Originally Posted by LittleRed
Also, you don't have Loughran. Certainly he rates above Sanchez?
I'm gonna take out McAuliffe I think, but I'm not sure who i'll add in his place. Front runners seem to be
Originally Posted by Manassa
Only as clearly as B. Leonard over Pep or something. You know yourself about that bantamweight-featherweight gap and how hard it is to jump. It was all a lot less organised back then of course, and I do believe the general boxing knowledge back then was less widespread (though conditions were tougher to almost make up for it), but nevertheless, a younger George Dixon was reportedly the great boxer of the day who was, quite importantly, a real ring innovator who shared his secrets with Walcott himself. I never like to take into account fame or political influence and things like that, but the invention or at least original implementation of boxing methods and techniques goes a long way in my book.
Both boxers fought significantly heavier opponents and both suffer incomplete records. They were also affected by racism. Dixon in particular - I have heard - deserved more decisions than given credit for.
It's a nice pocket argument, but is it really a clear
case for having Walcott lower?