Harold Brazier? Jesse Burnett? Lonnie Bennett? Jack Thompson? Young Peter Jackson? Harry Scott? Panama Joe Gans?
Mark kaylor ? - middleweight Floyd Harvard ? - super-featherweight Tom Collins ?? - light-heavyweight
The thing about being a fringe contender is that its a position which a lot of guys have been in, but didn't necessarily spend their WHOLE career in. Ross Purity was for the most part a journeyman but had spurts in his career where he could have qualified as fringe. Pierre Coetzer was ranked ridiculously high at the time he fought Bowe but was mostly fringe if truth be told. Prospects could reach the point of fringe before either moving to better things or fading into obscurity.
Yeah, not sure on this one. Some of the better fringe contenders were once contenders or prospects that didn't live up to the hype or maybe a hot/cold type that could manage the odd big win but never follow up on it. I would maybe go with Satterfield. He beat a large number of contenders but was rarely consistent enough to ever be considered a genuine contender himself.
I can't go with this.Satterfield was rated in 1951,52,53,& 55, by any definition that is a solid contender , not someone on the fringe.
How do we feel about Ralph Tiger Jones? Terribly inconsistent but beat several solid guys, reached as high as number three, but mostly stayed just outside the top 10 or barely in it. Also a good fighter.
What Mongoose said.... these guys have tendency to move around, either becoming legit contenders or stepping stones.