George "Sugar" Costner beat Gavilan and Ike Williams with one eye

[McGrain]

This ww contender was twice ko'd in the first by Sugar Ray Robinson in the first, although according to him, he threw the second one. "Three days before the Robinson fight, my vision in my left eye started to go." George had suffered the eye injury against Chico Varona, losing his vision during the match, but coming back to win the fight in a whirlwind even when his corener had wanted to pull him with a suspected detatched retina, exactly what the man had.

Anyway, his vision came back (this may have happened to Greb, too) but then departed once more - right in time for his getting in with Sugar Ray Robinson, The Greatest. "While I'm crying my eyes out, somebody - i don't recall who - suggests I lay down against Robinson. And you know what? That's just what I did." Maybe he did, maybe he didn't, but he was certainly having trouble with his vision. The Other Sugar died completely blind in both eyes. This makes what happened next all the more remarkable.

Costner beat Kid Gavlian - what, top 5 WW head to head all time? - in a possible bullshit decision over 10. Then he matched lightweight champion Ike Williams over ten rounds, taking all ten rounds on one of the cards. A shut out type victory over Ike Williams, who probably was starting to slip past his very best, but was still lightweight champion of the world and certainly one of the very best in all the world. Pretty stunning.

Supposedly, John Grosa of the Philly state commision asked Costner to go into Williams' dressing room and say hi. "When I got into his dressing room Ike was lying on a stretcher and it looke dlike he had two heads. That's how swollen he was."

The next day, Grosa and Costner would see each other again. Costner told him: "I know about your injury. I knew at the weigh in. And I was up half the night talking to my wife as to whether you should fight Ike. We decided to let you fight because we didn't think he would present you much of a problem [if that was said i'll eat my hat]. But i'm sorry to say that you're not going to fight any more. The NBA has ordered your retirement."

And that was that.


[Only registered and activated users can see links]


Anyone know any details of the Kid G fight? It sounds like a bullshit decision, I wonder if it was mad close or a robbery? I wonder if Costner was connected? Losses KO1, then beats a fighter nearly as good on points...

Anyway or no, the guy has decisions over these two boys with one eye. Hall of fame! Hall of fame! Hall of fame!

[McGrain]

Here he is knocked dangerously unconcsious by either LaMotta or Sugar Ray the first time (not sure which, sorry).
[Only registered and activated users can see links]

And here he is apparently giving Ike Williams a lesson in boxing!
[Only registered and activated users can see links]

[TheGreatA]

I thought the pic of Costner laying on the canvas may have been from the second Robinson fight but I probably confused it with the picture of Basora after his first round KO to Robinson (in their second fight) which ended in a similar scene.

[Only registered and activated users can see links]

Some quotes I found of Costner:

But in May of that year came the ill-fated fight with Cuban welterweight Chico Varona. Although Costner dominated the first five rounds, a Varona right caught Costner's cheekbone at an odd angle in the sixth.

"It felt like someone threw a ball of fire into my face," Costner said. "I didn't realize it, but the right retina, maybe both, had been detached." Everything went dark for a round, but strangely, Costner said his sight returned in the eighth, and he knocked Varona down four times. He then stopped the Cuban in the 10th. At a doctor's exam the next day, Costner said he was told he had a broken blood vessel and was given a typhoid shot to dry the hemorrhaging.

Although he fought seven more times without defeat in 1949, Costner began to lose his eyesight. He kept the problem to himself and signed for a nontitle match with Robinson in March 1950. Again he lost in one round. But six weeks later - fighting with just one good eye - he did the impossible. He decisioned Gavilan, who soon would be welterweight champ. A month later, he outpointed Charley Cotton, and four weeks after that, he battered Williams, the lightweight king who had planned to campaign as a welterweight.

The day after the Williams fight, the National Boxing Association - wise to Costner's eyesight problems - informed the 26-year-old welterweight he no longer would be sanctioned to fight. Although he underwent six operations between 1950-58, Costner's sight continued to worsen, and finally he was totally blind.

[Only registered and activated users can see links]

In 1984, learning that LaMotta was in Cincinnati, I arranged a Costner-LaMotta reunion at the Hotel Westin. It was a touching moment.

Costner told LaMotta, "You look great, Jake," and the still cocky Raging Bull replied: "Now, George, how would you know."

Costner, only 21, was stopped by LaMotta on a TKO in the sixth round in 1945 at Chicago Stadium, and later said "the right side of my face was paralyzed for a month; the man could punch."

[Only registered and activated users can see links]

[McGrain]

GREAT LaMotta line!

[McGrain]

From The Ring, October 1950:
"Willams took on George "sugar" Costner, the Camden N.J, welterweight, at Shibe Park, Philadelphia, recently. A victory over George was to qualify the Trenton Terror for a welterweight title fight with Sugar Ray Robinson. Contrary to the plans of Blinky Palermo, Williams' manager, it didn't happen that way.

To the amazement of the 9,809 spectators, Costner proceeded to give Williams a thorough going over. It wasn't even close. One judge, Frank Knarsborough, gave every round to Costner. Referee Beloff and Judge Lou Tress agreed that sugar George had won 8/10.

Williams never had a chance after Costner had rocked him iwth a terrici left hook in the third round. The lightweight champion rallied briefly in the 7th, but by then the verdict was a foregone conclusion."

Not to shabby.

[My2Sense]

Anyone know any details of the Kid G fight? It sounds like a bullshit decision, I wonder if it was mad close or a robbery?


I've read that Costner did well early, but Gavilan came on strong down the stretch. I've read some reports that said it was a close fight, and others that said it was a very unpopular decision.

[McGrain]

I've read that Costner did well early, but Gavilan came on strong down the stretch. I've read some reports that said it was a close fight, and others that said it was a very unpopular decision.


"Unpopular" is the word i keep running across too.

But unpopular close decisions don't really interest me. Even keeping it close is nice work, and the Williams win seals the deal. Must have been a good fighter.

[TheGreatA]

[Only registered and activated users can see links]

[McGrain]

Thanks for the pics Great A. I can confirm that mine comes from the LaMotta fight.

An obituary:


Went toe to toe with greatest boxers in world

By Rebecca Billman
The Cincinnati Enquirer









George "Sugar" Costner was a contender.

On July 12, 1950, the Cincinnati prizefighter took on the lightweight champion of the world, Ike Williams.

Mr. Costner thrashed him in the non-title bout - winning all 10 rounds on one judge's scorecard and eight rounds on the cards of the other two.

The victory made Mr. Costner the No. 1 contender to face another "Sugar" - welterweight champion Ray Robinson.

Mr. Costner was hoping the third time would be the charm. "Sugar" Ray Robinson - considered by many the best boxer in history, pound for pound - had defeated him twice before. But that third boxing match didn't take place. While Mr. Costner was a winner in the ring, he lost his eyesight. He had suffered detached retinas in both eyes, and he never fought again.

Yet, in the manner of a true champion, the Cincinnati slugger overcame blindness and got a college degree in business administration - at age 56.

Mr. Costner died Saturday at Harmony Court Nursing Home in Roselawn. He was 79. His nickname - Sugar - indicated his proficiency in the brutal sport known as "the sweet science." In addition to sweet moves in the ring, he packed a powerful punch. Mr. Costner scored 58 knockout victories in his 98 prizefights.

He fought his first pro bout at 15, knocking out "Red" Knox in the second round. Mr. Costner followed that with 22 straight KOs.

He fought some of the greatest names in boxing. In addition to Mr. Robinson, he battled Jake "The Bronx Bull" LaMotta and Kid Gavilan. He was knocked out by Mr. LaMotta in six rounds, while he beat Mr. Gavilan in 10.

Mr. Costner chalked up his initial loss to Mr. Robinson - by a knockout in the first round in February 1945 - to inexperience.

When the two Sugars met again, in March 1950, it was 10 months after Mr. Costner had both of his retinas detached in a fight with Chico Varona.

Despite the injuries, he knocked out Mr. Varona in the 10th round. By the time of his rematch with Mr. Robinson, Mr. Costner had no vision in his right eye. Mr. Robinson knocked him out - again in the first round.

Mr. Costner fought three more times. All were wins, including the thrashing he dealt the lightweight champ, Mr. Williams. But the handicap was too great to risk another match with the dangerous Mr. Robinson.

Then Mr. Costner went completely blind. Finding no work, he became homeless. In 1951, he got a job as a shipping clerk and began to rebuild his life.

At the age of 52, Mr. Costner became a student at Cleveland State, taking four buses a day to and from classes. He earned a bachelor's degree in business administration in 1979.

"It was like winning the championship of the world," Mr. Costner recalled in 1995.

He worked as an intake specialist for the Ohio Civil Rights Commission until 1985.

Survivors include: two sisters, Mae Scott and Norma Buckingham, both of Roselawn; two sons, George Costner Jr. of Dayton, Ohio, and Alvin Costner of College Hill; a daughter, Carolyn Dawkins of College Hill; and several grandchildren.

Visitation: 10-11:30 a.m. Friday at Thompson, Hall & Jordan Funeral Home, 2625 Gilbert Ave., Walnut Hills, followed by the funeral. Interment at Spring Grove Cemetery mausoleum.


He was a great man.

[McGrain]

[Only registered and activated users can see links]

[My2Sense]

[Only registered and activated users can see links]

The fuck?? :nut

:lol:

[McGrain]

There are many ways to bump a thread.

That there is the best one ;)

[My2Sense]

The hell is happening with this forum?? First Manassa with his drunken half-rants and now McGrain posting soft-core porn. :patsch


Oh well, I might as well join in on the fun.

Here's a Corrie Sanders training video:

BxU_3bz7LQs

[Manassa]

Who allowed this thread title?

[McGrain]

thread title

True dat.

[teeto]

Haha, just seen this anyway. Thank you Matt.

[McGrain]

Wee bump. SS asking about 1950-2010 fights not on film reminded me about this guy and his amazing triumph over Williams, which I would dearly love to see and made my list in SS's thread.

[sweet_scientist]

Would love to see him fight. No film available of him as far as I know, but something might turn up.

As an aside, is there a fighter that has been screwed more times that Gavilan?

[McGrain]

I consulted the 8-ball and "My source says no."

[sweet_scientist]

I consulted the 8-ball and "My source says no."

The 8-ball never lies. It seems the judges were one-eyed as well as George for that one with Gav :good

[TheGreatA]

[Only registered and activated users can see links]

[Only registered and activated users can see links]


[Only registered and activated users can see links]

[Meast]

Just been reading about his first encounter with Robinson in Sweet Thunder. It said he wasn't his usual self at all when he went into the ring(this was for the first fight mind) and some said he even bottled it as it was a much bigger crowd to what he was used to.

He was put down by a lighting fast blow which many of the crowd didn't see and took the whole count on one knee.

Robinson invited Costner to his bar later that night where they shared a drink and some photographs.

[GPater11093]

He looks to have a very long neck but it is thick as hell, weird that.

Seems a good fighter, I love these threads where you learn something new of a fighter you never even thought about before. Thank you McGrain.

Also is Costner the guy Ray punished for 'stealing' his nickname?

[Meast]

Also is Costner the guy Ray punished for 'stealing' his nickname?

It was said he wasn't happy about it when he found out he was using sugar, especially when the crowd started chanting 'sugar sugar sugar' at one of his previous fights with Rangel.

[GPater11093]

thanks Meast, thought tis was the guy.

[McGrain]

Just been reading about his first encounter with Robinson in Sweet Thunder. It said he wasn't his usual self at all when he went into the ring(this was for the first fight mind) and some said he even bottled it as it was a much bigger crowd to what he was used to.

He was put down by a lighting fast blow which many of the crowd didn't see and took the whole count on one knee.

Robinson invited Costner to his bar later that night where they shared a drink and some photographs.

Thanks man. I never would have read that book but here I am learning a little bit about a never-talked about fighter who interestes me. Cheers.

. Thank you McGrain.


Welcome buddy.

[GPater11093]

Thanks man. I never would have read that book but here I am learning a little bit about a never-talked about fighter who interestes me. Cheers.




Welcome buddy.

Really is interesting. Keep 'em coming.

[Russell]

Would love to see him fight. No film available of him as far as I know, but something might turn up.

As an aside, is there a fighter that has been screwed more times that Gavilan?

How many times was he robbed in your estimation?

[sweet_scientist]

How many times was he robbed in your estimation?

From the fights I've seen, I definitely think his second fight with Bratton was a robbery, as was his fight with Johnny Saxton. Beyond that, I thought he should have won the Danny Womber fight too, though I admit it would be a stretch to call it a robbery.

If we believe reports the following are definite robberies: his fight with Lester Felton, the first Billy Graham fight, Robert Villemain, George Costner and Peter Waterman fights.

There's quite a few other fights where the decision was questionable too, like the first Ike Williams fight, and there are plenty of fights where Gavilan lost close decisions fighting in other guys' backyards. I don't have reports on them, but who knows what happened there.

[Jorodz]

anyone who beat ike williams has more than earned my respect. got some research to do...

[sweet_scientist]

Question: let's say the Ray Robinson fights surface and Gavilan looks to have the better of the first fight and loses a 9-6 type of decision in the second - what would that do for his ranking?

I already have him about 14th all time on my p4p list, I am THAT high on him. But most have him quite a bit lower; where would he go on your list, given the above scenario?

[McGrain]

I just don't have the faith in my own cards that you do. I just don't see it as simple as me, scoring a 1950 fight with 2010 eyes and getting it "right". SO, it would need to be pretty seriously dominant. In all honesty, that would hurt Sugar more than help KG for me, because I am very high of KG as a h2h force, I'd consider him the #2 WW head to head of whom there is enough film to make judgement on. So probably Armstrong to 3, Robinson to 4, KG into my top 20 up from the low twenties.

[sweet_scientist]

I just don't have the faith in my own cards that you do. I just don't see it as simple as me, scoring a 1950 fight with 2010 eyes and getting it "right". SO, it would need to be pretty seriously dominant. In all honesty, that would hurt Sugar more than help KG for me, because I am very high of KG as a h2h force, I'd consider him the #2 WW head to head of whom there is enough film to make judgement on. So probably Armstrong to 3, Robinson to 4, KG into my top 20 up from the low twenties.

Mac, HAVE SOME FAITH IN YOUR OWN JUDGEMENT!

It's your list after all. Why do you need to go by what a judge says? YOU are the judge, and the jury too when it comes to your list.

If you want an "official" take on the sport, get a computer to analyse boxrec and spit out the facts to us.

If YOU want to make a list, stamp it with YOUR impramada. :good

I tend to agree with you that it would damage Robinson's standing somewhat.

[McGrain]

I do, but it's difficult enough to go disagreeing with judges without knowing exactly what they are being briefed to by that particular governing body these days.


So inflicting my opinion upon boxing judges 60 years previously, when there were differences in judging again...I don't feel comfrotable doing it. So I don't...but like I say, if I see a robbery I call it out, and I enjoy reading scorecards of you and others, it's a very good guide. I just need a bit more than most to chuck them out.

[GPater11093]

Question: let's say the Ray Robinson fights surface and Gavilan looks to have the better of the first fight and loses a 9-6 type of decision in the second - what would that do for his ranking?

I already have him about 14th all time on my p4p list, I am THAT high on him. But most have him quite a bit lower; where would he go on your list, given the above scenario?

I also think Gavilan is an awesome fighter.

I think he pretty much did those things to Robinson, the first fight was close, the second he acquitted himself well and lost a close decision second time around. I think it speaks volumes for KG, pre-prime, holding his own with SRR. I dont think it hurts SRR that much as he still would have beaten him when it mattered.

I just don't have the faith in my own cards that you do. I just don't see it as simple as me, scoring a 1950 fight with 2010 eyes and getting it "right". SO, it would need to be pretty seriously dominant. In all honesty, that would hurt Sugar more than help KG for me, because I am very high of KG as a h2h force, I'd consider him the #2 WW head to head of whom there is enough film to make judgement on. So probably Armstrong to 3, Robinson to 4, KG into my top 20 up from the low twenties.

Mac, HAVE SOME FAITH IN YOUR OWN JUDGEMENT!

It's your list after all. Why do you need to go by what a judge says? YOU are the judge, and the jury too when it comes to your list.

If you want an "official" take on the sport, get a computer to analyse boxrec and spit out the facts to us.

If YOU want to make a list, stamp it with YOUR impramada. :good

I tend to agree with you that it would damage Robinson's standing somewhat.

I like to have afew different viewpoints, myself. Like as such yours in the scorecard thread, gives things a different point of view you hadnt considered before and can back up or un back up your thoughts.

I do, but it's difficult enough to go disagreeing with judges without knowing exactly what they are being briefed to by that particular governing body these days.


So inflicting my opinion upon boxing judges 60 years previously, when there were differences in judging again...I don't feel comfrotable doing it. So I don't...but like I say, if I see a robbery I call it out, and I enjoy reading scorecards of you and others, it's a very good guide. I just need a bit more than most to chuck them out.

Good point, but do you think scoring a fight has changed that much?

[McGrain]

Good point, but do you think scoring a fight has changed that much?


No, not that much, but something will have been said to these guys - as long as the fighters knew about it, then no harm. I'm just not privy to the same information about what's important as these guys. They will be looking for slightly different things than you or I anyway, because they are different people, I just feel that those guys are more involved with the boxing culture at that time than I am.

[GPater11093]

No, not that much, but something will have been said to these guys - as long as the fighters knew about it, then no harm. I'm just not privy to the same information about what's important as these guys. They will be looking for slightly different things than you or I anyway, because they are different people, I just feel that those guys are more involved with the boxing culture at that time than I am.

I would say most people on these boards (including McGrain, I know, shockingingly low standards!) are knowledgeable enough to accuratly score a fight using their own critea and personally come to the conclusion of who 'won' the fight. Your reason about people looking for different things is why I like to compare my cards in the scorecard thread or on this board. I still think a fighter beats someone in a fight the same if it is in the 1910's, 50's or 2000's.

[McGrain]

I still think a fighter beats someone in a fight the same if it is in the 1910's, 50's or 2000's.


1910 is a good example. Close rounds might be decided by aggression alone, though they are MUCH more likely to be scored even, which can , of course, make a seemingly ridiculous card perfectly reasonable.

1990? Depending upon the judge close rounds can be decided on any number of factors, but affective aggression versus clean hitting is the most difficult. BOTH are reasonable.

Take Marquez-Pacquiao II. I can see cards that are reasonable based upon judging criteria that has any one of three results. I personally scored it for Marquez. So? People are welcome to draw their own conclusions, I do too, but I need to see rounds that are clearly scored wrong before I can toss out a decision, personally.

[GPater11093]

1910 is a good example. Close rounds might be decided by aggression alone, though they are MUCH more likely to be scored even, which can , of course, make a seemingly ridiculous card perfectly reasonable.

1990? Depending upon the judge close rounds can be decided on any number of factors, but affective aggression versus clean hitting is the most difficult. BOTH are reasonable.

Take Marquez-Pacquiao II. I can see cards that are reasonable based upon judging criteria that has any one of three results. I personally scored it for Marquez. So? People are welcome to draw their own conclusions, I do too, but I need to see rounds that are clearly scored wrong before I can toss out a decision, personally.

1910 was a bad example, regretted hitting the send button. I think boxing was different in the '10s. Became 'modern' in the 20s IMO.

But I see your points, but that is why I like to see other peoples opinions on a bout to draw a conclusion on it. Me and SS have differnt critea and scores fight differently (to say the least) and we wont say each other are 'wrong' in fact we look at how we scored the fight differently. But if we do agree and say it is against a judges decision then we would have to maybe think the judges were wrong.

[McGrain]

I don't mind it, not at all, i just am talking purely about myself here. And I agree that if a couple of guys who have seen a fight that I trust disagree with the judges I take that on board. I just am less comfortable ceeding the judges cards in favour of my own than most guys, I guess.

[GPater11093]

I don't mind it, not at all, i just am talking purely about myself here. And I agree that if a couple of guys who have seen a fight that I trust disagree with the judges I take that on board. I just am less comfortable ceeding the judges cards in favour of my own than most guys, I guess.

I wouldnt say anyone is flat out 'wrong' purely on the basis of my scorecard, but if 2 or 3 knowledgeable people agree with me then i think the card maybe 'wrong'.

Boxing is purely subjective and people do and will disagree, its inevitable.

[McGrain]

Yeah, that's right - which is why I feel the judges cards should take presidence. Basically, if you are a fighter, there are only three people in the entire world that you need to impress, in keeping with the rules of scoring in your era, and they are the judges. If you manage to do that, why should you be penalised by some guys watching the fight 60 years later, 20 years after you are dead?

Unless it looks blatant. But like I say, that is just me.