Darius and Ottke - compare their career achievements

[Flurry]

Compare the career achievements of two of the leading German/German based fighters of the late 90s and early 00s, both long time title holders, both also unfied belts. Led on by rivalling stables these two, who btw had already fought each other in the amateur ranks, despite numerous public call outs never quite managed to clash with each other in a pro ring.

Who was the "greater fighter" of the two based on achievements?

Lets get this straight, this is not about who had more talent, the better potential or who who of the two would have won had they met in the ring. Its purely about their accomplishments

[Artani]

Darius staying one of the best fighters of 1990-2000. His style was much better than Ottke.

[Batsch]

No question. Ottke achieved more.

Ottke did about 6 or 7 mandatory defences in his career and boxed every three month. Many of his opponents were first class (Brewer, Glen Johnson, Mundine, Larsen, Tate....)

Michalczewski boxed only two names in his entire career (Hill and Rocchigiani). The rest were almost only secondclass bums and he never had to fight in a mandatory defense.

We are not talking about entertaining fights we are talking about achievements.

So Ottke.

[Jens S]

Montell Griffin was a big win for DM as well. Ottkes first win was robbery and most neutral observers had Larsen winning as well. Other fights were close. Glen Johnson was not first class when he fought Ottke. It was first later in his career Johnson upped his level. It wasn't a big win.

Jens

[elias]

Ottke had too many dodgy decisions go his way to be considered a decent champion.

[chliJs]

Montell Griffin was a big win for DM as well. Ottkes first win was robbery and most neutral observers had Larsen winning as well. Other fights were close. Glen Johnson was not first class when he fought Ottke. It was first later in his career Johnson upped his level. It wasn't a big win.

Jens

so michalczewski won everything fairly?

[Flurry]

No question. Ottke achieved more.

Ottke did about 6 or 7 mandatory defences in his career and boxed every three month. Many of his opponents were first class (Brewer, Glen Johnson, Mundine, Larsen, Tate....)

Michalczewski boxed only two names in his entire career (Hill and Rocchigiani). The rest were almost only secondclass bums and he never had to fight in a mandatory defense.

We are not talking about entertaining fights we are talking about achievements.

So Ottke.

Fair enough, I do not concur with all you said but good post nevertheless. :good

Just two minor additions, if you permit me to, DM at least fought two mandatories, though they werent top notch admittedly, in Armenta and Biarslanov. And his best wins apart from those you mentioned should imo also include Barber, whom he took the title from originally, Thadzi (who beat Toney) and Griffin (former wbc holder)

[emanuel_augustus]

Ottke gets no respect but the fact is that his resume is better.

Two wins over Brewer, two over Thomas Tate, Glen Johnson, Byron Mitchell, Anthony Mundine. Far better than what DM did.

Ottke had too many dodgy decisions go his way to be considered a decent champion.

Everyone always says that, but what were they?? Outisde of Robin Reid, of course.

[Tom_Tocca]

Ottke gets no respect but the fact is that his resume is better.

Two wins over Brewer, two over Thomas Tate, Glen Johnson, Byron Mitchell, Anthony Mundine. Far better than what DM did.



Everyone always says that, but what were they?? Outisde of Robin Reid, of course.

Brewer I and Reid - Larsen fight was close, but shouldn't be called a robbery...

[emanuel_augustus]

Brewer I and Reid

Brewer I wasn't a robbery. Close fight, Brewer maybe by a point or two, but no robbery.

[Flurry]

I agree that the Reid fight was the only one Ottke should have lost, twas controversial mainly for the actions of the inept (and likely: corrupt) ref imo, the Brewer 1 and the Larsen fight were close fights, but no robberies. But we ve had these endless back and forth spins about robberies in the past and this thread really wasnt started to provide a playground for that sort of stuff.

This thread is meant to determine who of the two fighters in question had the bigger career achievements.

[Odo]

Compare the career achievements of two of the leading German/German based fighters of the late 90s and early 00s, both long time title holders, both also unfied belts. Led on by rivalling stables these two, who btw had already fought each other in the amateur ranks, despite numerous public call outs never quite managed to clash with each other in a pro ring.

Who was the "greater fighter" of the two based on achievements?

Lets get this straight, this is not about who had more talent, the better potential or who who of the two would have won had they met in the ring. Its purely about their accomplishments

I am not really sure who achieved more in his pro career,but I for sure know who was the more exciting fighter of those two great boxers.
Well,lets put it this way.Very seldom did I hear the words "fun to watch" in connection with Ottke.
However,I often noticed that he could also have competed as a runner representing the German colours.He would have felt at home at 10,000 meters IMO.

Seriously,a pity that Roy Jones vs DM didnt come off! DM needed a great opponent to be a truly outstanding opponent.All in all I slightly tend to say that Ottke achieved more in his pro career,but wouldnt argue the toss about it.

[emanuel_augustus]

I am not really sure who achieved more in his pro career,but I for sure know who was the more exciting fighter of those two great boxers.
Well,lets put it this way.Very seldom did I hear the words "fun to watch" in connection with Ottke.
However,I often noticed that he could also have competed as a runner representing the German colours.He would have felt at home at 10,000 meters IMO.

I don't know, I guess that depends on your definition of boxing. I was a fan of the technical brilliance of Ottke. He wasn't just a runner. Ottke could could uncannily judge distance, was always on balance and focused, and could avoid pretty much any punch. He would then find slight openings, come in and land a punch or a flurry, then clinch or move away just out of range.

Pretty? No. But effective, and it allowed him to defeat guys who were far more gifted physically than he was. His style was about negating his opponents advantages and maximizing his own.

[Jens S]

Ottke lost Brewer I with points. A clear robbery. Ottke did face some good fighters, but did he really beat them? Well, he got the decisions. DM beat Hill and Griffin. They were both better than anything Ottke ever faced. But both fought mostly mediocre opposition. Neither man belongs in the Hall of Fame.

Jens

[emanuel_augustus]

Ottke lost Brewer I with points. A clear robbery. Ottke did face some good fighters, but did he really beat them?

Repeat: Ottke/Brewer I was NOT a robbery.

And if you're going to make statements, give examples.

[Jens S]

Wow, you want examples and when you get it, you are in denial. Funny how the germans claim there never was a robbery in Germany. If the fight is within 4 points it was close, and then the win was ok. Beyer-Lucas created an outrage all over the world, except in Germany.

Larsen also beat Ottke. It was close, but Larsen won. The wast majority of neutral observers had Larsen winning.

Remember when Beyer lost a close one to Sanavia? Every German cried robbery. It just shows how sick the german boxing scene is.

Ottke was a solid champ, nothing more.

Jens

PS. How about Reid?

PPS. It should say that Ottke lost with 4 points.

[emanuel_augustus]

I'm not German and I thought we were talking about Ottke?

Larsen also beat Ottke. It was close, but Larsen won.

I didn't see this fight, but if you're saying it was "close" that is hardly robbery.

PS. How about Reid?

I'll concede Reid, but that was at the end of Ottke's career and hardly proves anything.

[Flurry]

I don't know, I guess that depends on your definition of boxing. I was a fan of the technical brilliance of Ottke. He wasn't just a runner. Ottke could could uncannily judge distance, was always on balance and focused, and could avoid pretty much any punch. He would then find slight openings, come in and land a punch or a flurry, then clinch or move away just out of range.

Pretty? No. But effective, and it allowed him to defeat guys who were far more gifted physically than he was. His style was about negating his opponents advantages and maximizing his own.

Thats a "fecking" outstandingly accurate analysis of his style, and this coming from me who has always opposed his defensive minded strategy. The guy was near to untouchable in his prime and toyed with a good handful of hard punchers who came in with the intention of decapitating him. He was feather fisted like a lady of course and near the end of his career became a minimalist tending to throw no more than 10 shots a round and get on his bike thereafter to take the round.

I voted they were "more or less on the same level" despite all this, Ottke never had a win as truly outstanding as DM´s triumph over Hill, a win that made DM THE man of the division at that time, the linear champ and all that. All in all, Ottke fought the better comp but he never was regarded the man at 168, cos there was still Calzaghe on the horizon a pity the fight never came off. A prime Ottke IMO would have beaten Cal, he had just the style for it.

[Flurry]

Wow, you want examples and when you get it, you are in denial. Funny how the germans claim there never was a robbery in Germany. If the fight is within 4 points it was close, and then the win was ok. Beyer-Lucas created an outrage all over the world, except in Germany.

Larsen also beat Ottke. It was close, but Larsen won. The wast majority of neutral observers had Larsen winning.

Remember when Beyer lost a close one to Sanavia? Every German cried robbery. It just shows how sick the german boxing scene is.

Ottke was a solid champ, nothing more.

Jens

PS. How about Reid?

PPS. It should say that Ottke lost with 4 points.

Beyer and sanavia have absolutely nothing to do with the issue at hand, You re a dane so your statement Larsen beat Ottke (and did I hear you say "clearly"? :lol: ) can hardly be considered objective, the fight was a snore fest all over with like 12 punches thrown per round by both fighters put together and Larsen being the guestfighter and the challenger should have done vastly more to edge it in the champs backyard, which he clearly didnt. But I dont even want to delve into this cos its been discussed like a 100 times and adds near to nothing to this thread

[matt_maxx]

I don't know, I guess that depends on your definition of boxing. I was a fan of the technical brilliance of Ottke.
He wasn't just a runner. Ottke could could uncannily judge distance, was always on balance and focused, and could avoid pretty much any punch. He would then find slight openings, come in and land a punch or a flurry, then clinch or move away just out of range.


I am sorry to say but Ottke was not a brilliant technican. People always say this about a boxers in case he is not known for his kock-out power. You described the qualities that made him win his fights pretty well. But to be a brilliant technician you have to show more variability in ur punches than Ottke did. In general he only threw only a left-right or left-right-left combination. I have never seen a punch that I can call a clean hook and and the uppercut was completly missing in his repertiore. And by the way, I always thought, whenever he jumped in his opponent to throw his flurry his head alwyas came before his fists, but may be its just me.

[Jens S]

Well, I am a dane and I don't hide. I am no chicken hiding behind a fake name without saying where I am from. Tom Tocca said it wasn't robbery, but he is from Germany. So he doesn't count? Now I was a Lennox Lewis fan, so anything I say about him doesn't count? Wow, the forum would be silent very soon then, if our opinions doesn't count when we talk about our favorite fighters.

The most depressing thing is that people roll out the "it was a close fight" excuse. The scoring is biased. How are judges elected for a world title fight? Do you really think, that it is the organisations who do that without interference? No, the selection is heavily influenced by the promotors. It is something that often is negotiated in the contract for the fight. The corruption scandal in football in Italy, was actually just somebody trying to do the same in another sport. If a judge sees the fights "right", the promotor will lean on the organisation to get him again. If not, it is the other way around. If a judge becomes a "house judge" by a big promotor, he will make good money. A judge gets around 2.000 $ + expenses for a world title fight. All he has to do is scoring it a 7-5 instead of a 5-7 and he is inside. If a fight in reality was 5-7 and the judge scored it 7-5. How do you think, he would have scored it, if it was 4-8? 6-6 or 6-5-1? Do you really believe that the judges are just inept? That boxing is a clean sport? Why do 95 percent of all fights that most people see as close wins for the visiting fighter go to the home fighter in Germany? (and the same thing happens all over the world) Do you really believe they are influenced by the crowd? When Larsen fought Häussler, he won every round VERY clearly. Yet two rounds before the fight was over, all Häussler had to do, was win the last rounds to retain his title. Inept judges or did they keep him alive on purpose? There was no crowd believing Häussler did well. What made them score like this? In the end it was luckily to much to hide away. The scandal would have been to much. Even german press would write about it.

Ottke had the advantage of knowing the scores all his career. That is a public secret. Of course there are naive people, who believe everything is by the book in Germany. Dream on. Why do you think, he ran for the last or two last rounds in a close fight so many times? Why wasn't he worried about losing the fight? I know, that it also happens from time to time in Denmark. I know it from an inside source, but I won't mention his name. But trust me it is solid! We are talking way up in DPBF (the danish federation).

Sauerland moved his business to Austria. Why? Because he likes the alps? Or because he could get a federation that would do what he asked for? Do the math. He had troubles with the german federation, which became more and more controlled by Kohl. So he found a new place. Germany wasn't big enough for both.

In cycling everybody closed their eyes. Not only the people of the sport, but also journalists. Nobody wrote about doping, unless somebody got convicted. For decades noone tried to catch the dopers. Despite all they had to do was look in the cycling teams trash cans. Boxing journalists are the same breed. Sad! Look at the internet. Press releases are disguised as news. People from promoters, managers, matchmakers are allowed to write articles anonymous praising their fighters twisting resumes of fights. Tv-commentaors in Europe has their head up the promoters asses, so they can sell any loss as a win. And people sit in front of their tv repeating like parrots: "Hey, it was a close fight".

Ottke knew the scores all his career, and that detracts from his accomplishments big time!

Was some of it a bit of topic? I don't care! I spoke my piece.

Jens

PS. And don't forget, it was always a dangerous opponent. Undefeated in 14 fights.

[emanuel_augustus]

The most depressing thing is that people roll out the "it was a close fight" excuse. The scoring is biased. How are judges elected for a world title fight? Do you really think, that it is the organisations who do that without interference? No, the selection is heavily influenced by the promotors. It is something that often is negotiated in the contract for the fight.

Bullcrap. Look at Ottke's record. The judges were invariably from various countries: Italy, Spain, U.S., etc. You're telling me they were all corrupt?

[emanuel_augustus]

I also give you this old article from ESB. Good stuff:




The German Myth

By Marty Mulcahey - MaxBoxing.com

18.12 - Quick, name the last boxer to be blatantly robbed of a decision in Germany?

I couldn't think of one off the top of my head either. Yet Roy Jones, a host of others, and now Max Kellerman, act as if this is a weekly occurrence. Kellerman stated on last Friday's show that, "If (Eric) Harding goes over to Germany and fights Michalczewski he'll get robbed. He'll probably eek out a decision, and get robbed. Or win comfortably even, and get robbed."

As a student of boxing, Kellerman should think twice before making statements like that to a national audience. I understand that he can not check facts as they come out of his mouth, but those comments, seemingly, have no basis in reality. Where did the notion of crooked judging in Germany find its genesis? Roy Jones and other boxers have a personal agenda for not wanting to travel to Germany. I can understand that. They can use a potential judging controversy as a bargaining chip to fatten up their end of the purse. Unfortunately, a media created perception, even when false, has a way of becoming reality in the USA. Imagine the horror of German boxers, if the only thing they knew about American boxing was the apparently corrupt judging going on in Las Vegas or New York City.

Perhaps Kellerman should ask his friend and colleague, Teddy Atlas, about fair scoring in Germany. As a trainer, Teddy Atlas took Michael Moorer to Germany, and won a close fight (The Ring magazine scored 116-112 for Moorer) against hometown favorite Axel Schulz for the IBF title. Frans Botha also got a decision win over the popular Schulz in Germany, in a fight that many believe (The Ring magazine voted 116-114 for Schulz) Axel should have won on the scorecards. Those bouts were for the heavyweight championship of the world, which, I would think, is worth stealing more than any title Roy Jones holds. If Moorer and Botha can get fair judging with boxing's most prized possession hanging in the balance, why couldn't others? Why didn't those wicked Germans find a way for Schulz to win the heavyweight title on the scorecards? How could those power mad Germans allow average boxers like Tyrone Booze, Nestor Giovannini and Glen Catley to walk into their country and win titles from German boxers?

Henry Maske, the most popular boxer in Germany since Max Schmeling, lost a 12 round decision to Virgil Hill for the IBF & WBA light heavyweight titles. Yet, Roy Jones, and others want us to believe that Dariusz Michalczewski, who does not enjoy the popularity of a Maske, is going win no matter what 'Super Jones' does? I would even venture to say that in a stadium of 30,000, up to 30 percent would be rooting for Roy Jones. The same way the Germans rooted for Chris Byrd when he defeated Vitali Klitschko for the WBO heavyweight title. Even if, by some miracle, Roy Jones is robbed of an obvious victory, he can use it to his advantage the way he did the Seoul Olympics. Gold Medal winners Kenedy McKinney, Andrew Maynard and Ray Mercer did not receive as much exposure as Roy Jones, because of the way he was robbed.

The following is a list of foreign boxers which have won a world title in Germany since 1990. I chose 1990 because it coincides with the current renaissance of boxing in Germany.

Frans Botha W 12 Axel Schulz IBF heavyweight 1995
Michael Moorer W 12 Axel Schulz IBF heavyweight 1996
Chris Byrd TKO 10 Vitali Klitschko WBO heavyweight 2000

Tyrone Booze W 12 Ralf Rocchigiani WBO cruiserweight 1992
Nestor Giovannini W 12 Markus Bott WBO cruiserweight 1993
Nestor Giovannini W 12 Markus Bott WBO cruiserweight 1993
Carl Thompson W 12 Ralf Rocchigiani WBO cruiserweight 1997

Virgil Hill W 12 Henry Maske IBF/WBA light heavyweight 1996

Chris Eubank W 12 Graciano Rocchigiani WBO super middleweight 1994
Glen Catley TKO 12 Markus Beyer WBC super middleweight 2000

Armand Kranjc TKO 6 Bert Schenk WBO middleweight 2000
(both Kranjc and Schenk are based in Germany but Schenk is the German boxer)

Artur Grigorian KO 6 Marco Rudolph WBO lightweight 1998
(both Grigorian and Rudolph are based in Germany but Rudolph is the German
boxer)

Can anyone come up with a similar list of bad decisions rendered in Germany since 1990? I am not naïve enough to think that there is no home turf, or promotional, advantage for German boxers. Undoubtedly, there is, just as there is for the hometown fighters in the USA. The Thomas Tate loss to Sven Ottke was, by various accounts, questionable. Some observers believed the cut that forced the stoppage was caused by a punch, not a headbutt, as the Italian referee ruled. I can name five circumstances in the USA where it was equally difficult to tell if a cut was caused by a punch or headbutt. Referees tend to rule cuts the result of headbutts, since it is the most common cause of lacerations. Other than that incident, which was not judging related, I have a hard time finding obviously bad decisions, such as, Oscar Larios vs. Willie Jorrin, Ivan Alvarez vs. Bones Adams, or Hugo Dianzo vs. Paulie Ayala, all of which took place in America, on ESPN2. Maybe, Latin American boxers should refuse to come to America and fight on ESPN2. It seems obvious that they are getting robbed every time they venture across the Rio Grande. An assumption which seems to have more basis in fact than this German thesis making the rounds.

[Axe]

Barber, Griffin, Hill, Tiozzo (though DM lost here, way past his prime), and Rocky were all rated top 5 in the world...Hill was rated at #1 in the world heading into his fight with DM.

Imo DM has the better resume, and all his biggest wins were clear-cut, unlike those of Ottke.

[Jens S]

Emmanuel, I don't have the time for a proper reply. First of all Marty is nice guy. He has been on the internet for a decade with his writings, but he mentions four fights that are stoppage wins. Well, what do they tell? Nothing, though we saw how Krasniqi was counted out against Brewster and allowed to continue. Yes, the referee counted to ten, and the homefighter continue. I doesn't seem suspicious to you? Secondly some of those fights were eerie close on the scorecards. I had Moorer winning 117-111 and The Ring had it 119-109 as far as I remember. It was a SD! Thirdly, some of the fighters had big promoters behind them, who could get there hjudges they wanted.
I'll be back tomorrow.

Jens

[Axe]

I for one agree with what Marty is saying. Germany has had its shares of atrocious decisions (mainly under Sauerland) but the States can be just as bad at times. Every country can have an unfair "homefield advantage" at some time or another. Ottke's career seemed to have more of these decisions than most, but a guy like DLH has had his share of dubious calls as well, and it didn't make him any less great (though his excellent opposition makes up for these facts).

[Flurry]

Well, I am a dane and I don't hide. I am no chicken hiding behind a fake name without saying where I am from. Tom Tocca said it wasn't robbery, but he is from Germany. So he doesn't count? Now I was a Lennox Lewis fan, so anything I say about him doesn't count? Wow, the forum would be silent very soon then, if our opinions doesn't count when we talk about our favorite fighters.

The most depressing thing is that people roll out the "it was a close fight" excuse. The scoring is biased. How are judges elected for a world title fight? Do you really think, that it is the organisations who do that without interference? No, the selection is heavily influenced by the promotors. It is something that often is negotiated in the contract for the fight. The corruption scandal in football in Italy, was actually just somebody trying to do the same in another sport. If a judge sees the fights "right", the promotor will lean on the organisation to get him again. If not, it is the other way around. If a judge becomes a "house judge" by a big promotor, he will make good money. A judge gets around 2.000 $ + expenses for a world title fight. All he has to do is scoring it a 7-5 instead of a 5-7 and he is inside. If a fight in reality was 5-7 and the judge scored it 7-5. How do you think, he would have scored it, if it was 4-8? 6-6 or 6-5-1? Do you really believe that the judges are just inept? That boxing is a clean sport? Why do 95 percent of all fights that most people see as close wins for the visiting fighter go to the home fighter in Germany? (and the same thing happens all over the world) Do you really believe they are influenced by the crowd? When Larsen fought Häussler, he won every round VERY clearly. Yet two rounds before the fight was over, all Häussler had to do, was win the last rounds to retain his title. Inept judges or did they keep him alive on purpose? There was no crowd believing Häussler did well. What made them score like this? In the end it was luckily to much to hide away. The scandal would have been to much. Even german press would write about it.

Ottke had the advantage of knowing the scores all his career. That is a public secret. Of course there are naive people, who believe everything is by the book in Germany. Dream on. Why do you think, he ran for the last or two last rounds in a close fight so many times? Why wasn't he worried about losing the fight? I know, that it also happens from time to time in Denmark. I know it from an inside source, but I won't mention his name. But trust me it is solid! We are talking way up in DPBF (the danish federation).

Sauerland moved his business to Austria. Why? Because he likes the alps? Or because he could get a federation that would do what he asked for? Do the math. He had troubles with the german federation, which became more and more controlled by Kohl. So he found a new place. Germany wasn't big enough for both.

In cycling everybody closed their eyes. Not only the people of the sport, but also journalists. Nobody wrote about doping, unless somebody got convicted. For decades noone tried to catch the dopers. Despite all they had to do was look in the cycling teams trash cans. Boxing journalists are the same breed. Sad! Look at the internet. Press releases are disguised as news. People from promoters, managers, matchmakers are allowed to write articles anonymous praising their fighters twisting resumes of fights. Tv-commentaors in Europe has their head up the promoters asses, so they can sell any loss as a win. And people sit in front of their tv repeating like parrots: "Hey, it was a close fight".

Ottke knew the scores all his career, and that detracts from his accomplishments big time!

Was some of it a bit of topic? I don't care! I spoke my piece.

Jens

PS. And don't forget, it was always a dangerous opponent. Undefeated in 14 fights.

What a long winded post detracting from the subject, you will excuse if I cant be bothered to read all of it with the actual topic at hand.

Right, I got the drift, you thought Larsen won the fight. Fair enough. Fine, now we move on :good

[Flurry]

I for one agree with what Marty is saying. Germany has had its shares of atrocious decisions (mainly under Sauerland) but the States can be just as bad at times. Every country can have an unfair "homefield advantage" at some time or another. Ottke's career seemed to have more of these decisions than most, but a guy like DLH has had his share of dubious calls as well, and it didn't make him any less great (though his excellent opposition makes up for these facts).

Good post, actually I tend to believe judging in the US is far more crooked, of the few german based fighters who fought a title bout over there that went the route practically all got robbed, most notably of course Schulz and Sturm.

Ottke, who was no puncher had to go the distance in virtually every fight of his. So its understandable there were some closer fights amongst them with some fight fans supporting the respectively other fighter

If you take into consideration that his decisive wins over Brewer (2nd fight) and Mitchell were officially ruled SDs you can figure he almost got robbed twice on his home soil.

[Flurry]

Barber, Griffin, Hill, Tiozzo (though DM lost here, way past his prime), and Rocky were all rated top 5 in the world...Hill was rated at #1 in the world heading into his fight with DM.

Imo DM has the better resume, and all his biggest wins were clear-cut, unlike those of Ottke.

Thats a very strong point you made there, Axe. Initially I was leaning towards DM as well not surprisingly as he had always been my fav fighter.

When trying to be objective some other aspects come to mind as well

Overall Ottke probably fought more top tenners than DM did who admittedly fought his share of - lets call them less than stellar title challengers for want of a better term. Ottke fought and beat Tate twice, Brewer twice, Mundine, Larsen, Johnson, Butler, Starie, Marcussen. One could add reid here whom he officially beat though the win was dubious. Thats lots of former champs and some others who went on to become champs after he had beaten them.

DM almost unified the division when he beat Hill (3 out of 4 major belts) but was stripped of two oif them instantly, never defended WBA nor IBF. Ottke only unified two belts but then again he went on to defend the two of them several times against strong comp. DM had more title defenses, Ottke slightly fewer but against the more demanding opponents. DM won a title at cruiser he never defended, Ottke started his pro career at 175 then dropped down to 168 in his 10th pro fight or so, never won titles in different divisions.

All in all a toss up for me

[Odo]

I for one agree with what Marty is saying. Germany has had its shares of atrocious decisions (mainly under Sauerland) but the States can be just as bad at times. Every country can have an unfair "homefield advantage" at some time or another. Ottke's career seemed to have more of these decisions than most, but a guy like DLH has had his share of dubious calls as well, and it didn't make him any less great (though his excellent opposition makes up for these facts).


Well spoken,axe!

I have seen a couple of hometown decisions in Germany like Sturm's title win against Velasquez,but neither would I say that Germany is worse than other nations.IMO countries like Italy,or Spain are much worse.
Of course blatant robberies like May vs Serrat,or Grigorian vs Zegan have taken place in Germany,too.
However,whenever a fightes fights on foreign soil he for sure knows that a close fight isnt enough to have another victory in his fight record.The rules of this game are no secret.
Dubious decisons have happened in a lot of countries.Germany isnt worse than the USA,or England,but much better than some other important box markets.

[Flurry]

Well spoken,axe!

I have seen a couple of hometown decisions in Germany like Sturm's title win against Velasquez,but neither would I say that Germany is worse than other nations.IMO countries like Italy,or Spain are much worse.
Of course blatant robberies like May vs Serrat,or Grigorian vs Zegan have taken place in Germany,too.
However,whenever a fightes fights on foreign soil he for sure knows that a close fight isnt enough to have another victory in his fight record.The rules of this game are no secret.
Dubious decisons have happened in a lot of countries.Germany isnt worse than the USA,or England,but much better than some other important box markets.

Agreed, Grigorian vs Zegan was a blatant robbery, then Hoffmann got a few gifted decisions along the way, Kotiev Santos the first was a robbery, the may fight you mentioned which if I remember correctly took place in eastern germany and saw the crowd booing the "winner" quite vehemently and there undoubtedly were several more. Incidentally, Velasco vs Sturm was definitely not one of them :hey but anyway, no one s disputing there have been crooked decisions
but

a) considering there have been hundreds of title bouts staged here over the years the percentage of those one could call a robbery is considerably much smaller than the rumour has made out to be and
b) thats not exactly the topic of this thread, its a tad sad people keep attempting to hijack the thread and turn in into that direction. Though its valid where it concerns one of the two fighters in question, along the line that an alleged or genuine gifted win either of them was granted would in effect tarnish his (resp.) legacy

[Flurry]

Despite the fact i myself voted they were about the same level I cant hide the fact Im rather thrilled Darius is winning in this poll :yep Go darius go

[sean]

i am going for D/M.

D/M was a true fighter willing to put it all on the line over many years , giving everything to get his opponent out of there and had a great will to win , willing to suck it up, to give it.

opposition wise , technically ottke might nick it.

but why i would not vote for ottke is that he new the scorecards in every fight and used his style to fight according to the scorecards.

for example the ottke v larson fight.
very boring, herdly 2 to 3 pounches landed by either boxer per round.

come up to the 12th when anyone who does not know the scorecard must think its very close and what happens, ottke does not throw or land a single punch in the 12th happy to see out the round on his feet .

D/M would have gone out all guns blazing, whether he was up on the cards or not.

to much of ottke`s career to me was not the bad decisions, i had brewster winning the 1st fight and reid winning, but the fact that it was like a poker player knowing all his opponents cards and knowing when to fold and when to bid.

basically ottke had a stacked deck, whereas /dm IMO was a true warrior .

[Axe]

Thats a very strong point you made there, Axe. Initially I was leaning towards DM as well not surprisingly as he had always been my fav fighter.

When trying to be objective some other aspects come to mind as well

Overall Ottke probably fought more top tenners than DM did who admittedly fought his share of - lets call them less than stellar title challengers for want of a better term. Ottke fought and beat Tate twice, Brewer twice, Mundine, Larsen, Johnson, Butler, Starie, Marcussen. One could add reid here whom he officially beat though the win was dubious. Thats lots of former champs and some others who went on to become champs after he had beaten them.

DM almost unified the division when he beat Hill (3 out of 4 major belts) but was stripped of two oif them instantly, never defended WBA nor IBF. Ottke only unified two belts but then again he went on to defend the two of them several times against strong comp. DM had more title defenses, Ottke slightly fewer but against the more demanding opponents. DM won a title at cruiser he never defended, Ottke started his pro career at 175 then dropped down to 168 in his 10th pro fight or so, never won titles in different divisions.

All in all a toss up for me

Looking over Ottke's resume it does look a litte closer for me now, on paper at least. I do think he may have fought more top 10 opponents, but with DM facing more top 5 opponents. I still say DM accomplished more but that is just my opinion, others are welcome to theirs. And I do agree with you regarding the Mitchell fight, the American came on strong late but only because Sven already had the fight legitimately in the bag and got on his bike.

And fair enough, some of the things we have seen in the States have been truly disgraceful, the Schulz fight for one, Lewis vs Holyfield for another, the list goes on.

By the way, I remember discussing the Barber fight with you a while back. I found a link to a Ring mag archive that confirms he was top 5 going into the DM fight: [Only registered and activated users can see links]

These are the end of 1993 ratings, Barber was #5. He beat Piper in early '94 and Charles Williams (rated at #4) went down to 168 and lost to James Toney, so when he faced DM in September Barber would have been at least #4 in the world, according to Ring.

[Flurry]

Looking over Ottke's resume it does look a litte closer for me now, on paper at least. I do think he may have fought more top 10 opponents, but with DM facing more top 5 opponents. I still say DM accomplished more but that is just my opinion, others are welcome to theirs. And I do agree with you regarding the Mitchell fight, the American came on strong late but only because Sven already had the fight legitimately in the bag and got on his bike.

And fair enough, some of the things we have seen in the States have been truly disgraceful, the Schulz fight for one, Lewis vs Holyfield for another, the list goes on.

By the way, I remember discussing the Barber fight with you a while back. I found a link to a Ring mag archive that confirms he was top 5 going into the DM fight: [Only registered and activated users can see links]

These are the end of 1993 ratings, Barber was #5. He beat Piper in early '94 and Charles Williams (rated at #4) went down to 168 and lost to James Toney, so when he faced DM in September Barber would have been at least #4 in the world, according to Ring.


Well balanced post there, as usual axe matey. Interesting stuff you digged out concerning Barber. :good I remember he also took the unbeaten tag off Andrea Magi, the only one ever to be able to floor Maske throughout the german´s entire pro career.

[Axe]

Despite the fact i myself voted they were about the same level I cant hide the fact Im rather thrilled Darius is winning in this poll :yep Go darius go

:lol:

:good

[Flurry]

i am going for D/M.

D/M was a true fighter willing to put it all on the line over many years , giving everything to get his opponent out of there and had a great will to win , willing to suck it up, to give it.

opposition wise , technically ottke might nick it.

but why i would not vote for ottke is that he new the scorecards in every fight and used his style to fight according to the scorecards.

for example the ottke v larson fight.
very boring, herdly 2 to 3 pounches landed by either boxer per round.

come up to the 12th when anyone who does not know the scorecard must think its very close and what happens, ottke does not throw or land a single punch in the 12th happy to see out the round on his feet .

D/M would have gone out all guns blazing, whether he was up on the cards or not.

to much of ottke`s career to me was not the bad decisions, i had brewster winning the 1st fight and reid winning, but the fact that it was like a poker player knowing all his opponents cards and knowing when to fold and when to bid.

basically ottke had a stacked deck, whereas /dm IMO was a true warrior .

True what you said about Ottke knowing the scorecards, not sure if in all of his fights but seems in quite a few, cos that was something that was mentioned by the TV-commentators. Now, I ve often wondered if that was such unique in itself or maybe it wasnt and it is rather common, you sometimes hear that sort of stuff, when listening to whats been said in a corner during an interval, that a coach would tell his man "you re behind, you have to do something", one doesnt know if its just the coaches opinion or if he has checked with the judges scorecards.

[boxexpert]

dariusz was one of the greatest lightheavy-weight of all time. his style was always very specatacular and attractive to watch.

ottke was not as half as good. throwing some pitty-pat hands and running away. he has a very boring style.

so, no compare between both because dariusz would have beaten the crap out of him

[Alonzo]

on paper Otthe achieved more I would say, but everyone who saw few fights of both know who is the better fighter for sure...

You ain't know shit about boxing man... Ottke would own Darius anytime , anywhere at any weight:bbb

[pioterbezkitu]

You ain't know shit about boxing man... Ottke would own Darius anytime , anywhere at any weight:bbb

:rofl

[*BOX_FAN*]

According to me Darius. His performance against Hill was amazing. Tiger(Prime) vs RJJ(Prime) thread would be also interesting :hey