View Full Version : FULLMER-PARET BEAT DOWN ON ESPN CLASSIC ON THURSDAY!
11-02-2005, 11:43 PM
This is one of the most brutal fights you will; EVER see. They showed some highlights during the Griffith doc. earlier this year but to the best of my knowledge it hasn't been shown since the fight was originally broadcast back in 61.
This is MUST SEE TV ... Not to be missed if possible. 5 p.m. Left Coast time 8 p.m. East Coast.
11-03-2005, 05:33 PM
I get to see it at 7
But I wont be there.
GOOD thing there replaying it, at 1100 pm. So I get to see the re run.
11-03-2005, 08:28 PM
In a way this was the fight that really sent Paret hurtling towad oblivion. This fight should have never happened a welter like Paret had NO business being in the ring with Fullmer. It's just about the most brutal beat down I ever saw.
11-03-2005, 08:29 PM
Well, Bucket: why not have had it happen?
Griffith did it.
He moved up to middleweight and beat Dick Tiger, who was better than Fullmer was.
Mickey Walker, Ray Robinson, Carmen Basilio, Ray Leonard, Thomas Hearns, and Roberto Duran accomplished the feat as well.
I think the fight should have have happened, and I know for a fact a lot of boxing folks were actually picking Paret to win that particular fight.
Benny was a very highly regarded World Champion, much like Levander Johnson was.
Paret got the title the hard way as did Levander.
Ring deaths are inevitable, Bucket.
Yes it was a brutal beating, but Benny had dished out a lot of brutal beatings himself.
It was just a case of a good bigger man beating a good smaller man, no more and no less, IMO.
11-03-2005, 08:46 PM
Wasn't it this beating that contributed to Benny's death in the Griffith fight? Was the fight competitive?
11-03-2005, 09:31 PM
Nobody I know favored Paret. The guy came into the fight at 34-10. He'd already been ko'd in his first bout with Griffith & frankly, Paret was not a great fighter. A good one, yes, but nowhere near the class of a bull like Fullmer.
There was no demand for the fight. Fullmer took it for the money & because he knew without a doubt like just about everybody knew that Fullmer would out muscle him because Paret wasn't a big banger & he simply didn't have the ammo to keep Fullmer off of him. Not to mention that Paret was not adept at all at fighting off the ropes.
& oh yeah, Paret by no stretch of the imagination was in the same class as Mickey Walker, Ray Robinson, Carmen Basilio, Ray Leonard, Thomas Hearns, or Roberto Duran.
11-03-2005, 11:53 PM
They were ALWAYS able to fit in 12 or 13 rounds in a hour.
I mean they show 12 rounds of the Moore Maxie fight.
Why would they show 9 rounds out of ten??
11-03-2005, 11:54 PM
We will agree to disagree, Bucket.
I just got off the phone with a guy that had favored Paret going into that fight.
I have to point out the Federico Thompson and the Griffith rematch where Benny was exceptional fighting off the ropes.
In fact; that was one of his strengths, playing possum and then winging back with both hands in windmill fashion.
But to use that line of reasoning saying he was in no stretch of the imagination in a league with those fellas: Kid Gavilan and Jose Napoles also failed in their bids for the middleweight title. Would you say those two Greats were not in a league with the aforementioned as well?
11-04-2005, 12:56 AM
Pisses me off that ESPN had a whole hour to show 10 rounds & they skipped the 9th. Why? The 9th round was crucial it's when Fullmer really took over & beat the crap outta brave Benny. The 9th totally set it up for the final denoument in the 10th.
11-04-2005, 01:08 AM
Why ? Because they don't know sh-t about boxing or the incredible gem of a library that they own...they are a disgrace.
11-04-2005, 06:11 PM
Fullmer wasn't just another middleweight champion, but perhaps the physically strongest middleweight of all time. I think of him as a middleweight version of Chuvalo or Jim Jeffries. Very tough, very hard punching, and from what I've seen and read he bulled around everyone he fought.
It was a mismatch for physical reasons. What chance would a welter like Paret have of keeping Fullmer off of him when few natural middleweights could do the same?
11-04-2005, 07:19 PM
I have all 4 Robinson Fullmer fights, and I agree Fullmer was pretty strong.
I did not think of it until Kid Achilles brought it up, but he is right, he is a Jim Jeffies in that ring lol.
He does not beat you with POWER punchs, he beats you with pressuer, pressuer, and WELL More pressuer, he swams you, he is all over you.
With todays refs of couse, I dont see Fullmer being able to do his game plan though, but still, I always ranked him in the top ten my self.
11-05-2005, 12:58 AM
Fullmer was one of the most underrated middleweights of all time because people did not appreciate his sometimes crude style. Look at the guys he fought: Ray Robinson (4 times), Dick Tiger (3), Gil Turner (3), Carmen Basilio (2), Spider Webb (2), Florentino Fernandez, Joey Giardello, Eduardo Lausse, Rocky Castellani. He lost 6 out of 73 fights. I rate him in the all time Top 10 of middleweights.
11-05-2005, 01:41 AM
I agree totally with Lytell. Fullmer is VASTLY under rated & was truly one of the all-time great middleweight champions. Paret? He's not even in the top 20-25 as an all time welter.
11-05-2005, 04:50 AM
You cant take Fullmers reign out of context. When you do it looks much better than it was. He beat Robinson for the title by fouling his way to a win. He was then knocked out in the return. He rewon a version of the title by beating Basilio. He then won a controversial decision over Webb to retain. He then got a controversial draw with Giardello to retain in a bout in which he fouled his ass off. Then when everyone was calling for a rematch with Giardello (who most felt won their first fight) he decided to defend against Basilio (who noone felt deserved it) instead of fighting Basilio he just danced around all night until his personal ref stopped the fight for no reason prompting Basilio to try to attack the referee. Then he gets another gift draw, this time against Robinson. Then he rematches Robinson and again fouls his way to a win. At one point hitting Robinson about FIFTEEN times after the bell. Ridiculous. He then wins a controversial decision over Florentino Fernandez in another fight that was "too close to call". Then he finally gets a real win against Paret. He then loses to Tiger in a one sided fight, gets a draw in the rematch which most thought Tiger won, and got a one sided ass kicking in the rubbermatch. He never rematched Webb, Fernandez, or Giardello despite the feeling by most that they either beat or deserved no worse than a draw, certainly at least a rematch. Instead he rematches a faded Robinson and faded Basilio. There were other contenders at the time that he was blocking out as well and there were also calls for him to move up and fight light heavy weights (which I dont fault him for). People were sick to death of his illegal tactics and when Tiger finally beat him a sigh of relief went up among purists. Im not faulting him per se but his career, especially as a champion, did have warts. He was a rugged and strong fighter but under a less than LOOSE interpretation of the rules he wouldnt have such a nice looking record.
11-05-2005, 12:45 PM
all fighters do not fight in the classic style of a joe louis or a sugar ray robinson. the really good ones make the best use they can of their God-given talent. your assessments of gene fullmer are those of a child not old enough to appreciate different styles. to say fullmer won those fights by fouling is disrespectful of his talent. he was a rough, tough, crude slugger who, incidently, in the first basilio fight and in the second tiger fight, actually used boxing techniques to befuddle his opponentsa (and there are more than a few people who believe fullmer got robbed in the second Tiger fight). only the best left hook ever thrown in boxing history put him on the floor for good in the second robinson fight. he dominated robinson in their first and fourth fights and, though I rooted against him in the second Webb fight and the Florentino Fernandez fight, I did not think he won either one. the third robinson fight may have been a gift, but every fighter in boxing history got a few of those. you have to learn to appreciate all styles and, I agree, Fullmer's was tough to stomach when I was a kid, but boy oh boy would I like to see him around today with these imposters. he would run them out of the ring.
11-05-2005, 03:21 PM
so i dont agree with you and you call me a child. thats mature. this "child" has probably seen more of fullmers fights than you have and to deny that he was a dirty fighter is ridiculous. he didnt bend the rules he flat out broke them. he didnt just win a few close decisions name me one time during his championship that a close decision went the other way for him. you cant. he got the benefit of every brake he could including using his own ring in fights, his own judges, and his own referee.
11-05-2005, 10:21 PM
by the way, even though I rooted against him, I thought Fullmer DID WIN the second Spider Webb fight and the Florentino Fernandez fight. (I erred in my last response). do not confuse roughhouse tactics with dirty fighting. fullmer was a bull and fought like one. he invented the term "winning ugly" but his record speaks for itself.
11-05-2005, 10:24 PM
name me one time a close decision went against Muhammad Ali (Doug Jones, Jimmy Young, Earnie Shaver, Ken Norton III), Joe Louis (Walcott I), Rocky Marciano (Lowry I, LaStarza I).
11-05-2005, 11:55 PM
A lot of what bodyblow wrote, is quite true although if I may, I would respetfullydisagree with the idea that in the Basilio fight it was stopped prematurely.
Carmen was hurt and hurt badly.
I would like to add, that Fullmer, to me, after seeing most every fight available to the public on him, was one of the most determined and powerful men at Middleweight who ever laced on a glove.
He punched much harder than one would think and I studied him very carefully. He was someone to fear in an era where men like Lausse, Perot ( The guy who stopped Lausse) Fernandez, Robinson, Greaves, Tiger, Giardello, and all those middleweight animals prowled.
Lets give the old Mormon from Utah his due, he rumbled with the best, had iron courage, and was made of steel.
He would DESTROY these pretenders today, absolutely destroy them.
11-06-2005, 12:08 AM
Mr Lipton, would Fullmer or Basilio beat Bernard Hopkins? Hopkins seems pretty tough and clever.
11-06-2005, 12:25 AM
In the rematch Basilio wasnt hurt at all. He hadnt even been hit by a punch at the point when the ref stopped the fight. Basilio was so upset that he tried to attack the ref and was pulled away by state troopers. It was a ridiculous stoppage. The first fight the stoppage was better but not great. Fullmer hit Basilio high on top of the head and Basilio bounced off the ropes and went into a crouch. At that moment the ref stopped the fight. He didnt even look to see if Basilio was hurt or anything. Basilio wasnt winning either fight but those KOs make Fullmers record look good and without a protective ref he probably wouldnt have either.
As to Lytells comment that Fullmer was "rough" as opposed to dirty. BOLLOX! Fullmer rabbit punched, hit low, headbutted like a billy goat, tripped and/or wrestled his opponents to the ground, threw elbows like they were jabs. You name it and Fullmer did it. Thats not rough its dirty. Period. That doesnt even address the fact that he often fought with "friendly" judges, referees, and more than once had his own personal ring imported to bouts.
11-06-2005, 12:44 AM
besides the rabbit punchs, I did not think Fullmer was dirty vs Robinson in fights 1 and 4.
OR all 4 fights.
He was ruff, but not relly dirty, Dirty is like Greb, or Zivic.
11-06-2005, 09:43 PM
and how many dirty performances by greb and zivic have you seen greek?
11-06-2005, 09:46 PM
No film of Greb, but I do know he was steping on Tunney's feet in one of there fights, and knockout a ref in other. :lol
Zivic did the works on Armstrong I belive. No I have not seen Zivic either, any film of Zivic anyway?
11-07-2005, 07:07 PM
I watched the fight on Classic and it was something to watch.
One could see after the 2nd round, that Fullmer was so much stronger. The way Fullmer mauled and manhandled Paret was impressive. Paret's courage was remarkable.
I wonder what Paret's corner was thinking around round 9.
How does a corner decide when to save their fighter so he can fight another day?
The strength difference in this fight reminded me of the later rounds in the Salvador Sanchez - Wilfredo Gomez fight, when you could see the beginning of the end.
Fullmer was quite the Pit Bull. The kind of fighter who could take years off of another fighter's career. Dirty Fighter? Hard to say. He did what he had to do to beat faster and more gifted opponents. How else would he have become a title holder and all time great.
11-08-2005, 03:22 AM
"Dirty Fighter? Hard to say. He did what he had to do to beat faster and more gifted opponents. How else would he have become a title holder and all time great."
Comments like these are hard to fathom. There is a clear cut criteria for what a dirty fighter is, its someone who clearly and consistently breaks the rules. Fullmer did, you can qualify it by saying "he did what he had to" but thats like saying its not cheating to take steroids in order to break babe ruths record, "I just did what I had to". Not much of an argument...
11-08-2005, 03:37 AM
Fullmer was in a fight, and he said so in the post fight interview.
Gene was stung by several hard shots throughout the fight, but was always willing to come back and won most of the torrid exchanges and was swollen and cut in the brutal affair.
Benny turned and spun the guy with his muscular torso and ripped biceps; but eventually Gene with his huge leg strength in the thighs and calves and with wicked, strength and soul sapping body and head shots wore the Cuban Welterweight King out to a knockout defeat.
11-08-2005, 04:33 AM
""he did what he had to" but thats like saying its not cheating to take steroids in order to break babe ruths record, "I just did what I had to". Not much of an argument""
Big difference. the referee is supposed to protect the fighters and take points away , even disqualifying , for fouling. A fighter gets away with whatever he can, its up to the ref to keep it within the rules.
11-08-2005, 05:20 AM
So the fighter has no responsibility to fight within the rules other than what the ref says? Thats B.S. especially considering many of Fullmers biggest fights where fought with a handpicked ref that wouldnt have DQd him if hed hit his opponent with an axe.
11-08-2005, 11:09 AM
If you consider Ali the greatest, thats how he won many of his fights. Unless grabbing behind the head is legal. the refs didn't warn him so he continued to do it.
Thats how klitschko beat samuel peter. i thought a warning should be given for excessive holding, but the ref allowed it, klit continued to do it and won the fight.
11-08-2005, 11:36 AM
[[[If you consider Ali the greatest, thats how he won many of his fights. Unless grabbing behind the head is legal. the refs didn't warn him so he continued to do it.
Thats how klitschko beat samuel peter. i thought a warning should be given for excessive holding, but the ref allowed it, klit continued to do it and won the fight.]]]
Fortunately I don't consider Ali the greatest, however grabbing behind the head is considered a legit defensive move. Excessive holding though is against the written rules and Ali often held excessively, though nothing like Ruiz. The rules will always subjective to any given ref.
In the Peter fight, Wlad significantly landed many more clean punches on Peter and was having to deal with a much dirtier and more dangerous fighter as Peter lands lots of rabbit punches, and at one point pulled Wlad's head down forcing a knee and hit him behind the head which was wrongly ruled a KD by the ref.
Every fighter ideally should start off a bout with a certain number of minor indiscretions held in reserve. However, many fighters will overdraw their account and have reputations of being exclusively dirty fighters and I guess Fulmer falls in that category. I'm a little mystified by the "his own ref" comments. Was this Morman out of Utah so well connected that his promoter gave him his own ref who traveled with him?
11-08-2005, 12:59 PM
Professional Boxing has brawlers.
Fullmer was no different than Duran, Gomez, Zivic, Petrolle, Marciano, Qwai, Pryor, etc.
Maybe fighters like Fullmer should be DQ'd in the Amateurs and the Olympics, but in Professional Prize Fighting it's common place.
This isn't Baseball, and taking steroids is different than throwing some elbows, grabbing, or an occasional head butt.
It may be hard to appreciate Fullmer's style of brawling or grappling, but it worked for him.
11-08-2005, 01:31 PM
I guess I shouldnt be so upset the next time Sammy Sosa gets caught with a corked bat :rolleyes
11-08-2005, 05:23 PM
Im glad Classic showed this fight. THIS is what Marvin Hagler was supposed to do to Duran and Leonard. The bigger guy should impose his will. Monzon and Napoles is a case in point also. Fullmer did it to Basilio also. Thats why I can never rate Marvin with a handfull of middleweight greats who have the strength of the superhuman. Kid Paret was a fine champ and a real good fighter, but he just didnt have the strength to beat a middle like Gene. People should think about these things when they talk about who might beat whom. It counts much of the time.
11-08-2005, 08:20 PM
Fullmer didnt impose his will on Basilio. That was and is the major drawback to both of their fights. Fullmer just stayed outside and boxed Basilio in that ugly herky jerky style that Don would later utilize almost exclusively. The two Fullmer-Basilio fights are probably his most boring fights on film. He freely admitted that he didnt want to engage Basilio in a shootout and was booed for not making a fight of it.
11-08-2005, 08:25 PM
to me fullmer may rate in the top ten- however- dick tiger took care of him- why- was fullmer a shot fighterand or was tiger that good? any feedback appreciated. fullmer would destroy any chump today the middleweight jeffries. thanks
11-09-2005, 02:49 AM
dick tiger was lucky to get a drw in the second fight of his three-fight series with fullmer.
11-09-2005, 03:00 AM
Fullmer was lucky to get the draw. The fight was held in his neck of the woods, it wasnt held anywhere Tiger was popular. Fullmer ran the entire time and refused to stand and fight. When he did in the first and third fights he got his butt whipped.
11-09-2005, 05:37 AM
I thought that holding behind the head was always considered a foul, the first time you did it as well as the sixtieth. PeteLeo.
11-14-2005, 07:26 PM
Fullmer stopped Carmen twice. Thats imposing your will. We all know how tough Carmen was and Gene did what he had to do.
By the way, I thought Fullmer won that second fight with Tiger also. Tiger could be outboxed because he thought IMO that it was beneath to chase a guy.
11-14-2005, 08:23 PM
The ref stopped Carmen twice. Its obvious from reading some of the posts here that the people using these fights to bolster Fullmers cred. havent seen either fight.
11-14-2005, 09:03 PM
Fullmer gave full credit to Tiger for lambasting him- particulary in their 3rd fight. Gene made no excuses whatsoever in the 3rd fight. He was decisively beaten by the better man.
11-15-2005, 03:17 AM
I saw fullmer /robinson IV tonight. fullmer must have hit robinson behind the head at least 50 times during the fight. Every time they were in a clinch, fullmer would land 2 or 3 untill robinson had no choice but to retalliate. No warning from the ref so fullmer continued to do it. During the klitschko/peter fight, lampley was going on and on about peter hitting klitschko behind the head. Big difference between the 2 fights. it looked like fullmer intentionally aimed behind robinsons head while peter was just swinging wildly at any available target.
11-15-2005, 03:44 AM
Come on, you guys get on to Fullmer about rabbit punchs, and yet say, you know what?? Jack Dempsey hit Tunney in the back of the head about 50 times lol.
Yes Dempsey was the master of the rabbit punch, and no one blames Dempsey for that tactic. But they pick on Fullmer for it??
Or how about Marciano with his rabbit and headbutts on Ezzard Charles??
Or Joe Louis's kidney shots vs Schmling in fight 2(And low blows in fight one)
11-15-2005, 03:38 PM
I've seen Fullmer-Basilio I and it was clear to me that Basilio was not only outboxed but outgunned. He was getting badly hurt when they stopped the fight, though he may well have survived the round. I haven't seen the rematch, though - can anyone who has give us a description?
The ORIGINAL Irish JQ
11-15-2005, 10:47 PM
In the rematch, Basilio wasn't hurt or anything. The referee just stepped in and stopped the bout, which prompted Basilio to scream at him "What the hell are you doing?"
Security had to hold Carmen back to keep him from going after the referee.
11-16-2005, 03:33 PM
Exactly irish. The second fight was as boring as the first with Fullmer reluctant to fight and Basilio to small to box with Fullmer. Late in the fight the ref steps in and stops the fight for literally no reason at all. Basilio hadnt taken beating, wasnt in trouble, nothing. The fight wasnt intense, there was no reason to stop the fight. Basilio went after the ref with his cocked fist and his cornermen pulled him away. State troopers swarmed the ring and held Basilio back and then his cornermen started arguing with the ref which prompted the state troopers to push them back. It was a joke. You couldnt beat Fullmer out west. If you were fighting Fullmer anywhere from the rockys to the Pacific then you could guarentee the best you could get was a draw. Dick Tiger had to beat him like a drum to get a decision as far west as SF. Giardello, Webb, Tiger, and Robinson were all robbed in Fullmers backyard and Basilio has two stoppages that probably would have been loses anyway but shouldnt have been TKO losses.
11-16-2005, 07:09 PM
seems to me fullmer got the decison against robinson in 1957 in the garden. i don't think those were fullmer judges.
11-16-2005, 08:53 PM
I find it difficult to sit here and read this boards comments about Fullmer being a dirty fighter. For all of you Ali lovers who spent so much time slobbering over his fantastic skills, which they were, he was allowed to foul more than Fuller dreamed of. Ali held every fighter he ever fought behind the head the entire fight and no referee ever really got on his ass for it. He was royality therefore allowed to bend the rules. Fuller was a crude strong guy who was not "pretty" therefore it looked worse than it was. If yr. gonna dig on Fuller, then do the same to the rest of the dirty fighters. Holmes educated thumbs were things legends are made as were many others. I have to agree with The Bucket, this guy was totally underrated. When Marciano threw those elbows, nobody got goose bumps. Hopkin's head has knocked out more than a few poor souls who never got the benefit of a referee. I could go and on but it wouldnt do any good. You see what it is you want to see. There is a hell of a difference between a rough fighter and a dirty fighter. Pedrosa was a dirty fighter, but Fullmer was rough fighter. Not everybody can dance.
11-17-2005, 05:00 AM
Dirty is dirty and Fullmer was dirty.
As for whoever made the comment about Fullmer-Robinson 1: Nobody is saying Fullmer couldnt win a fair fight. What Im saying is if you fought out west with him you could be damn sure you better beat him silly to get a draw. His fights with Robinson should be split down the middle not 2-1-1.
11-17-2005, 11:38 AM
What? someone else posting that Ali fought dirty? Glad to see I'm not the only one.
Fullmer fought dirty vs robinson. On the other hand, i saw fullmer/basilio last night and fullmer looked awsome without clutching or rabbit punching.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.1.8 Copyright © 2014 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.