Packey McFarland ND10 Mike Gibbons
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 8 фев 2014
- When Packey McFarland retired, he was lauded as one of the best pound for pound fighters of his time. Caught in purgatory, he couldn't make the then lightweight limit (not the 135lbs we know today) and had no light welterweight division to compete for honours in. So he fought anywhere between 135 and welterweight, and sometimes higher depending on trim he was. One of the very, very best to never win a title and one of the greatest fighters of all time, with his only loss still not quite verifiable and likely undefeated in his whole career of over 100 bouts, Chicago's favourite son had wins over ATGs such as Freddie Welsh and Jack Britton on his ledger when he retired.
Coming back out of his self imposed exile after nearly two years, Packey was sought after to take on the critics' new darling, Mike Gibbons, McFarland was not in his best shape. Gibbons had been on quite a roll, and whilst he'd had a very tricky outing against Soldier Bartfield a few months before he was younger and taller than the great veteran McFarland and widely considered the cleverest P4P fighter of the time.
In these highlights you see both men exhibiting their cleverness and masterful in-fighting skills. The papers were split, but most seemed to favour Packey, though they were undoubtedly swayed by how surprisingly successful he was. Some picked Gibbons, some felt a draw was fair.
One thing is certain; McFarland's stock only rises with a performance this game, taking the circumstances into account. Still undefeated, he never fought again, and should be remembered as one of the very greatest fighters ever.
For more rare footage like this I would strongly suggest you drop ragingbull_22@hotmail.com an email. 
Спорт
I am related to Packey McFarland. He was my great grandmothers sister's son. He is also ranked in the boxing Hall of Fame as one of the 50 greatest boxers of all-time. Never got a chance to fight for a title as amazing as that sounds. 106 wins, 1 loss and 6 draws. Not too shabby.
It's admirable and revealing how this century-old fight is modern in its style. Love these vintage bouts.
thanks so much 4 this excellent footage, i've wanted to see some of this fight for ages.
Nice, I haven't been able to find this since I was about ten.. My Great Grandpa.
Weird, my great-grandfather was MacFarland.
Let's beat the hell out of eachother some day.
Ryan Gibbons He and Tommy were outstanding fighters. Wonder if ur family has any fight film they could share ? Let me know.
My father had a poster of these two in our basement growing up . Wonder if we’re distant relatives lol . My great grandfather came here from County Mayo
@@michaelgibbons75 For sure.
Gibbons gang to the grave
Thanks for uploading!
As a British Pakistani man I feel proud.
James Cagney brought me here.
Its clear after watching these clips that Gibbons won. The newspaper men must have had a soft spot for McFarland giving him his due as a past great. Since he didn't get KO'd its all subjective anyway. Just note he didn't box again..
Mike Gibbons was considered at Master level in his day. There was the "Gibbons style" of boxing. Gene Tunney stated he studied Mike Gibbons above all others & tried to emulate him. Quite lofty praise..
***** @thewelshviper A friend of mine has much more footage of this fight and he considers it very strange that most newspapers went for Packey. He says it's Gibbons' fight by a mile.
Just been watching an interview with James Cagney, he said that McFarland was his hero.
Haha, this is how I came to this video as well.
@@SirMo :-)
wow. love to see the old training footage...funny when i first started training boxing little things like the resistance band and stair climbing.....they were inventing the wheel back then. the Shadowboxing was intriguing too, obviously striking must have been different with the type of glove and the clinching rules allowed back then.
Mike Gibbons was a master boxer, I sometimes wonder how his career would have gone had he had a knockout right cross?
They look bizarre when they shadowbox. I love this old footage, the history, fantastic! Harry Greb had a four fight rivalry with Gibbons, Greb won the only one where an official decision was given.
Grab fought both Gibbons brothers, Mike and Tommy. Won & lost against both.
It always irritates me when modern " fans" say that the Old Timers wouldn't be good today. Personally, I think that is backwards. This is boxing at a very high level. I'll admit that sometimes the old films don't do them justice but you are watching two brilliant fighters here. Jabs are hard, straight and fast. Excellent infighting. Those hooks Gibbons is throwing are as good as any hook you'll see today. Defense from both men is really good. It seems to be in fashion now to rip on the older fighters. But I think if guys like this were fighting today, there would be a lot less undefeated fighters running around.
It's true, though. The science of training has evolved so much since then that these guys wouldn't make it today if they fought like this. They were tough for sure, and they weren't without skill, but they couldn't stand up against a modern fighter with their old-fashioned training and not leave on a stretcher. They were good at absorbing punches, but not so good at getting out of the way. Old school boxing like this looks like MMA boxing but without the wrestling and jiu-jitsu. In fact I've seen MMA fighters box better than this. I still enjoy these old fights, but I take it for what it is: more history than technical clinic. The only technical aspect I feel you get more of in old fights is the art of dirty boxing, which is why I enjoy it. To each his own, though.
@@josephmonkele5992 Respectfully disagree. These guys that fought 100 times are just better than what we have today. No question.
Just a thought. IF training is so much better, how could a guy like Greb throw 100 punches in the 15th round or Marciano averaging 82 punches a round but alvaroids is gassed by the 7th? Think about it.
Maybe you don't understand what you are watching? When I was younger, I did a lot of boxing and was a fair inside fighter. Gibbons on the inside here is just masterful. Some of the best you will find. You will NEVER see that today.
@constantine7382 I boxed too, so there's no need for your version of "respectful disagreement." Have you seen Canelo vs. GGG? Does that look like being gassed out by the 7th? And they did that without any of the unnecessary spastic motions that old fighters used to use. Look at Gibbons training with the elastic bands; he looks like a slow kid having a fit. Obviously these guys were great boxers of their time, but you've been kidding yourself if you think boxing training hasn't evolved. Also, clenbuterol only helps with making weight. It's not like he was on testosterone.
@constantine7382 Btw, Nick Diaz can throw 180 punches a round although they are 5 minute rounds instead of 3 minutes. Go watch Corrales vs. Castillo if you want to see an example of masterful inside fighting. Saying that boxing training has evolved isn't a dig at these guys. Thry were great for their time and will always be remembered for it but things evolve for a reason. It is the nature of all things to evolve. That said, this is one of the better fights I've seen from the 1910s. I'm currently brushing up on boxing from that era, so I'll check out any other recommendations you have.
@@josephmonkele5992 It wasn't " my version." It was simply being respectful.
Yes, I have seen alvaroids gassed a dozen times. And that's with him cheating. Pretty sad.
I collect fight films and have seen a lot of fighters from every era. Often times, it's the film itself that makes these fighters look " spastic." Every era has boxers, sluggers, cuties, free swingers, brawlers. To say that about an entire era when it is OBVIOUS you have watched very little film isn't being honest.
So much has been lost over time. You say that fighters from then couldn't fight today? Watch George Foreman. His cross arm defense he learned from Archie Moore. That little shoulder push he used? He was taught that from someone that took it from Jack Johnson over a hundred years ago.
There is a video here on youtube about Benny Leonard. It does a side by side comparison for part of the video with floyd mayweather. mayweather is using the EXACT same jab and defense that Leonard used, again a hundred years ago.
You think by watching a few good guys blow out overmatched opponents is something special? All the while avoiding anyone that has a hope in Hell to beat them? That is not greatness, my friend. That is cherry picking, something else they didn't do then. You don't see guys feint today or fight on the inside or box without running.
By the way, going back to alvaroids? Marciano threw over 100 punches against Charles in the 15th round, nearly ALL power punches. Against Bivol, alvaroids average 41 punches per round, landing 7. But yeah, he is in a LOT better shape than the " old timers?"
The fight commentary said that Gibbons, having fought Dillon and Greb ,among others, had never fought such a tough opponent as McFarland.. That is nonsense. Greb was as great a fighter as ever existed and Dillon was known as the giant killer.
Stanley Wecker McFarland was seen as one of the greatest of all time in his own time. Read the reports. Difficult to find anyone who was as well respected as McFarland in his own time.
Critical appraisal of Greb was high as well, but has reached its pinnacle with the research carried out by modern historians such as Steve Compton. Both are top 10 all-time greats.
Stanley Wecker Also, he doesn't say 'as tough'. He says 'the equivalent'. Boxing writers of the time would probably have agreed with him. McFarland was seen as an absolute marvel, as aforementioned.
I read about this fight, supposedly it was big flop with fans and nobody landed a clean shot....But....Based on what is shown here, Gibbons won this fight.....Btw, here's a tip for watching these really old film, change the playback speed to .75, then you can reaaaally see what both guys are trying to do.....
Gibbons shadow boxing at 22 seconds is probably the most awkward shadowboxing I have seen. There must be a reason behind such but it looks so different from how modern boxers do it.
Some here say it took decades of development in punching to create a better fighter. That's true with computers, not punching! Ridiculous! I can see that in diet and health, but not actual boxing. Although food had little to no added poisons like today. The bare knuckle game is different because of different kinds of stoppages the fighter has to consider. Fighters of the past were just as good.
Tom Holland should portray Packey McFarland.
Eww
Once read in the Guiness Bokk (please check archives of G Book)
McFarland had over 325 fights undefeated !!! Boxing experts please check this detail. Thank you.
Not undefeated in Newspaper decisions
133
Is that Jim Jacobs talking?
great fight,IMO Gibbons would compete today no problem..
You do know that most boxing “experts” feel the era of Gibbons and McFarland was superior to today’s era, don’t you? Gibbons would not only compete he’d reign as a champion for a very long time. McFarland would as well. You have to really understand boxing to know just how good these guys were and how bad boxers are today.
Hav Risen We have some awesome boxers today who are technically near perfect and who’s skills have been mastered slowly overtime with the knowledge that has been gained from the fighters of the past as well as learning and building on their mistakes and flaws. These old timers wouldn’t compete with the elite of today head to head and it would be unfair to expect them to. These guys are clearly beasts though and if they were around today with today’s knowledge, training and technique...well that’s a different story. But to downplay the skill of today’s boxers compared to these guys, I’m not sure what you’re watching to be honest.
@Mike J
With all due respect, by any means necessary, please enlighten me by telling me who some of the boxers are today or modern era, whose skills have been “mastered slowly over time..learning and building on the mistakes and flaws of the old-timers.”. Then tell me why you feel they are superior fighters and how “old-timers couldn’t compete with them and why we shouldn’t expect them too”. Because, like you, only from the other end of the spectrum, I don’t see how you downplay the skills of the old-timers compared to fighters of today. To steal a line from you I really don’t know what you’re watching to be honest. I’m not being coy, I’d really like to know. Regards, Hav.
@@WBB1981 you cant prove this , I can prove that the skills of mcfarland and gibbons are superior to todays boxers, you dont know what you are watching!
@@WBB1981 There is NO FIGHTER today that could compete with the greats of the twenties. They are not rough enough, skilled enough or mentally tough enough. I hear what you said all the time but what, exactly, would a modern fighter be able to show a guy with 300 fights? Nothing. I just watched an elimination fight a few days ago. These boys threw about 25 punches a round and were dead by round 6. It is ridiculous to think ANYONE today could go 15 rounds, let alone 20. Harry Greb was seen to start fights throwing 100 punches a round and, by round 15, was throwing upwards of 150. Who is going to keep up with that?
You watch this fight here. Both boys are throwing jabs that are very fast and accurate. Most of the punches are straight. You will not find a hook thrown better than what Gibbons is using here. And the infighting is outstanding.
I understand that everyone wants to believe their era is the best. But I have long been a fight film collector and have seen many of the greats. And that is exactly what they were. Many of them would destroy this overly protested bunch of " fighters" that we have today. It's just a fact.
I thought gibbons won.
so....what was the then lightweight limit ?
I believe 130lbs.
He got his answer 6 yrs later 😂
And then it was wrong. 133 was the limit then.
😂 they can’t beat Ali