Originally Posted by BoxingGlove1
I feel Jimmy was to inconsitent and never had a dominant world title reign and most of his best wins, that fighter also beat him.
He wound't be in my top 20. And I feel Monzon, Whiatker, Hagler, Foreman, Holmes, Leonard, Charles, and Archie are all better fighters.
And am not my own really guys, Ring Magazine have some good writers and they didnt even have him in there top 50 and had Holmes, Foreman, Monzon, Whiataker, and Hagler all higher than him.
Ring had Khaosai Galaxy in their top 40 and Jack Dempsey/Johnson in their top 10. That should tell you enough about their list.
You haven't proved McLarnin's inconsistency at all aside from simply making the statement. Any fighter that has ever fought would take a few losses against that caliber of opposition. Barney Ross and Tony Canzoneri are both probably top 20 ATG's in their own rights (Ross arguably top 10) and McLarnin faced both men multiple times. Of course he's going to rack up a couple of losses in the process. The bottom line is, he was always able to come back from adversity to conquer his foes in rematches, no matter what the caliber of opponent or the manner in which he was defeated in the first bout.
Again, your arguments don't hold water. You need to re-think your stance.