Stanley Ketchel: All-time great or no?

[JAB5239]

- - As I've mentioned in volume, Scully the only guy I'm interested in sparring though I'd have gladly taken up Two Ton Toney back in the day.

Don't kid yourself, we all know a stiff breeze you knock over your drunken Ass.

[Willie Pep 229]

Ketchel looks very ordinary on film to me. I've seen him vs Johnson and Papke. Ketchel lacks fast hands, accuracy, a jab and mixing of punches, no defense and is pretty much stationary in there. And he is short. He was a hitter though and had great staima.

His record of losing times ( five times if you count news losses to Langford and Klauss ) with three draws to me shows you who he was .

A very over rated old timer if you ask me. Below is Ketchel vs Papke. Ketchel looks like a jr middleweight here. Pakpe is the disadvantaged man in the cheeks trunk.

Not a top 10 or top 15 middleweight in my book.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cLZ-wfP-CHg

First off thanks for posting. It was fun trying to watch the fight. Lol

1. IMHO it was mainly Ketchel who was trying to make it a fight; Papke did most of the grabbing and holding. (Although on occasion Ketchel didn't hesitate to grab as well.) For the rounds we did see I would have given Ketchel the nod, he was the one trying to make it a fight. I felt Papke was doing much stalling.

2. As far as technique goes I would suggest you check out Langford-McVea, that film looks very much like this one, with one punch lunging and a whole lot of grabbing. In fact I would argue, just from these two films Langford didn't look like much better a technician than Ketchel.

3. For all the complaints made about Jack Johnson grabbing I would say that it looks as though grabbing was commonplace for all these fighters back then, Ketchel, Papke, Langford, McVea.

4. If you're going to wear tongs (sp) in the ring (which is OK it gave the ladies motivation to attend) one might want to lay on the beach for a couple of days first.

[Bundana]

The reason why he's rated so highly, by people who actually were around in his time (like Fleischer), could be because what was considered "good" boxing back then, probably differs a lot from what we today associate with that word, when it comes to boxing.

I've just finished watching that beautiful Bivol clinic against Zurdu Ramirez - but would something like that be appreciated back in the first decade of the 20th century? Maybe they were more impressed by a young, strong, fit man, who could push and wrestle his opponent around in the clinches for 20 rounds. That's what we have seen Ketchel do against Papke - in a fight so terrible, that it's almost unwatchable! To us, anyway... but maybe his contemporaries had a completely different view on things?

[QueensburyRules]

The reason why he's rated so highly, by people who actually were around in his time (like Fleischer), could be because what was considered "good" boxing back then, probably differs a lot from what we today associate with that word, when it comes to boxing.

I've just finished watching that beautiful Bivol clinic against Zurdu Ramirez - but would something like that be appreciated back in the first decade of the 20th century? Maybe they were more impressed by a young, strong, fit man, who could push and wrestle his opponent around in the clinches for 20 rounds. That's what we have seen Ketchel do against Papke - in a fight so terrible, that it's almost unwatchable! To us, anyway... but maybe his contemporaries had a completely different view on things?

- - How did Bivol impress you more than Zorro?

Seemed to me a gentlemanly spar with both features completely intact with neither hurt at any point.

[Bundana]

- - How did Bivol impress you more than Zorro?

Seemed to me a gentlemanly spar with both features completely intact with neither hurt at any point.

For sure, it wasn't a Gatti vs Ward slugfest - but the way Bivol defused and controlled a bigger, hard-punching oppenent was pretty impressive. At least I thought so... but maybe it's just me?

[Dr. Z]

First off thanks for posting. It was fun trying to watch the fight. Lol

1. IMHO it was mainly Ketchel who was trying to make it a fight; Papke did most of the grabbing and holding. (Although on occasion Ketchel didn't hesitate to grab as well.) For the rounds we did see I would have given Ketchel the nod, he was the one trying to make it a fight. I felt Papke was doing much stalling.

2. As far as technique goes I would suggest you check out Langford-McVea, that film looks very much like this one, with one punch lunging and a whole lot of grabbing. In fact I would argue, just from these two films Langford didn't look like much better a technician than Ketchel.

3. For all the complaints made about Jack Johnson grabbing I would say that it looks as though grabbing was commonplace for all these fighters back then, Ketchel, Papke, Langford, McVea.

4. If you're going to wear tongs (sp) in the ring (which is OK it gave the ladies motivation to attend) one might want to lay on the beach for a couple of days first.

Jack Johnson designed his defense around clinching and offense too. And hitting and holding, mixing in some fouls and such. Like you said Ketchel; is tying to make the fight.

I have to point out a correction in your first quote. I know you didn't write it, but where did Ketchel knock out heavyweights? Not O'brien. Unless he is a heavyweight is under 175 pounds. So maybe you were technically correct, but I am very excited to learn about Langford vs Mcvey. I can't wait to see it on film. What are your charging and will consider a trade for some semi rare stuff? Don't get me excited this early in the morning. I'm just having my coffee. Surely you meant to say Mcvey vs Jim battling Johnson.

There is a lot of stuff out there on web. Langford can be seen on the web vs. Lang, Flynn and Jeannette. I highly recommend watching Langford vs Jeanette if you have seen it.

[Willie Pep 229]

Jack Johnson designed his defense around clinching and offense too. And hitting and holding, mixing in some fouls and such. Like you said Ketchel; is tying to make the fight.

I have to point out a correction in your first quote. I know you didn't write it, but where did Ketchel knock out heavyweights? Not O'brien. Unless he is a heavyweight is under 175 pounds. So maybe you were technically correct, but I am very excited to learn about Langford vs Mcvey. I can't wait to see it on film. What are your charging and will consider a trade for some semi rare stuff? Don't get me excited this early in the morning. I'm just having my coffee. Surely you meant to say Mcvey vs Jim battling Johnson.

There is a lot of stuff out there on web. Langford can be seen on the web vs. Lang, Flynn and Jeannette. I highly recommend watching Langford vs Jeanette if you have seen it.

Sorry I am all twisted around with your post. I never mentioned O'Brien and never meant to imply he KOed Johnson or fought any other HW but Johnson.

Sorry again I may have confused McVea with Jeanette. I have no access to old rare films.

[Dr. Z]

Sorry I am all twisted around with your post. I never mentioned O'Brien and never meant to imply he KOed Johnson or fought any other HW but Johnson.

Sorry again I may have confused McVea with Jeanette. I have no access to old rare films.

No worries. You don't need access to old films, you have you tube! Some film collectors upload the stuff there. Enjoy

[QueensburyRules]

For sure, it wasn't a Gatti vs Ward slugfest - but the way Bivol defused and controlled a bigger, hard-punching oppenent was pretty impressive. At least I thought so... but maybe it's just me?

- - I score even rounds because the favorite almost always wins those rounds that almost always are the source of most scoring controversies. I had Bivol by 5-4-3Even that fits well into his average margin of winning rounds, but notably, most winning rounds were very close with this being one of the tightest fights of non power punching peers that could be had in boxing today.

Also sets up a future all Russian showdown with Beter if he make's past Yarde in England who packs his own punch, so thus Bivol the favorite gets kicked into the fight lottery as planned, so let's see how Beter does in England. Of all weight drainers, he's one of the biggest, making him also one of the frailest in any tough contest of distance, and this Yarde kid despite crudeness is purt fair tough with a good punch of his own allied with a nasty streak.

Understand, not claiming Bivol/Zorro was fixed, but just noting general realities of modern boxing.

[Ivich]

It is a puzzlement my friend.
Why is he ranked so high on the ATG middleweight lists? ....and so many, too?
Especially when this is so far, far away from what YOU are convinced of??!!
Why????

My response to you, Mr. GHOST, is that you're very, very likely asking the wrong question.



IBHOF Mini Profile:
Stanley Ketchel is considered by some to be the greatest middleweight of all time. A natural fighter who was never formally trained, Ketchel propelled himself to fame and the middleweight championship in just six years. Sadly, his career ended when he was murdered at age 24. Ketchel's life often resembled a torrid movie script. Orphaned at fourteen, he ran away from his adoptive home and lived as a hobo, traveling through the Canadian and American West. In Butte, Montana, he worked as a bouncer and also took on all comers in fights at a local theatre. He fought his first recorded professional bout-a one-round knockout-in 1903.


Ketchel lost only twice in his first 42 matches, all fought in Montana. In 1907, he went to California, where he won matches with several well-respected fighters, and by 1908, he had achieved national prominence. His twentieth-round knockout of Jack (Twin) Sullivan earned him the vacant world middleweight title. In his first three months as champion, Ketchel decisioned Billy Papke, and knocked out Hugo Kelly and Joe Thomas. In the rematch with Papke, the challenger punched Ketchel in the head as the fighters were meeting in the center of the ring to shake hands. The referee merely chided Papke, and the fight commenced. Still dazed by the illegal punch, Ketchel never seized control of the fight and was knocked out in the twelfth round. Six weeks later, Ketchel fought Papke with a savage fury and knocked him out in the eleventh, becoming the first middleweight champion to regain a lost title.


In 1909, Ketchel fought some of the most memorable battles of his career. In a no-decision bout against light heavyweight champion Philadelphia Jack O'Brien, Ketchel absorbed a solid beating for six rounds, but came back to knock O'Brien down four times in the ninth and tenth rounds. The fight would have been a knockout if O'Brien hadn't been saved by the bell. In their rematch, Ketchel demolished O'Brien in three rounds.


Feeling bold after his strong performances, Ketchel agreed to challenge Jack Johnson for the heavyweight championship. The champ far outweighed Ketchel and was at the peak of his career. For the first six rounds, Ketchel stayed out of Johnson's way. In the seventh, Ketchel caught Johnson with a stinging left to the jaw. Ketchel went on the attack in the eighth and on into the tenth round. Meanwhile, Johnson landed enough punches to bloody Ketchel's face. The moment of truth came in the twelfth round, when Ketchel pounded a right into Johnson's jaw that threw the champ off balance. To the roaring of the crowd, Johnson briefly sat down on the canvas but rose up enraged and blasted Ketchel with a right to the jaw. Ketchel, his mouth a ruin, fell and stayed down for the count.


After the loss to Johnson, Ketchel continued to rack up victories. In 1910, determined to get another shot at the championship, he went to a ranch in Conway, Missouri to train. In this remote locale, the melodrama of Ketchel's life caught up with him. He died with a bullet in his lung, shot by a jealous hired hand who claimed the handsome prizefighter tried to steal his ladyfriend. The killer, Walter Dipley, was convicted of first-degree murder and served 23 years in prison.


Had he not died, Ketchel might have accomplished much more, perhaps even winning the heavyweight championship. At it was, he built a great record as middleweight champion and recorded 49 knockouts in 64 fights.




Hank Kaplan's CBZ - Ketchel record preface:
Ketchel is rated by many boxing historians as the best Middleweight ever; He punched out heavyweights as easily as middleweights; Stanley put tremendous pressure on his opponents and was an aggressive attacker who threw dangerous knockout punches from any angle with either hand; He was shot and killed by Walter Dipley, a jealous farm worker.

Nat Fleischer and Charley Rose both ranked Ketchel as the All-Time Middleweight; Herb Goldman ranked him as the All-Time Middleweight; He was inducted into the Ring Boxing Hall of Fame in 1954 and the International Boxing Hall of Fame in 1990.

The IBRO:
1. Harry Greb
2. Sugar Ray Robinson
3. Carlos Monzon
4. Marvin Hagler
5. Mickey Walker
6. Stanley Ketchel
7. Bob Fitzsimmons
8. Bernard Hopkins
9. Charley Burley
10. Marcel Cerdan


Nat Fleischer (1971):
Middleweights:
1 - Stanley Ketchell
2 - Tommy Ryan
3 - Harry Greb
4 - Mickey Walker
5 - Ray Robinson
6 - Frank Klaus
7 - Billy Papke
8 - Les Darcy
9 - Mike Gibbons
10- Jeff Smith


Sports Illustrated (2009):
1. Harry Greb
2. Sugar Ray Robinson
3. Carlos Monzon
4. Marvin Hagler
5. Mickey Walker
6. Stanley Ketchel
7. Charley Burley
8. **** Tiger
9. Bob Fitzsimmons
10. Jake Lamotta

Monte Cox:
1. Harry Greb
2. Bob Fitzsimmons
3. Carlos Monzon
4. Marvin Hagler
5. Stanley Ketchel
6. Bernard Hopkins
7. Charley Burley
8. Marcel Cerdan
9. **** Tiger
10. Jake Lamotta

The story of Papke hitting Ketchel during the introductions is BS.
Johnson could have stopped Ketchel any time he went to work on him.
He knocked him down and picked him up twice.

Johnson bet on himself to stop Ketchel inside 15rds and told all his friends to bet accordingly .

Johnson carried Ketchel to make the movie of the fight more valuable ,as he was on a percentage of the film rights.
Ketchel was essentially done by the time he was killed,Wilson Mizner his manager paid guys to take it easy on him.