Stanley Ketchel: All-time great or no?

[GhostofDempsey]

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

Not sure how I'm asking the wrong question. Yes, several historians ranked him as a top ten ATG MW...that is my question. On film, he looks crude and he didn't exactly stack up any great wins. O'Brien was on his way out, and Papke was never a great fighter. The Johnson fiasco was just that, a money grab with the understanding that Johnson would carry him so long as he didn't try to get cute. He plugged Johnson with a big punch that momentarily floored him, probably thinking he would get an upset win. It backfired, and he immediately got KO'd for his efforts.

I'm just not seeing greatness in Ketchel, not on film and not on his resume. Perhaps the legend was bigger than the truth. I think he was a good MW for his day, strong, big puncher, resilient, tough, but I can't find any room for him on a top 10 or even top 20 ATG MW list. I don't think I'm being unfair or unreasonable.

[Dr. Z]

Not sure how I'm asking the wrong question. Yes, several historians ranked him as a top ten ATG MW...that is my question. On film, he looks crude and he didn't exactly stack up any great wins. O'Brien was on his way out, and Papke was never a great fighter. The Johnson fiasco was just that, a money grab with the understanding that Johnson would carry him so long as he didn't try to get cute. He plugged Johnson with a big punch that momentarily floored him, probably thinking he would get an upset win. It backfired, and he immediately got KO'd for his efforts.

I'm just not seeing greatness in Ketchel, not on film and not on his resume. Perhaps the legend was bigger than the truth. I think he was a good MW for his day, strong, big puncher, resilient, tough, but I can't find any room for him on a top 10 or even top 20 ATG MW list. I don't think I'm being unfair or unreasonable.

I view it this way as well, not only does Ketchel former welter weight lacks a quality resume, and he also looks horrible in film. The fact the he died at 24 IMO somehow make some think he was something he was not. If you research who he fought you'll find a lot looses and draws his resume. More so than his wins. Now historians don't have the research tools we do so I must ask how many fights of Kechtel were filmed and what did Nat F see in person? Just trying to put this all together.

He has two quality wins on his resumes. Papke and the long in the tooth O'brein. Maybe Joe Thomas and Hugo Kelly can be view a top ten fighters of the time. That is a razor thin resume for any all time top 20 middleweight.

[Willow The Wisp]

Good posters here don't see it, great historians universally did. It's a puzzlement.

[Bundana]

Not sure how I'm asking the wrong question. Yes, several historians ranked him as a top ten ATG MW...that is my question. On film, he looks crude and he didn't exactly stack up any great wins. O'Brien was on his way out, and Papke was never a great fighter. The Johnson fiasco was just that, a money grab with the understanding that Johnson would carry him so long as he didn't try to get cute. He plugged Johnson with a big punch that momentarily floored him, probably thinking he would get an upset win. It backfired, and he immediately got KO'd for his efforts.

I'm just not seeing greatness in Ketchel, not on film and not on his resume. Perhaps the legend was bigger than the truth. I think he was a good MW for his day, strong, big puncher, resilient, tough, but I can't find any room for him on a top 10 or even top 20 ATG MW list. I don't think I'm being unfair or unreasonable.

I think the surprisingly high ranking of Ketchel by historians, raises a couple of questions.

Now I can understand, why those who lived through his era could have thought the world of him - in most cases likely based on colourful newspaper tales about his exploits. Or even based on having actually seen him in the ring - which, evidently, left a lasting impression with some (Fleischer).

But what about historians living today? They have not seen him live, and have access to the same footage as we have. How can they (IBRO) think so highly of him - when the available evidence points to a very crude guy, with next to no actual skills? It boggles the mind!


Another question could be: What does this tell us about the really old oldtimers, where no footage exists, and where all we have to go by is sensationalized newspaper reports? Take, for example, someone like Nonpareil Dempsey - who reporters at the time (1880s) thought was the best boxer in the world. But what does this even mean - is it possible, that he was just as (or even more) crude as Ketchel? What were the journalists judging him against? They had obviously no knowledge of things to come - and would probably find it hard to believe their own eyes, if they were visited by someone from the future, who showed them film of, say, Robinson and Louis! Would they even recognize a willie pep floating gracefully across the ring, as actual boxing?