Notice how George spends most of his time holding while Bob is swinging for fences, even when at that point he is in his mid thirties - most guys have stopped fighting for the most part by this age.
Notice how George spends most of his time holding while Bob is swinging for fences, even when at that point he is in his mid thirties - most guys have stopped fighting for the most part by this age.
Im saying the best fighter and the best fighter always wins have you ever seen Laraque lose?
Im saying the best fighter and the best fighter always wins have you ever seen Laraque lose?
I definitely saw him get flattened by Shelley when I was living in Edmonton. Near the end of the season, must have been 2002 or 2003. Pretty sure Shelley was a rookie though, so must have been 2002.
Laraque is not #1. In my honest opinion he isn't ahead of Chara from his own era. The two of them dropped it once but they went to the ground almost immediately and it wasn't much of a fight. I think Chara is considered by many to be his era's best fighter. Laraque I always thought was almost as much of a deterrent than a great fighter.
Anyway, I'd put Probert, Kocur, Nilan, Gillies, Robinson ahead of him at least, plus a few more. Yes that's right on the last two. They didn't fight a whole lot but they didn't need to, there was a reason few tested them. Like someone else mentioned you could add Lindros into the pile. We know he wouldn't back down from Laraque and Lindros had those rapid and very HARD right hand punches that he was relentless with. Also was taller than Laraque.
Im saying the best fighter and the best fighter always wins have you ever seen Laraque lose?
If you look at one of the Tony Twist fight compilations, you'll see Laraque lose to him. Mitch Fritz beat him. Boogard beat him a couple of times...When Laraque begins to hold on to guys for the headlock and stops throwing, it's not really fighting in hockey terms anymore is it?
Laraque is not #1. In my honest opinion he isn't ahead of Chara from his own era. The two of them dropped it once but they went to the ground almost immediately and it wasn't much of a fight. I think Chara is considered by many to be his era's best fighter. Laraque I always thought was almost as much of a deterrent than a great fighter.
Anyway, I'd put Probert, Kocur, Nilan, Gillies, Robinson ahead of him at least, plus a few more. Yes that's right on the last two. They didn't fight a whole lot but they didn't need to, there was a reason few tested them. Like someone else mentioned you could add Lindros into the pile. We know he wouldn't back down from Laraque and Lindros had those rapid and very HARD right hand punches that he was relentless with. Also was taller than Laraque.
I essentially said the same thing, but nice to see the name pop up again. And that's absolutely right, Larry Robinson didn't have to fight a whole lot because he was so effective, not unlike Chara today (who I agree, as another posted noted, might be the class of his era).
And don't get me wrong, I think Laraque was a great enforcer, he's just not this epitome of enforcers in the history of hockey. He was certainly one amongst a group for some time, and maybe the best in the league for a season or two...but there's a bunch of players in their prime that would give big George reason to hold on and hopefully bring the fight down to the ice and to a complete stop, before he was.
Too much BGL hate going on around here. He might not be the greartest fighter of all time but most probably the best of the last two decades...
And I absolutely despited him when he was with the Habs. I will never forgive him for the way he played against Boston. But before his stint with Montreal he was a feared force.
I think it depends on how you define best fighter. If you're talking about pure wins and losses, then Laraque was clearly the best. He rarely lost and often those "losses" could have been decided either way. If you're talking about pure intimidation and dishing out pain, then Laraque was not the best. He won but rarely ever really killed anyone. That's due to a combination of his fighting style and the fact that he just seemed like a genuinely nice guy that didn't want to hurt anyone too badly.
If you're talking about pure wins and losses, then Laraque was clearly the best.
Don't know about that, really. I mean, I'm not sure John Scott even has a "loss" on his fight record yet, just for one recent example. But here's the top 5 win% among NHLers between 1917 and 2011 with over 100 fights:
Dave Brown - 161 fights - 62.1%
Chris Simon - 120 fights - 61.2%
Tony Twist - 124 fights - 60.8%
Joey Kocur - 220 fights - 60.1%
Georges Laraque - 142 fights - 60.0%
So Brown and Kocur, at the very least, have Laraque bested in 3 of wins and losses, given the higher win% of a larger sample size. And just some guys included to round out some numbers for those with between 25 and 100 fights:
John Scott - 26 fights - 66.7%
Eric Lindros - 49 fights - 66.0%
Milan Lucic - 46 fights - 62.6%
If you look at one of the Tony Twist fight compilations, you'll see Laraque lose to him. Mitch Fritz beat him. Boogard beat him a couple of times...When Laraque begins to hold on to guys for the headlock and stops throwing, it's not really fighting in hockey terms anymore is it?
A couple of times? I've seen Laraque beat Boogaard 2-3x and never the other way around. When did Boogaard beat him?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Big Phil
Laraque is not #1. In my honest opinion he isn't ahead of Chara from his own era. The two of them dropped it once but they went to the ground almost immediately and it wasn't much of a fight. I think Chara is considered by many to be his era's best fighter. Laraque I always thought was almost as much of a deterrent than a great fighter.
Not sure if serious...Chara is a horrible fighter and I dare you to find one person who considers him the best fighter of our era.
Laraque was a good fighter, but he never really pummeled many guys (besides Brant Myhrres). Laraque was really strong so he just had the ability to get in a few punches and then take the other guy down before they could really get in any punches.
There are a lot of guys I'd put ahead of Laraque (in no particular order): Bob Probert, Behn Wilson, Dave Brown, Donald Brashear, Jim McKenzie, Sandy McCarthy, Chris Simon just to name a few.
Jim said he was so angry and humiliated it only took one shift for the Whaler players to get their answer. The very first shift that he and Nilan played against one another McKenzie went right after his 'former' hero like a buzzsaw and absolutely destroyed Knuckles in the fight. While Chris Nilan might have a different version, there was no holding back from the rookie this night when lining up beside his hero. Jim McKenzie didn't forget his job."
It's a nice story but Chris was at the very end of his career. Even to those who mentioned Dave Brown, I have seen numerous fights between Nilan and Brown and never was Nilan dominated despite the fact that Brown was 6'5" and Nilan was barely 6feet tall. The only guy who could intimidate Chris (...and everybody else in the world..) was Probert. Probert, to me, is the best of all time.
A couple of times? I've seen Laraque beat Boogaard 2-3x and never the other way around. When did Boogaard beat him?
Working from memory here, I'd have to double-check. But in the event Boogaard didn't beat him, and given that there's a lot left to quote from my posts that Laraque isn't the greatest fighter of all time, I think you're missing the point of the thread and my position.
Jim said he was so angry and humiliated it only took one shift for the Whaler players to get their answer. The very first shift that he and Nilan played against one another McKenzie went right after his 'former' hero like a buzzsaw and absolutely destroyed Knuckles in the fight. While Chris Nilan might have a different version, there was no holding back from the rookie this night when lining up beside his hero. Jim McKenzie didn't forget his job."
It's a nice story but Chris was at the very end of his career. Even to those who mentioned Dave Brown, I have seen numerous fights between Nilan and Brown and never was Nilan dominated despite the fact that Brown was 6'5" and Nilan was barely 6feet tall. The only guy who could intimidate Chris (...and everybody else in the world..) was Probert. Probert, to me, is the best of all time.
And that would be a worthy discussion, because if it's not Probert, it's still a very small discussion and his name is on the table without doubt.
Laraque is not #1. In my honest opinion he isn't ahead of Chara from his own era. The two of them dropped it once but they went to the ground almost immediately and it wasn't much of a fight. I think Chara is considered by many to be his era's best fighter. Laraque I always thought was almost as much of a deterrent than a great fighter.
Anyway, I'd put Probert, Kocur, Nilan, Gillies, Robinson ahead of him at least, plus a few more. Yes that's right on the last two. They didn't fight a whole lot but they didn't need to, there was a reason few tested them. Like someone else mentioned you could add Lindros into the pile. We know he wouldn't back down from Laraque and Lindros had those rapid and very HARD right hand punches that he was relentless with. Also was taller than Laraque.
This is the same Chara who seems to lose all balance when it comes to fighting these days, right?
Laraque was a good fighter, but he never really pummeled many guys (besides Brant Myhrres). Laraque was really strong so he just had the ability to get in a few punches and then take the other guy down before they could really get in any punches.
There are a lot of guys I'd put ahead of Laraque (in no particular order): Bob Probert, Behn Wilson, Dave Brown, Donald Brashear, Jim McKenzie, Sandy McCarthy, Chris Simon just to name a few.
good list. lots of people forget how much of a monster McCarthy was in jrs and early in his NHL career. Georges had the potential to be an all time great but not the mindset.
Twist was tough, but he didn't have longevity. His career was cut short by a motorcycle accident. His best years were as a Blue, that was only 5 seasons.
The video everyone is posting of Laraque and Probert is an older Probert and a very, very young Laraque. I would have liked to have seen a prime Laraque and a prime Probert.
McKenzie was tough, but he had some not so great seasons. Anaheim traded him for being inactive, he barely played in Pittsburgh, and he suffered quite a few losses his last few years. He turned his career around with New Jersey and def made a nice comeback.
