Tommy Loughran or Mickey Walker?

I have Loughran #9 all time at LHW. I could see him as high as 7 and no lower than 9.

Walker spread his careers work so thinly across 4 x weight divisions, that the highest I rank him divisionally is #15, at both WW and MW.

Whilst I don't have Walker top 10 in any division, as I do Loughran, he's top 20 in 2 divisions compared to 1 for Tommy.

Factor in Walker's additional and extermely impressive, from a p4p perspective, work at LHW and HW, and he's comfortably ahead of Loughran in p4p, ATG terms, imo.

Incidentally, neither Conn nor Rosenbloom make my top 10 at LHW. Conn did much of his work at MW and HW, leaving his resume in bouts contested at LHW thinner than most may realise. Conn is another who I rank below Loughran at LHW, based solely on their LHW resumes, but above Tommy p4p based on their entire careers. Rosenbloom was just so inconsistent and lost too many fights at LHW to make my top 10.

 

Plenty of fighters outboxed Walker and the 1920s is a pioneering era, when the technical level is generally pretty poor. Sure Walker could hang with Hudkins and Milligan who just like him didn't have jabs, so what does that prove? Do you think not setting up your punches with a jab is a good idea? I mean Roy Jones and Mayweather are 2 who got away with it at times in the modern era because they could throw a hook or right as fast as most can throw a jab. But a slow guy like Walker not jabbing? It's a technical blunder. You put a jab in his face and Walker didn't know what to do. Greb, Loughran and Tiger Flowers all proved that to be the case

 

I think Loughran's HW credentials are being somewhat overlooked here. He beat an undefeated Jack Gross. He beat Ernie Schaaf, Max Baer, Johnny Risko, Paulino Uzcudun, Steve Hamas, Stanley Poreda, King Levinsky, Tuffy Griffiths, Jack Sharkey, Arturo Godoy, Al Ettore, and many others. He lost quite a few times along the way at HW as well but he was fighting these guys a lot more often than Walker was meaning they had more opportunity to defeat him. Some of his victories are pretty amazing for a guy who turned pro weighing about 150 pounds.

 

Im not going to argue with a brick wall who think a gift decision sponge like Ottke is better than two of the greatest fighters in history. I wont lower myself to that level.

 

How high do you rate Toney, Qawi and Byrd because of their HW excursions against much bigger men than this. You probably rate them below someone as poor as Loughran because you have an era bias

 

I agree Loughran had an impressive HW resume for a natural LHW.

It depends what perspective you're taking, I think.

If I were to rank Loughran and Walker at HW, solely based on their respective resumes in bouts contested at HW and completely disregarding their size, I'd rank Loughran higher.

When I consider the impact their HW fights had on their p4p rankings, I think Walker's did more for him, given he was naturally so much smaller than Loughran.

I hope that makes sense.

 

I know you need to stoop to person attacks because it breaks your heart that Loughran and Mickey Walker aren't great fighters, they are foundamentally poor and very limited. But I can forgive you because I don't think you understand boxing technique well enough to understand this.

I do honestly think both are pioneers and it was harder to learn boxing back then, so I don't want to hate either man

 

Walker and Loughran weren't great.. the things i have to read

Jesus forgive us

 

What about their foundamentals (sic) do you find objectionable?

 

It was actually probably easier to learn with the abundance of opponents and teachers, boxing was as big as baseball… today they speak like the shoulder roll is an esoteric practice in those days university teams knew how to do it lol.

 

Hi Buddy.
Firstly welcome to the forum, good to have new members with fresh anecdotes, and different outlooks, with viewpoints that stray from the general or perceived consensus, which yours palpably do, not entirely sure, but I see very few posters ( based on my short time here ) not having Walker and Loughran as " greats " as you obvs do, also not on board with them being very poor and limited, seems harsh on Walker in particular being a 2 weight champ, and hanging tough with full blown HWs, as they were at that point in time, but , these are your opinions and views, and you are fully entitled to air them, and we should respect them, we may not agree, and put forward our points and counter arguments to that effect, as long as the discussions are voiced in a polite and civil manner, then the forum is all the better, as to @RockyValdez stooping to a personal level, believe me I have seen a lot worse, plus he has served his dues, been here a long time, and is a poster who is quite forthright with his position, no issues with that.
Stay safe buddy, chat soon.
Mike.

 

Yes, I do.

Based solely on fights contested at LHW, allowing a few lbs over for non title fights, my all time list is:

1. Charles
2. Greb
3. Tunney
4. Moore
5. JHL
6. Spinks
7. Foster
8. Bivins
9. Loughran
10. RJJ
11. T. Gibbons
12. Jack Delaney
13. MS Muhammed
14. Johnson
15. Marshall
16. Norfolk
17. Conn
18. Galindez
19. Maxim
20. Dillon

I only have a top 20 at LHW, but given you mentioned him, if I appraise the others fighters I considered and analysed that didn't make my 20, I think I'd have Rosenbloom at #22. He has a fine resume, but I value dominance highly and he lost 30 times at LHW, including 26 during what I consider his prime years, some to fine fighters and some less so.