunging from 4 foot away.. Ketchels limited footwork was barely able to keep his arse from hitting the ground after the lunges. Should he miss the target, he'd be flat on his face.

Fine, he's a HOFer.. He was M/W champ.. He has a great KO record..

Sterling Moss drove to a F1 title in a iron chunk of trash in compariso to todays vehicles..

Training technique in fighters is no different to advancements in cars as a comparison. Ketchel had 3 wheels in respect to Haglar. I cant even suggest that a comparison should be made.. The chance of Ketchel lasting more than 40 seconds with the W/W Hearns is nil.

A keen eye for boxing Suzie Q???? I didnt see any glimpses of what we call boxing in either film.. Unskilled, rough house brawling is all. No technique, combinations, defense or executed game plan...

Save the arguements.. its embarrassing to yourselves.

[Unforgiven]

I believe there were some remarkable skillful boxers back in Ketchel's time. But I dont think he was one of them.

I cannot really form an opinion on how he does against Hagler because there's not enough footage of Ketchel. As others have noted, there's far too much holding and wrestling in that Papke footage. I notice that Ketchel goes AGES without throwing a straight left, as if he wants Papke to come in and wrestle with him.

[mcvey]

Some film of Ketchel:




vs. Papke
0pVSDwPoNfs

vs. Johnson
yJ0Lufb4tUI




This guy makes Ruiz look downright clean. I have never seen this much blatant wrestling in a boxing match from the early 20th century. Ever.

We have seen this proposed match allready.





HAGLER V ROLDAN.



Only joking Suzie:D

[PowerPuncher]

Well said. There is not a single element of Ketchels style that would give me any inclination to believe he'd last into the second round against Haglar. .

Just because someones a brawler with lesser skills doesn't mean they won't make a fight of it, just look at Lamotta and Ricky Hatton, they were competitive with the best but lesser technique saw them got picked apart

[flamengo]

Just because someones a brawler with lesser skills doesn't mean they won't make a fight of it, just look at Lamotta and Ricky Hatton, they were competitive with the best but lesser technique saw them got picked apart


Skillwise, LaMotta and Hatton are lightyears ahead of Stanley. I do understand and appreciate what you are saying PP, Im simply implying that Ketchel did not have any technique that would trouble Marvin.

Put it this way.... can you take anything from the Ketchel footage and legitimately impliment it into the modern game.. with effectiveness?? Would you let Ketchel train your children? Teach them the finer points of the game?? I'd suggest not. I hugged my ex g/f less than he hugged Papke... lol.

[Mr Butt]

hagler usues his boxing skills to win a wide ud ,ketchel punches hard and is durable ,but hagler gives him a boxing lesson

[Unforgiven]

I hugged my ex g/f less than he hugged Papke... lol.

I bet you'd hug her more if she wore that thong ! :lol:

[flamengo]

I bet you'd hug her more if she wore that thong ! :lol:

Nah.... I had to take her to work with me every day... she was too ugly to kiss good-bye in the morning. :D

[Unforgiven]

Nah.... I had to take her to work with me every day... she was too ugly to kiss good-bye in the morning. :D

:lol:
Maybe she was Papke. :D

[Bad_Intentions]

Hagler by TKO.

too much power, too much aggression.

[dpw417]

It's comparing apples and oranges...BUT nobody is talking about putting ol' Steve in a ring with a modern referee intervening every 5 seconds. I'll maintain that under a ruleset of his era, Ketchel is very hard to deal with for anybody. With a referee from his era Ketchel could beat Hagler. Modern rules? With no prolonged infighting? Hagler's ability from the outside takes him to a comfortable decision.

[SuzieQ49]

Powerpuncher I swear if you comapre Prime Jake Lamotta with Ricky Hatton one more time, I am going to flip out. You sound retarted when you compare the two. No offense. Lamotta's skill level and pysical tools are leagues beyond what hatton is capable of. While Hatton got destroyed by Mayweather and Pacman the best p4p fighter of the era...Jake lamotta BEAT the greatest fighter of all time handing him his first loss. No comparison.

[SuzieQ49]

Lamotta was only 10x more talented a swarmer than hatton was. Not to mention Lamottas ring Smarts, Chin, Strength, and Workrate were around 5x Hattons capabilities.

[SuzieQ49]

So let's get this straight SQ: You have determined all these outstanding skills of Ketchels without the same film we formed our opinions on ? What a crock.


O wait....you mean the same way you do with Harry Greb? how you have never seen real film of him, yet you talk about his amazing speed/skill bla bla bla how he would give Marciano and Dempsey even fights.


DOUBLE STANDARD

[Ted Spoon]

Hagler will find it really tough to wrap Ketchel around his jab. Stanley made lovely use of distance and then came down hard on you, big time.

If Hagler wins by decision he is given a tougher argument than either Hearn's or Mugabi gave him.

[Dave's Top Ten]

Hagler will find it really tough to wrap Ketchel around his jab. Stanley made lovely use of distance and then came down hard on you, big time.

If Hagler wins by decision he is given a tougher argument than either Hearn's or Mugabi gave him.

I always feel very confused when watching a clip like this and then reading comments like this from a boxing 'historian'. I've been watching boxing for about 25 years, and honestly, I feel like I've seen more technique in my local pub than in some of these clips. I know many will find that sort of comment blasphemous, but hey, that's what I'm seeing. I guess 25 years ain't enought to understand boxing, but to me it looks like a mismatch with Hagler light years ahead in skill. Back to the drawing board for me I suppose....

[cross_trainer]

O wait....you mean the same way you do with Harry Greb? how you have never seen real film of him, yet you talk about his amazing speed/skill bla bla bla how he would give Marciano and Dempsey even fights.


DOUBLE STANDARD

You wrestled in high school if I recall correctly...could you evaluate the quality of their clinch work? A lot of fighters during this period trained in wrestling to supplement their boxing, and I strongly suspect that Ketchel is one of them.

[fists of fury]

You sound retarted when you compare the two. No offense.

:lol:

[ricardoparker93]

Lamotta was only 10x more talented a swarmer than hatton was. Not to mention Lamottas ring Smarts, Chin, Strength, and Workrate were around 5x Hattons capabilities.

La motta's ring smarts? :L walking forward and letting the guy punch you in the face is ring smarts!

La motta is one of the morst overrated fighters in history.

[ricardoparker93]

Bill Papke was a hall of famer. A very good middleweight in history if not great one. Very respectable resume. His best stuff is not on film. The 4th Papke-Ketchel fight was more of a exhibition. The other 3 were WARS and sadly none of them made it on film.

Oh yeah ketchel who fought with 4 oz gloves a hundred years ago was a big hitter than tommy hearns and mugabi of course :L. Both of these guys techniques are shit and they remind me of two drunk bear throwing one punch and then colliding and hugging.

If either tried that with Hagler they would get nailed by TECHNICALLY SUPERB counter shots.
Hagler late KO or lopsided descision.

[he grant]

Nice try SQ, swing and a miss ... Greb is universially know to have been exceptional by his record, comments by his opponents and newspaper coverage from the time. We have a ton of film of the men he did beat as well.

Back to your point, what films are you viewing that show you Ketchel can compete w Hagler ? That he hits harder and could actually knock out a man with one of the most proven chins of the 20th Century? That he had the skills to survive while attempting to do so?

I'm not knocking Stanley who by all accounts was a warrior. However, again, let's not over glamorize the man. For the most part he was crude. Tricky, a bit but crude. He was a fast swinging , hard hitting demon, no doubt. Did he have skills, absolutely. Could he have been trained in more modern methods and excelled today, likely. Could the man who fought Papke have knocked out Marvin Hagler ? A prime, razor sharp Hagler ? No way.

I can see Ketchel having a brawl with the older Hagler who fought a Roldan but I see it ending with similar results. It's not a knock on Stanley. Maybe despite odds he does so against lesser modern champs. Extremely possible, even likely. Just not Hagler.

[cross_trainer]

Nice try SQ, swing and a miss ... Greb is universially know to have been exceptional by his record, comments by his opponents and newspaper coverage from the time. We have a ton of film of the men he did beat as well.

Back to your point, what films are you viewing that show you Ketchel can compete w Hagler ? That he hits harder and could actually knock out a man with one of the most proven chins of the 20th Century? That he had the skills to survive while attempting to do so?

I'm not knocking Stanley who by all accounts was a warrior. However, again, let's not over glamorize the man. For the most part he was crude. Tricky, a bit but crude. He was a fast swinging , hard hitting demon, no doubt. Did he have skills, absolutely. Could he have been trained in more modern methods and excelled today, likely. Could the man who fought Papke have knocked out Marvin Hagler ? A prime, razor sharp Hagler ? No way.

I can see Ketchel having a brawl with the older Hagler who fought a Roldan but I see it ending with similar results. It's not a knock on Stanley. Maybe despite odds he does so against lesser modern champs. Extremely possible, even likely. Just not Hagler.

Which recent MW champs would you pick him to beat (or beltholders if you think he can't beat lineal guys)?

[PowerPuncher]

Powerpuncher I swear if you comapre Prime Jake Lamotta with Ricky Hatton one more time, I am going to flip out. You sound retarted when you compare the two. No offense. Lamotta's skill level and pysical tools are leagues beyond what hatton is capable of. While Hatton got destroyed by Mayweather and Pacman the best p4p fighter of the era...Jake lamotta BEAT the greatest fighter of all time handing him his first loss. No comparison.

Lamotta had a 17lb weight advantage though, If Hatton was fighting say Willie Pep he would probably win, which is comparable. Hatton is faster, closes the gap fast, throws 800 power punches a fight, is very strong at 140 and has always pushed his opponent around even strong men like Tyszu and even FMJ and Collazo at 147. Hatton also has a better body attack and quicker hands. Lamotta has better head movement though

[Ted Spoon]

I always feel very confused when watching a clip like this and then reading comments like this from a boxing 'historian'. I've been watching boxing for about 25 years, and honestly, I feel like I've seen more technique in my local pub than in some of these clips. I know many will find that sort of comment blasphemous, but hey, that's what I'm seeing. I guess 25 years ain't enought to understand boxing, but to me it looks like a mismatch with Hagler light years ahead in skill. Back to the drawing board for me I suppose....

Naturally, as you should not believe everything you hear, but what are you actually looking at when you cast your eyes upon a grainy, frame-skipping film of a comparatively poor showing from Ketchel?

For a start, a present boxing coach would divert you from fighting in such a way, but it's about what works for you. Ketchel was simply tenacious and confident enough to make his ropey looking conduct pay dividends. Slap some of that jittery 24 frame film on a Naseem Hamed fight and it's going to prove ugly watching, effectiveness notwithstanding but scrutinized nonetheless.

Hagler was a fantastic fighter, he can most certainly win this one, but then so can Ketchel through his ugly>awkward>effective style.