Please Participate--All Time Lightweight Survey (POLL CLOSED!!)

Ike Williams had better get the #4 spot (at least) by the time this is over. Not trying to influence the votes or anything. But Ike Williams had better get the #4 spot.

 

You really took me by surprise with this post mcvey.

I know you are well aware of boxrec inaccuracies from the period, but why not look at what we do know.

He wins the title by defeating Billy Frazier. You surely dont think that Billy Frazier was a debutante. YOu have to fight who you fight, to win your first title. Next up is Harry Gilmore. Harry had won nearly 30 fights (known) with his main loss being his loss to John L Sullivan. Hardly a blight on his record. He is not a nobody, in fact he appears to have been the reigning Canadian Champion at the time.

Interesting also that Billy Frazier got his chance at a rematch and was beaten. Next up with a chance was Carney. Carney had about 15 or 20 known bouts. His only loss (over a decent distance) was to Billy Frazier, who McAulliffe had asserted superiority over. Carney was the English champion. Another good name and not non entity.

Next up was Sam Collyer. Sam was a former American Champion. He had lost his title in close fought wars with billy edwards but he had never been kod quickly and was a good fighter. McAuliffe KOd him in 2.

We have him KOing Bill Dacey. I know nothing of him, but i am fairly confident he wasnt a novice.

The Jimmy Carroll fight was around then. Definitely not a novice and as mcGrain pointed out earlier, he is a hidden all time great. He was old, but his won loss record was definitely still in tact.

Austin gibbons was another who clearly seems to have won more than he lost. He appears to be a reigning american champion and was not far off his win against coloured middleweight champion Frank Craig. Another big scalp.


We soon have young Griffo. He was an all time great, although admittedly a little lighter, by this time, McCauliffe was not far off retiring.

Even when he came out of retirement, he still has some good wins. The carroll win is impressive, but perhaps the most impressive is his No contest/Exhibition with George Lavigney. Lavigney himself was about to reign as the next lightweight champion. The young lion could not and did not knockout the old past it champion.

When you consider these wins and the length of his reign, which is unsurpassed in the lightweight division, i dont think that there is any doubt that he is top 10 all time. (For his own time), he was more dominant than Hagler or Monzon, or Welterweight Ray Robinson, Heavyweight Marciano, the list goes on.

Ask yourself this, how much much better can your record be than to hold the world championship for 9 years, and never ever lose a fight? This is not a Joe Calzaghe or Sven ottke situation where the majority of the time that he has the championship, he is not the real champion, Jack was the man for 9 years and was never beaten. That is an ATG achievement. In fact, it is something that no one has ever done (that i can think of off hand).

I am sorry but leaving Jack Mcauliffe off a top 10 is like leaving Ray robinson or Monzon, or Archie moore etc of a top 10 list. He even has a case for P4P all time great

 

By the way, i have deliberately held off on making a list at this stage, like most on this board i would like to consider posts from mcVey, McGrain and others who have an astounding knowledge on this subject, so that as few deserving contenders as possible are not taken off. I have to say, the lightweights seem to have an astounding amount of talent go through them. Maybe as good as the Welterweights and Middleweights.

 

I think it's the deepest division. I mean, looking at a sensible pound-for-pound list, think of the lightweights who'd feature in the top thirty five:

Ike Williams
Carlos Ortiz
Henry Armstrong
Julio Cesar Chavez
Benny Leonard
Joe Gans
Barney Ross
Alexis Arguello
Pernell Whitaker
Tony Canzoneri
Roberto Duran

Eleven fighters, which leaves the rest of the divisions with 3.4 fighters each. It's imbalanced, and you can't even say the division lacked depth because I didn't list Buchanan, Jack, Montgomery, McFarland, Nelson, Carter, Angott, De Jesus, Ambers, McAuliffe, Tendler, Blackburn, Laguna, Joyce, Brown, Mosley, Lavigne or Mandell. Those are just the Hall of Fame level ones and I'm sure I missed a couple. On top of those there are plenty of strong contenders such as Kansas, Dawson, Lampkin, Salas etc. to really fill out a top 300 list.

Welterweights give them a good run, but the lightweights for me are the strongest by a fair margin.

 

No, don't shortchange him number 3, just in front of that little Panamanian.

 

1. Benny Leonard
2. Roberto Duran
3. Joe Gans
4. Henry Armstrong
5. Barney Ross
6. Tony Canzoneri
7. Joe Brown
8. Freddie Welsh
9. Ike Williams
10. Pernell Whitaker

 

Ok ,lets look at what we know.
Billy Frazier scaled 128lbs for his fight with McAuliffe ,10lbs lighter than Jack ,his KNOWN RECORD is what?
Harry Gilmore, possibly Champion of Canada?
Even today when their population has vastly increased such a title means nothing,how many pro lightweights do you think operated in Canada then? Every Canadian fighter of that era had to go to the States to get fights the competition was non existant, and so was the prestige of their domestic titles. Nearly 40 years later the Canadian heavyweight Champion [Larry Gains] was working as a sparring partner for Dempsey,that puts the Canadian Lightweight Championship of the 1880's in perspective.
What is glaring to me is the number of times McAuliffe rematched men he had allready beaten handily,this suggests a dearth of competition to me.
Frazier ,who was not a lightweight at 128lbs,x2
Myer x3
Carroll who was 35 and over 40 x2
McCarthy x2
Hopperx2
Thats 5 of his principal foes that accounts for 11 fights!
If the talent pool was deep why did he keep having repeat figths with men he had allready beaten?
The best men McAuliffe met were Carney,and accounts say Carney was in front when McAuliffes supporters broke down the ring ,forcing the referee to declare a draw.And Griffo who was a feather weight and likely drunk at the time,[Griffo lost his next fight to a nobody]this was a draw.
So the two best men he fought held him to a draw, one of them being cheated out of a win.and the other being a smaller man.
Do you really think Lavigne tried to stop McAuliffe in their exhibition?
Ask yourself this ,if in 9 years you only meet one truly world class man ,and he is winning the fight before your supporters break down the ring ,to prevent his victory, what sort of acheivment is that?
Top ten ? I would not put McAuliffe in my top 15 and probably not 25.
How can I ,in all conscience rate him above men I have left off my list ? Greats such as,
Chavez
Buchanan
Mandell
Petrolle
Arguello
Welsh
Near greats like Jack ,Montgomery, Ambers, Dejesus, Tendler.
NO WAY.

 

what number do you have buchanan ?? i nearly put a sober lew jenkins on mine

 

I really dont put too much stock in rating one era against another. Unless you have an era that overlaps, such as George Foreman or Larry Holmes causing havoc against the 90s champs, Or Joe Louis dominating 2 decades and competing when past his prime. Even then i think that there is limited value. I think that it is fair to say that most eras are very similar, even though popular opinion often says otherwise. McAuliffe dominated his era. He simply could not do any more. No one was good enough to beat him.

I agree that rematching the beaten foes should be applauded. If you criticise McAuliffe for asserting superiority, shouldnt you also criticise Sam Langford, Harry Wills and others, who did the same thing. The only real difference is that unlike these guys, McAuliffe was never beaten in his fights.

I cant see how McVey can say that fighters were not world class when he cannot point to other fighters who were better than these fighters. They were good fighters. Just because little is known about them doesnt mean that they were good fighters.

It seems that i rate fighters different to most people on this board, but i believe that the fighters need to be rated in the form of their dominance against the fighters of their time. I must say, i would rather go undefeated for 9 years against the best fighters around, than have 4 wins and 3 losses against supposedly better fighters.

 

I was thinking about Lew, too. He´s my favourite lw but just to inconsistent to be ranked anywhere in the Top10.

 

1. Roberto Duran
2. Benny Leonard
3. Joe Gans
4. Pernell Whitaker
5. Carlos Ortiz
6. Ike Williams
7. Henry Armstrong
8. Ken Buchanan
9. Freddie Welsh
10. Alexis Arguello

I just want to say that Jose Luis Castillo was a great lightweight, not fit for this list by any stretch of the imagination, but no matter how limited he may have been, he achieved a degree of greatness as the best lightweight of his era (bar a small passing through of the division of one Floyd Mayweather),

 

1. Roberto Duran
2. Benny Leonard
3. Joe Gans
4. Henry Armstrong
5. Pernell Whitaker
6. Barney Ross
7. Tony Canzonerri
8. Ike Williams
9. Jack Blackburn
10. Carlos Ortiz

 

Nice one! Definitly a fighter worth mentioning.