The genius of Freddie Welsh

A recurring theme at boxing forums across cyberspace concerns the question of who were the greatest British fighters of all time. Many of the names seem to pick themselves, from the diminutive old timer, Jimmy Wilde, right up to the modern giant, Lennox Lewis. However, in the lower regions of these ' top tens ' there is normally a group of five or six fighters, such as Randolph Turpin or Naseem Hamed, by way of example, who are jostling for the final couple of places. One such is the great old lightweight from Pontypridd, Freddie Welsh.

One of my favourite fights from days gone by is the third meeting between Welsh and the ' Genius From The Chicago Stockyards,' Packey McFarland. It's a wonderful display of skill and endurance from two of the best fighters ever to have inhabited the lightweight region, and it still seems ' modern ' and fresh, even today.

We need only scratch the surface to find out the reasons why Welsh was such a marvellous fighter. He was an avid student of boxing skills and tactics, obsessive about physical fitness, ( he had suffered from asthma as a youngster, and was a lifelong vegetarian, ) and in dividing his career between America and Britain he developed a synthesis of two styles - the classical ' upright ' British style and the busier American way with a few rough tricks thrown in for good measure. There is an excellent documentary entitled ' Freddie Welsh's Scrapbooks ' at youtube which explains that the rough tricks he learned in America were largely responsible for his victory over the fading Jim Driscoll. Peerless Jim and Welsh were friends, but their bout descended into an ill tempered foul fest, culminating in Driscoll's blowing a fuse, butting Welsh, and getting himself disqualified.

In the finer and legitimate arts Welsh was a wizard. He asserted that a boxer, along with strength, speed, stamina and endurance required, above all, intelligence and a quick mind. A fascinating insight as to the latter was the practice which he called ' nursing one's strength.' Perhaps it would be best to let Welsh explain this concept in his own words :


" ........... And the secret of this is relaxation. One should make this a fine point. Often a boxer who is not nearly as strong as his opponent may so con­serve and employ his strength that he will seem far stronger, allowing the other to waste much of his great energy. The secret is complete relaxation except when actually doing some­thing. There is no need for tenseness of the muscles when fiddling and sparring for an opening. If one's muscles are so tensed he cannot possibly strike quickly when the opportunity comes, for he must first relax and then contract the striking muscles. If relaxed, the muscles may contract with great vigor at the moment of impact, but the instant the blow has been struck, they should be relaxed again until the next blow. I also nurse my strength in another way. While relaxing as much as possible on my own account, I try to keep the other fellow tied up with muscles tense in expectation of my attack, which brings him to a condition of fatigue all the sooner. This I accomplish by constantly feinting and changing my posi­tion by shifting my feet, so that he is parrying or blocking blows that never come, and sometimes making and missing wild swings that tire him out.

In another way it is well to let the other man use his own strength against himself, and by these tactics I have often been able to get the better of big fellows of apparently twice my strength. If I can get the other man pushing against me, to show me how strong he is, I will resist him a little for a moment and then, suddenly discontinue my resistance. As a result he goes plunging or sprawling forward, and surprised at the strength with which I appear to throw him around. I may also use his own strength to make my blows more powerful. I feint to make him lead, and when he is rushing toward me my blow has nearly double force. Mean­while I am always relaxed except when actually executing some effective move. I have been credited with wonderful endurance, but while my endurance is better than most athletes, a great deal of this is due to making use of the other man's strength to my own advantage and also to this practice of re­laxation. In many cases I have boxed the last few rounds of a twenty- or twenty-five-round contest faster and stronger than the first few rounds, simply through nursing my strength. "

It is abundantly clear to those who watch the surviving footage that Welsh was a master boxer who employed every trick and nuance of boxing skill. His blocking, parrying and feinting are a delight to watch and remind us of both his rival, Benny Leonard, and the modern British great, Ken Buchanan. Of these arts we, again, have Welsh's words by way of explanation :


" ...... In giving suggestions for feinting I can probably make myself most clear by telling simply the methods which I use. I not only feint with my hands, but also with my eyes and with my feet. Feinting with the hands is very simple, for a quick little movement may look like a blow starting on its way. I may feint for the body with the left, dropping it a couple of inches quickly, and then shoot over the right to the face, or perhaps draw back the right as though to hit hard and then put in a quick left jab. Or pretend to hook the left high on the face which often has the effect of making opponent put his guard higher up, thus leaving his body exposed. Quick as a flash one may whip over a left hook or drive to his body. The same applies when you feint at the body; the opponent lowers his guard, exposing his face to attack, then you may rain a hurricane of blows on and around his jaw. Remember that there is nothing so quick as a left lead, and if one does it quickly he can sometimes get it over even when the other is on his guard, expecting such things to happen. It should be like lightning. One or two feints or false moves followed by a lightning and vigorous left jab will often score.

Feinting with the eyes is often very effective. I usually keep my eyes on my opponent's eyes, but in feinting I sud­denly drop them and look at his stomach. The first once or twice that I do this I actually do hit him in the stomach, so that he comes to expect this. The next time, I suddenly look down at his stomach and he puts both his arms down there for protection, whereupon, still looking at his stomach, I whip one over to his face like a flash, often a one-two attack with both left and right.

Much can also be done with the feet. Sometimes I step forward, pretending to attack, and then draw back, which leads him to lunge. If he leads hard, any blow which I might de­liver at this moment would have double effect because he is coming to meet it. A feint at side-stepping, a little to the right, for instance, will lead opponent to think that I am shift­ing my base of attack in that direction, and he will move over to face me. Instead of this, however, I quickly step far to the left, and attack him to great advantage from this position, to one side of him. One may work all possible variations of this.
I often mislead an opponent by placing my left hand on one of his shoulders, or sometimes upon his forehead, and pressing against him. Invariably he resists this pressure, pushing as hard as he can against it, perhaps to convince me of his strength. This is just what I want, for not only is he then partly off his guard, but when I quickly release the pres­sure and strike with my right, he plunges with full force into the blow. This little stunt nearly always works. It is the same with pulling, for if I cannot get my hand on his shoulder or head, sometimes I hook my left wrist in his and start to pull. Immediately he forgets about boxing and commences to pull hard against me, so that while his left arm is locked in pulling against mine, I can usually shoot a right uppercut under it to the body or a cordial and well meant right hook over it to the face. "

I came across these fascinating insights from the great man some time ago in an extract from an encyclopaedia entitled ' Of Physical Culture,' and, given that the ' old v new ' and the ' greatest British fighters of all time ' discussions have recently featured prominently here at 606v2 I thought it might be topical to share them with you.

Welsh finished with an official record of 74 - 5 - 7 ,was only stopped once, ( by the immortal Benny Leonard, ) beat men of the calibre of Abe Attel, Ad Wolgast, Willie Ritchie, and Mexican Joe Rivers, and shared a ring with other greats such as Packey McFarland, "Philadelphia" Pal Moore, Johnny Dundee, Oscar "Battling" Nelson and Rocky Kansas.

Benny Leonard said of Welsh :

" I boxed Welsh three times before I won his title. Welsh knew all about the art of self defense. He was cagey, cunning and he knew what his opponent was trying to do, and when I beat him he was already on the slide. "

The IBRO rate him fifteenth in their all time lightweight list, whereas Nat Fleischer had him fourth, Charley Rose fifth, and modern day historian Herb Goldman ninth.

Top ten Brit of all time ? For me, yes.

What say the rest of you ?

I've heard of the name and that's where my knowledge ends prior to reading this. Gotta say that quote from Leonard at the end there is fantastic. How many boxers would downplay their own achievements like that, especially at the expense of defending their opponent's reputation? Nowadays all we hear is how the opponent was tough, put up a good fight, or was the best they've ever been despite not having won a fight in years and being over the hill. Ahem.

Good article.As a result I watched the Welsh v Mcfarland fight again.
No doubting the ring craft from both men. Perhaps the draw was a little home town though?
Welsh certainly seemed to have all the tricks of the trade and I have seen a few respected writers have McFarland right up with Burley in the best fighters never to win a world title lists
Back to Welsh.On resume alone I think he must be in the Brits top ten as it was a division steeped in talent.
Clearly a "thinking" boxer as well judging by those quotes

Absolutely a top ten guy for me Windy and of constant wonderment to mehe is not nearer the higher reaches of a few lists. Think when compiling lists of Brits the criticism is often the lack of action stateside and the lack of truly big names on their records but with Welsh these are simply not valid, because the likes of Driscoll, Ritchie Leonard and Attell are top drawer in any language. Recall I posted a thread asking if Welsh had beaten more HOF'ers than any other brit an age ago and we struggled to come up with anyone to top him.

If anything could perhaps put Welsh down the list of brits it was his reliance later in his career on the no decision rule, would be revisionist history of the worst kind to suggest Welsh did anything other than milk this to keep his title but for me this does not detract too much as his record without the no decision rule is still impressive enough.

As you rightly say a smart fighter inside the ring and something of a trailblazer in terms of his lifestyle outside of the ring and a nice mention for one of the finest ever from these shores.

Thanks very much for your responses, fellas.

Regarding the point about sportsmanship, BALTIMORA, I feel the same as you that it's a refreshing change to read something like that. Welsh was also, on losing his title to Leonard, effusive in his praise for his conqueror, though, ironically, his manager kicked up a fuss because Freddie was stopped on his feet, ( having already been down twice, ) without a count being administered. It was all a storm in a teacup, though, and the fighters had the greatest respect for each other.

skidd, it's an anomaly with two of the McFarland fights. The New York Times reckoned that McFarland had had the better of the going in the final scrap in London - hard for us to judge without the complete fight - whereas Ad Wolgast thought that Welsh had been shafted in the earlier Los Angeles bout, which referee Jeffries called a draw.

jeff, can't argue at all about the no decision stuff. Freddie openly admitted that he intended to milk the title for fame and fortune once he got his hands on it. In mitigation, he certainly wasn't the only champion to do so in the day, and as you rightly point out his resumé is, in any event, resplendent with quality names.

Its a good read Human Windmill.

For me, there is no doubt about Welsh. I think he belongs in a clear different bracket to the likes of Hamed, Lewis (Lennox), Turpin and others.

Definate top 5 British all timer for me.

Think your being a bit harsh on Welsh with regards to the No Decision thing, he did milk the title but from memory he won the newspaper decision every time he defended the title. Would argue that the ND era cost him legacy wise just as much as he gained from it, got the newspaper decision over some superb names like Leonard. His level of opposition is second to none for a british fighter and is definitely worthy of a top 5 spot.

Ayup Windy, nice article to come home to after a disappointing night down the boozer.

Not a lot to add as you've pretty much summed everything up beautifully. For me, an all-time top ten Brit list without Welsh is pure blasphemy, and I actually give him a top five spot; indeed, it is only Buchanan's superior title reign (in my eyes at least, as I am always a bit reluctant to count 'No Decision' bouts as bonafide title defences) which keeps him ahead of Welsh as Britain's greatest ever Lightweight.

Updated thanks to Colonial Lion, Ghosty and Chris for your interesting responses.