Greatest Heavyweights of all time list 1969

[billeau2]

True... especially if we go way back, where we have no (or very little/poor) footage of the boxers, we want to learn more about. Then contemporary reports is all we have to work with.

However, it's important to put things in their right perspective! Reporters who wrote in gloving terms about boxers around the turn of the last century, may have felt they were watching the greatest fighters ever. And they may very well have been right - up until that time! But would they have been as impressed with those boxers, if they had seen a Robinson, Louis or Pep?

True. We had a very unique situation in boxing because of essentually random historical factors. There were guys around who had actually worked with fighters from 3 generations. These guys imo were invaluable. I don't think much much of the media, these guys were puffers and great puffers at that! Whether it be an account of how great Jeffries was as stronger than ten men, or an article by Mailer on Foreman (one of the best pieces I ever read) its not unbaised information.

[Bundana]

Thats like some old timey sketch comedy right? If thats real footage, I could whip his ass.

Yes, it does look hilariousy bad! The funny thing is, that the two actors must have been trying their best to make it look real - so if nothing else, it probably gives us an idea of the exaggerated feinting that was part of boxing back then.

[billeau2]

Thats like some old timey sketch comedy right? If thats real footage, I could whip his ass.

Your seeing the way the sequence is filmed....which makes movement unnatural and punches seem slow because of the film speed. Instead analyze the actual fight happenings. Here are a few things

Notice that at this time both men are attacking from a much greater distance. They are using footwork to try to get into the range of the other. Also notice that the jab is thrown different, it is in fact more a lead hand thrown short and it is not a range finder so much as a punch that can be used quickly if the range changes suddenly. It cn also be used as a feint.

Most of the work done is setting up to make an attack, or, to punish the person for overextending his attack. The shot Fitz is caught with would look different if filmed with today's technology. What you have to notice is how Jeffries feints, throws his lead hand low to draw Fitz into that overhand shot. Fitz has to find a way to enter and in doing so squares up. Jeffroes sees this squaring up and sets a trap by getting Fitz to look low and defend the lead hand. Squaring up is always dangerous because your whole body is in range of punches when you are squared up.

Generally speaking the reason this sequence looks so strange is because when we watch a boxing match today when guys are more than swords length away from each other (3 feet or so) the fight stops until they close the gap. What you are seeing is men with footwork such that most of the action takes place outside of sword length where the traps are set, the feints thrown, etc. This looks funny...."gee why are they gesturing so much with their hands out there?" You would find out the reason for this quickly if in the ring: Watch Roy Jones set up for a triple combo to get some idea, in both cases most of the attack is the movement coming in quickly and punching to the openings created by your trap.

Our eyes don't see that, we see two funny looking men moving their hands a lot because our eyes, as modern fight fans, is trained to hone in on when two guys are in front of each other, squared up...and yeah if we increase glove size, make the ring a certain way, frame the length of the contest, you get guys throwing a lot of punches while they are squared up! If you then encourage this with punch stat numbers, judges that count any punches thrown and do not even have the championship rounds to watch a real shark go to work....well, you can see why boxing looks so silly when we see baldy windmilling around.

At the end of the day fighting is like anything else, I can tell you to look into a microscope to see all the single cell creatures and you will see nothing...your eye has to be trained to kow what to look for.

[Tom Cruise]

Yes, it does look hilariousy bad! The funny thing is, that the two actors must have been trying their best to make it look real - so if nothing else, it probably gives us an idea of the exaggerated feinting that was part of boxing back then.

Its harsh to say it looks hilariously bad, though there has definitely been a lot of evolution from then to now. You have to remember that punching an opponent in the face was a dangerous business back then. Gloves were not as big and padded so you could break your hands at any point. You also had to conserve energy as fights could go on for a heck of a long time. It also meant that plastering your glove to your chin did not give you the protection then as it does now or even 50 years ago.

[Bundana]

Its harsh to say it looks hilariously bad, though there has definitely been a lot of evolution from then to now. You have to remember that punching an opponent in the face was a dangerous business back then. Gloves were not as big and padded so you could break your hands at any point. You also had to conserve energy as fights could go on for a heck of a long time. It also meant that plastering your glove to your chin did not give you the protection then as it does now or even 50 years ago.

I'm of course not implying, that the real Fitz and Jeffries were this bad! But to see these two guys goof around, trying to recreate the fight... wouldn't you agree, it looks more like something from a Chaplin movie, than an actual prize fight?

[Bundana]

Your seeing the way the sequence is filmed....which makes movement unnatural and punches seem slow because of the film speed. Instead analyze the actual fight happenings. Here are a few things

Notice that at this time both men are attacking from a much greater distance. They are using footwork to try to get into the range of the other. Also notice that the jab is thrown different, it is in fact more a lead hand thrown short and it is not a range finder so much as a punch that can be used quickly if the range changes suddenly. It cn also be used as a feint.

Most of the work done is setting up to make an attack, or, to punish the person for overextending his attack. The shot Fitz is caught with would look different if filmed with today's technology. What you have to notice is how Jeffries feints, throws his lead hand low to draw Fitz into that overhand shot. Fitz has to find a way to enter and in doing so squares up. Jeffroes sees this squaring up and sets a trap by getting Fitz to look low and defend the lead hand. Squaring up is always dangerous because your whole body is in range of punches when you are squared up.

Generally speaking the reason this sequence looks so strange is because when we watch a boxing match today when guys are more than swords length away from each other (3 feet or so) the fight stops until they close the gap. What you are seeing is men with footwork such that most of the action takes place outside of sword length where the traps are set, the feints thrown, etc. This looks funny...."gee why are they gesturing so much with their hands out there?" You would find out the reason for this quickly if in the ring: Watch Roy Jones set up for a triple combo to get some idea, in both cases most of the attack is the movement coming in quickly and punching to the openings created by your trap.

Our eyes don't see that, we see two funny looking men moving their hands a lot because our eyes, as modern fight fans, is trained to hone in on when two guys are in front of each other, squared up...and yeah if we increase glove size, make the ring a certain way, frame the length of the contest, you get guys throwing a lot of punches while they are squared up! If you then encourage this with punch stat numbers, judges that count any punches thrown and do not even have the championship rounds to watch a real shark go to work....well, you can see why boxing looks so silly when we see baldy windmilling around.

At the end of the day fighting is like anything else, I can tell you to look into a microscope to see all the single cell creatures and you will see nothing...your eye has to be trained to kow what to look for.

I'm not sure why you're trying to analyze a mock fight between 2 actors, where every move is choreographed. What is that supposed to prove?

[billeau2]

I'm not sure why you're trying to analyze a mock fight between 2 actors, where every move is choreographed. What is that supposed to prove?

Because they are not goofs they are actually using the strategies and skills used...the figting distance is correct, though as said that jab would be a lead hand punch. When actors recreate something they can be inept (a lot of combat sequences were horrendous in movies before they started to take them seriously) or very good. Watch Sinatra tussle in the manchurian candidate...Cagney helped with the scene and most people don't know that Cagney was a Kodakan trained BB in Judo. The way the scene was filmed even is correct.

besides Fitz was a baldy!!! they got that right.