Least athletic SUCCESSFUL boxer in history [Archive]

OLD FOGEY

07-19-2007, 09:22 PM

rocky marciano
he one of my fav but i gots to speak the truth

I don't know about this. He was actually a pretty good all around athlete in high school and got a tryout with the Cubs. I think he was a strong man with a great deal of stamina and might have done well in sports such as wrestling or gymnastics if given the chance. Don't forget he didn't start his boxing career until well into his twenties and still managed to become outstanding.

rekcutnevets

07-19-2007, 09:31 PM

Greg Haugen? He was not exceptionally fast. He did not have a lot of power. He doesn't have the greatest chin ever. His stamina is good.

Don't get me wrong, he could take a punch. He had stamina. Look, to be a champ, you have to be good at some things.

joe33

07-19-2007, 09:32 PM

Tony tubbs?,he did win a belt

rodney

07-19-2007, 09:54 PM

rekcutnevets

07-19-2007, 10:10 PM

Suck my dick Rodney. I know you want to.

It is least athletic SUCCESSFUL boxer in history. Haugen is not athletic. Swallow that, and then swallow this.

Seamus

07-19-2007, 10:32 PM

rocky marciano
he one of my fav but i gots to speak the truth

He was one of the most athletic, a three sport guy in HS, who got a tryout in the majors, who had more stamina than damn near any heavy or cruiser who ever lived, and was as strong as an ox. What more do you want?

Someone, please give me an absolute definition of athletic? Is it posing and preening with cut muscles while you can't deliver a basic combo or fall at the first jab?

The term "athletic" or its horrible counterpart "athleticism" can not be graded in a vacuum. They need to be judged within the context of an athletic endeavor. Thus, any legit World Champion is extremely athletic by definition; he excels at the top level in an athletic forum. If you want to talk about guys who had skills in more than just boxing, that is different. But proficiency in basketball or baseball or rugby does not translate into being better boxer.

tays001

07-19-2007, 11:00 PM

He was one of the most athletic, a three sport guy in HS, who got a tryout in the majors, who had more stamina than damn near any heavy or cruiser who ever lived, and was as strong as an ox. What more do you want?

Someone, please give me an absolute definition of athletic? Is it posing and preening with cut muscles while you can't deliver a basic combo or fall at the first jab?

The term "athletic" or its horrible counterpart "athleticism" can not be graded in a vacuum. They need to be judged within the context of an athletic endeavor. Thus, any legit World Champion is extremely athletic by definition; he excels at the top level in an athletic forum. If you want to talk about guys who had skills in more than just boxing, that is different. But proficiency in basketball or baseball or rugby does not translate into being better boxer.

he wasn't very nimble on his feet could he of competed in football , basketball , track, base ball and hockey ? no and he failed at base ball

Slothrop

07-19-2007, 11:34 PM

rocky marciano
he one of my fav but i gots to speak the truth

This is not true. He was a very good baseball and football player.

OLD FOGEY

07-19-2007, 11:41 PM

he wasn't very nimble on his feet could he of competed in football , basketball , track, base ball and hockey ? no and he failed at base ball

Checking on this, he only played football one year, as a sophomore in high school, breaking in as a starter on the state championship team. He dropped out of school after that year.

Calling him a failure at baseball is a bit much. He seems to have been a good prospect whose career was interrupted by WWII. Who knows? And how many champions have done better at a second sport.

Dempsey1238

07-19-2007, 11:46 PM

cross_trainer

07-19-2007, 11:51 PM

He was one of the most athletic, a three sport guy in HS, who got a tryout in the majors, who had more stamina than damn near any heavy or cruiser who ever lived, and was as strong as an ox. What more do you want?

Someone, please give me an absolute definition of athletic? Is it posing and preening with cut muscles while you can't deliver a basic combo or fall at the first jab?

The term "athletic" or its horrible counterpart "athleticism" can not be graded in a vacuum. They need to be judged within the context of an athletic endeavor. Thus, any legit World Champion is extremely athletic by definition; he excels at the top level in an athletic forum. If you want to talk about guys who had skills in more than just boxing, that is different. But proficiency in basketball or baseball or rugby does not translate into being better boxer.

A guy without exceptional physical gifts....without particularly amazing natural reflexes, stamina, "chin", power, or speed, who compensates with boxing intelligence, skill, heart, or other similar factors.

OLD FOGEY

07-19-2007, 11:52 PM

Marciano also injured his thowing arm. Reason why the tryouts were a poor showing. Marciano may not look nimble ete. But what other style was he going to used for his body type?? He had the smallest reach in heavyweight history, so he was NOT going to out box any one. He was also a fast runner. Check how fast he ran to the netural conor in the Walcott fight. The reason he seem slow on foot was because he perfer to have his feet level to generated that knockout power.

Anyway--how can one be a catcher without being nimble. The other team would bunt you to death. Catchers normally do not run well, but they are certainly nimble.

On his running--I have seen a film of Marciano running after football passes and he really doesn't look that slow. Linebacker is not a position for a super slow man either.

Dempsey1238

07-20-2007, 12:00 AM

I just saying it was his stance, and foot work that made the Rock slow in the ring. He needed to brace his feet, get the footwork NEEDED , and powerful legs to get that knockout power going. If Ali could learn how to do that, he would be a powerful puncher. Most of the power punchers outside of Dempsey or Tyson were pretty slow on foot in regards to heavyweights. Louis, Marciano, and even Foreman were pretty slow on foot.

Seamus

07-20-2007, 01:15 AM

intelligence, skill, heart, or other similar factors.

as vague as these supposedly "unathletic" features are, I find them very protean to the concept of what is athletic. skill is only practiced by those who are blessed with the ability to harness their physical components best, heart is often merely a misnomer for stamina and recuperative skills... which leaves us with the amorphous "other factors."

the term athletic is entirely too vague which is just where it is prefered by those who want argue it in a vacuum.

Marciano Frazier

07-20-2007, 01:25 AM

he wasn't very nimble on his feet could he of competed in football , basketball , track, base ball and hockey ? no and he failed at base ball No, you're dead wrong. Marciano didn't make it to the Major Leagues in baseball(like 99.9% of all players who aspire to make it there), but he was one of the absolute best in his region and a local hero; he only got to the Major League try-outs because he was considered to have a serious chance at being a Major League player. Not only that, but he was an all-start linebacker in football and ran a record touchdown in his local stadium. Marciano was a very athletic guy.

Senya13

07-20-2007, 01:28 AM

Carlos Monzon

NickHudson

07-20-2007, 03:06 AM

i think it would be fair to say that strength, speed and stamina are 'pure' athletic qualities that translate across sports.

are there any boxers that have been succesful, despite deficiencies in one or more of these qualities?

tony tubbs is a good one, also buster mathis senior.

He was one of the most athletic, a three sport guy in HS, who got a tryout in the majors, who had more stamina than damn near any heavy or cruiser who ever lived, and was as strong as an ox. What more do you want?

Someone, please give me an absolute definition of athletic? Is it posing and preening with cut muscles while you can't deliver a basic combo or fall at the first jab?

The term "athletic" or its horrible counterpart "athleticism" can not be graded in a vacuum. They need to be judged within the context of an athletic endeavor. Thus, any legit World Champion is extremely athletic by definition; he excels at the top level in an athletic forum. If you want to talk about guys who had skills in more than just boxing, that is different. But proficiency in basketball or baseball or rugby does not translate into being better boxer.

Lacyace

07-20-2007, 03:32 AM

Joe Frazier

fists of fury

07-20-2007, 03:57 AM

Maybe Tommy Burns? I'm not that familiar with the guy, but I can't recall ever reading anything where he was praised for his athletic prowess.

cross_trainer

07-20-2007, 10:12 AM

This question is an Oxymoron. It is the equivalent of asking what was the worst team to ever win the Superbowl. Or what was the worst athlete to win a gold medal in the olympics. No champion can be a success without some degree of athletic prowess. Maybe some had more than others, but they would not have reached the level that did if they had lacked athletic ability
But "Worst team ever to win the superbowl" is not an oxymoron. Of all of the teams that ever played in the superbowl and won, one is bound to be worse than the others.

cross_trainer

07-20-2007, 10:32 AM

as vague as these supposedly "unathletic" features are, I find them very protean to the concept of what is athletic. skill is only practiced by those who are blessed with the ability to harness their physical components best, heart is often merely a misnomer for stamina and recuperative skills... which leaves us with the amorphous "other factors."

the term athletic is entirely too vague which is just where it is prefered by those who want argue it in a vacuum.

I'm referring to heart as determination to win, rather than a simple physical ability to sustain punishment. And skill, although I admit that it requires coordination, is more a function of one's ability to grasp how "it's all supposed to work" and practice diligently.

Athleticism can be defined. One's raw physical abilities--reflex, stamina, speed, power, strength--are generally essential to winning in sports. It would be hard to argue that a guy with blazing reflexes, a national-level 100 meter dash time, powerlifting score, Olympic lifting poundage, and iron man level abilities in marathons would not do well in sports. But boxing is a bit different--it's a skill sport where the fastest, strongest, and otherwise genetically gifted often lose to the fighters who can simply figure out their opponent's style better...as canny old Archie Moore would agree.

OLD FOGEY

07-20-2007, 10:36 AM

I'm referring to heart as determination to win, rather than a simple physical ability to sustain punishment. And skill, although I admit that it requires coordination, is more a function of one's ability to grasp how "it's all supposed to work" and practice diligently.

Athleticism can be defined. One's raw physical abilities--reflex, stamina, speed, power, strength--are generally essential to winning in sports. It would be hard to argue that a guy with blazing reflexes, a national-level 100 meter dash time, powerlifting score, Olympic lifting poundage, and iron man level abilities in marathons would not do well in sports. But boxing is a bit different--it's a skill sport where the fastest, strongest, and otherwise genetically gifted often lose to the fighters who can simply figure out their opponent's style better...as canny old Archie Moore would agree.

Who in your judgement is the poorest athlete to become heavyweight champion?

And the best?

cross_trainer

07-20-2007, 10:55 AM

Who in your judgement is the poorest athlete to become heavyweight champion?

And the best?

Hmm...

Poorest: Jersey Joe Walcott (at the age he was when he acquired the championship...he relied more on skill and weird rhythm than athleticism)

Best: James J. Jeffries

mcvey

07-20-2007, 04:34 PM

Who is it?
Tony Galento fought for the Heavyweight title and floored ATG Joe Louis,will that do?

mcvey

07-20-2007, 04:37 PM

Tony Galento fought for the Heavyweight title and floored ATG Joe Louis,will that do?
Willie Meehan fat and light hitting gave Dempsey fits.

Darthmage

07-20-2007, 04:40 PM

A guy without exceptional physical gifts....without particularly amazing natural reflexes, stamina, "chin", power, or speed, who compensates with boxing intelligence, skill, heart, or other similar factors.

I was going to say John Ruiz but then again he compensated with things like... hugging so there goes that idea.

TBooze

07-20-2007, 04:46 PM

Least athletic SUCCESSFUL boxer in history

His name is Joe Grimm and he feared no man.

NickHudson

07-20-2007, 05:35 PM

well put cross-trainer.

I'm referring to heart as determination to win, rather than a simple physical ability to sustain punishment. And skill, although I admit that it requires coordination, is more a function of one's ability to grasp how "it's all supposed to work" and practice diligently.

Athleticism can be defined. One's raw physical abilities--reflex, stamina, speed, power, strength--are generally essential to winning in sports. It would be hard to argue that a guy with blazing reflexes, a national-level 100 meter dash time, powerlifting score, Olympic lifting poundage, and iron man level abilities in marathons would not do well in sports. But boxing is a bit different--it's a skill sport where the fastest, strongest, and otherwise genetically gifted often lose to the fighters who can simply figure out their opponent's style better...as canny old Archie Moore would agree.

cross_trainer

07-20-2007, 06:24 PM

well put cross-trainer.

Thanks. :good

Pat_Lowe

07-20-2007, 08:34 PM

Carlos Monzon

Thats who I would have put, but when you think about it, his altheticism had to be amazing. He smoked, partied and fucked yet he was possibly the greatest middleweight ever and one of the best 15 round fighters ever. He never looked tired and the fact he did what he did with all the negative thigns in his life showed how good his athleticism had to be.

hdog

07-20-2007, 10:54 PM

Joe Frazier

Are you thinking of his performance on "The Superstars?" Man was he terrible. Stripped the gears on a bike, couldn't swim and didn't even know to jerk the weight over his head.

Dempsey1238

07-20-2007, 11:06 PM

The guys on Cheap Seats were just ripping into Fraizer during thsos events lol.

karmazon

07-20-2007, 11:23 PM

Lawrence Clay Bey

Vanboxingfan

07-21-2007, 01:21 AM

I personally think Foreman in the second part of his career wasn't particularly athletic in the conventional sense of the word and neither do I think was James Toney.

Seamus

07-21-2007, 03:12 AM

I personally think Foreman in the second part of his career wasn't particularly athletic in the conventional sense of the word and neither do I think was James Toney.

Yeah, those clips of Foreman draging a tractor uphill on a harness circa 1988 were decidedly unathletic.

Vanboxingfan

07-21-2007, 01:31 PM

Yeah, those clips of Foreman draging a tractor uphill on a harness circa 1988 were decidedly unathletic.

I wouldn't confuse strength with athletism. Foreman was always strong as an ox, he's in his 50's and he still likely stronger than most, but I don't think he ever had great endurance, nor was he particularly fast, especially in his 40's (course who is?). In his second career, (not the first one, when he was younger) he basically had three attributes, he was huge and he could take a punch and he could throw a punch, perhaps harder than anyone who ever boxed, but these in themselves are not athletic endeavours, and those are what won him the title in his second career.

I'm in my 40's and I know I can run faster than him, and I probably have better endurance, and I certainly have more speed, so I may be more athletic than he is, but he's obviously a hell of a lot better boxer and is far more powerful. And obvious these attributes would apply more to someone in their primes, such as Wlad for example or even a young Foreman who would be significantly faster and in better shape than the 40+ Foreman was. Hence my decision to throw his name into the mix.

BTW, I'm not trying to knock Foreman, he's one of my ATF's I'm just trying to contribute something meaningful to the thread but suggesting him (perhaps debatable) and Toney, unlike you.

It's easy to knock someone who put's forth a name or two so where's your list smart guy?

MrSmall

07-21-2007, 01:40 PM

Toney
Foreman

Cobra33

07-21-2007, 06:20 PM

Gene Fullmer

Ramon Rojo

07-21-2007, 06:27 PM

Maybe Tommy Burns? I'm not that familiar with the guy, but I can't recall ever reading anything where he was praised for his athletic prowess.

I agree with that.

He doesn´t even look athletic at all.

[Only registered and activated users can see links]

john garfield

07-21-2007, 06:53 PM

I think Paddy DeMarco, who was from my neighborhood and the lightweight champ for one bout, best qualifies for this. Tabbed "The Billygoat," his nickname says it all: head first and flailing. No coordination, just brute strength.

Cachibatches

07-21-2007, 08:12 PM

Gene Fulmer.

HAd an awkward style, but not known for much.

OLD FOGEY

07-21-2007, 08:45 PM

Gene Fulmer.

HAd an awkward style, but not known for much.

I think Fullmer was very athletic in a way though. He was strong, had a lot of stamina, and actually was fast on his feet in the ring.

Sonny Carson

07-21-2007, 08:50 PM

Monzon wasn't the best athlete. Earnie Shavers was a huge puncher but wasn't much else.

rekcutnevets

07-21-2007, 10:45 PM

I mentioned Greg Haugen earlier in this thread. Can anyone tell me a successful fighter that was less athletic than him?

karmazon

07-21-2007, 11:20 PM

I mentioned Greg Haugen earlier in this thread. Can anyone tell me a successful fighter that was less athletic than him?

Lawrence Clay Bey

rekcutnevets

07-22-2007, 02:00 AM

I was thinking more like a world champion, or at least a top contender.

Seamus

07-22-2007, 02:52 AM

When you start mentioning Frazier, Monzon and Fulmer as unathletic, this becomes the dumbest goddamned thread ever.

Shake

07-22-2007, 06:02 PM

I don't agree. For all his talent, a lot of what made Joe Frazier was mental more than physical.

Seamus

07-22-2007, 07:03 PM

I don't agree. For all his talent, a lot of what made Joe Frazier was mental more than physical.

He had great stamina, balance and quickness, three very athletic attributes.

Cachibatches

07-23-2007, 03:37 AM

When you start mentioning Frazier, Monzon and Fulmer as unathletic, this becomes the dumbest goddamned thread ever.
Fulmer was cited by writers and opponents alike as a guy that was not particularly fast or powerful.

OLD FOGEY

07-23-2007, 08:50 AM

Fulmer was cited by writers and opponents alike as a guy that was not particularly fast or powerful.

Fullmer was a strong man for his size who could and did bull people around in the ring. He was not a strong puncher, though.

He was faster on his feet than most of the men he fought, period. His stamina was extraordinary and was commented on at the time.

What opponent said he was not particularly fast or powerful? Basilio called him the toughest opponent he fought. Robinson spoke highly of him.

Fullmer was relatively short, had stubby arms, and had an unorthodox and often clumsy looking style, but he moved gracefully when he went into his "boxing mode" and I would judge him all-around a superior athlete.

Holmes' Jab

07-23-2007, 09:33 AM

Ernie Shavers

Vockerman

07-23-2007, 04:09 PM

Anyone ever looked at a photo of Jimmy Wilde?

The phrase "pencil necked Geek" springs instantly to mind. A scrawney thin frail looking pale boy - It still boggles my mind that he - as a Flyweight has 100+ KO's and place in the HOF. How the hell he did it with THAT body is beyond me

Just to head off the inevitable remark

- I don't care if he did fight TinkerBell Taxi Drivers from Tupelo -

100 KO's as a pro is still a huge achievement.

And he did it NOTHING to work with on a physical level.

Bob Mee, (Boxing Heroes p 335), stated, "Jimmy Wilde cut a pale, waif like figure, and conceded weight even to flyweights."

Even his IBRO bio says "The frail-looking Wilde, whose skinny limbs and protruding ribs belied the power of his punches, became the first flyweight champion to be recognized in the United States as well as in Britain."

Successful?

Nat Fleischer and Charley Rose both rated Jimmy Wilde as the # 1 all time Flyweight.
Herbert Goldman also rated Wilde # 1 in 1987.
Cox’s Corner currently Rates Jimmy Wilde as the # 1 Flyweight of all time.

john garfield

07-23-2007, 07:23 PM

[QUOTE=Vockerman]Anyone ever looked at a photo of Jimmy Wilde?

The phrase "pencil necked Geek" springs instantly to mind. A scrawney thin frail looking pale boy - It still boggles my mind that he - as a Flyweight has 100+ KO's and place in the HOF. How the hell he did it with THAT body is beyond me

Just to head off the inevitable remark

- I don't care if he did fight TinkerBell Taxi Drivers from Tupelo -

100 KO's as a pro is still a huge achievement.

And he did it NOTHING to work with on a physical level.

Bob Mee, (Boxing Heroes p 335), stated, "Jimmy Wilde cut a pale, waif like figure, and conceded weight even to flyweights."

Even his IBRO bio says "The frail-looking Wilde, whose skinny limbs and protruding ribs belied the power of his punches, became the first flyweight champion to be recognized in the United States as well as in Britain."

A perfect argument, V, for: punchers are born -- body type and muscles mean nothing. You can either do it or you can't. Lou Jenkins looked like a scarecrow...a right hand that would knock your head off.