The best HW never to hold the lineal title.

That's a fair and reasonable argument. Except, when assessing two fighters in their entirety I prefer to look at their full resumes from top to bottom rather than isolating a single year out of their whole careers. I would also argue that 1973 was a comparable year for Quarry as 1968 was for Ellis. Jerry beat five opponents that year including young renditions of Lyle and Shavers.

 

Ring Magazine Ratings 1936
Schmeling #1, Louis #2, Braddock #3

Full ratings for all the divisions here:

https://news.google.com/newspapers?...AIBAJ&sjid=oZgFAAAAIBAJ&pg=6763,3446960&hl=en

Another publication, The Referee, which published ratings at the time had Braddock at #4, behind Schmeling #1, Louis #2, and John Henry Lewis #3.

See center column.

https://news.google.com/newspapers?...AIBAJ&sjid=oZgFAAAAIBAJ&pg=7119,3559735&hl=en

 

They didn't make a mistake. Whoever typed up the BOXREC list did.

Montreal's is the best coverage because they include the full rankings of every division. Other papers reported it but didn't list the full ranking in all the divisions.

https://news.google.com/newspapers?...AIBAJ&sjid=Bk4DAAAAIBAJ&pg=6773,4005668&hl=en

https://news.google.com/newspapers?...AIBAJ&sjid=-UwMAAAAIBAJ&pg=6307,8046188&hl=en

There are more. Papers everywhere ran it. But you get the idea.

And I stated mine about 10 times already. Ike Ibeabuchi, Deontay Wilder and Anthony Joshua. And then you insult me because I don't rate Vitali because I keep pointing out he WAS NAMED THE LINEAL CHAMP ... and you refuse to accept that. And then you insult me some more.

Now I'm going to go again. Because I don't want to have the same discussion with you over and over and over again.:hi:

 

A little off topic, but The Ring was rigging ratings in 1977.


https://books.google.com/books?id=T...ge&q=rigged ratings the ring magazine&f=false

 

Paul cavaliere.

According to gym folk lore he all but knocked out Gene Tunney and Joe Louis decking both, but was frozen out of actual big fights even though he wound up with a 117-2-1 record beating Jimmy Braddock and Tony Galento in the 1930s.

http://www.njboxinghof.org/paul-cavaliere/

 

It's an incomplete record. Paul Cavilere clearly had over 100 fights. He obviously languished within a lower level just to get work and these dates featured unknown fighters on forgotten cards in small clubs. Why would they go recorded?. They say Paul was frozen out. But Tunney called him the cleverest heavyweight and Joe Louis took him everywhere as a sparring partner.

 

For years Ring's annual ratings grouped fighters - Group 1, Group 2, etc. - as shown in the Montreal Gazette listing. These ratings usually included more than 10 fighters per division, too. I wish Boxrec's reportage of Ring's annual ratings reflected this.

Thanks, Dubblechin, for the 1936 ratings links. I've got a document on which I collect primary source heavyweight ratings, some of which I post here when the discussion merits it. I've done several Google news searches and found many sets of monthly ratings, but I didn't have these. So again, thanks!

 

The extra losses are "no decision" bouts. Boxrec converts them where ever possible if there is a "news paper" decision. So the losses are as likely later conversions of already known fights previously recorded as unofficial wins. In 1961, Paul's record stood at 117-2-1. Somewhere It got cut down, but after 15 years in the ring one would presume 100 plus fights of that period of time.