Archie Moore has a better top 12 HW wins in their era than Marciano does.

Always the source of proof.

 

McVey normally swears by rankings. He'll use the rankings argument to build up his favorite fighters but then say they don't matter as much as the quality of those ranked when arguing against a fighter.

 

Got it bad haven't you.lol
Just in passing,who are my favourite fighters?

 

No, I'm just pointing out how you'll defend certain fighters by how their opponents were ranked, yet dismiss rankings when someone you disagree with defends their fighter on the grounds of opponents rankings. It's a double standard.

 

You made this statement.
"He'll use the rankings argument to build up his favorite fighters."
So you must know who my favourite fighters are yes ?
Now I'm asking you to name them, which should be easy enough for you,if your statement is correct.

So Ghost Of Dempsey, let's have the names of my favourites ,please?

 

Hey Ivich, I mean Bronson, or whoever you are, you claim Dempsey is one of your favorites. However, your username is McVey so lets start there. Claiming he had a hidden career prior to his official fight record, yet there are no documented fights to back up Boxrec's claims of about 8 mystery fights against unknown opponents. Using that logic we can assume all fighters of that era had more fights than their official record claims, including Dempsey and Johnson. You claim you aren't a fan of Johnson yet defend him to the death on every thread. All because of your ongoing beef with another poster that has traumatized you.

Time and again I've seen you tout rankings as the end all be all to measure a champion's resume. Yet, when you are arguing against a fighter, suddenly you want to add context to rankings. That is called a double standard, or more accurately in your case, hypocrisy.

 

Anybody who had just lost to Harry Matthews and Willie James is either washed up or just plain shite.

 

McVey isn't one of my favourites, he is the lesser of the black trio.
I dont claim McVey had more fights than his record shows,Box rec does.

Johnson is certainly not one of my favourites,his style is the opposite of that which I enjoy.I just abhor agenda driven posts from haters whose personal dislike of a fighter for reasons we will need not go into, continuously overides their objectivity. I have never been traumatized , certainly not by a poster on a boxing forum and just as certainly you won't be the first to do manage it.lol

So you have named exactly one of my favourite fighters,Dempsey,now tell us when I showed those rating tendencies you attribute to me , about him?
Your problem,[ one of them,]is you grossly exaggerate everything,and are then forced to dilute and qualify your original statements.

You have no idea whom my boxing favourites are, you are just projecting BS in my direction,which is Ground Hog Day/par for the course for you.
I have no ongoing beefs with anyone including you ,whom I look upon as free entertainment.lol

 

Nice try, but your post history tells a different story. Now go find another Johnson thread you can defend on to the death.

 

There has just been a thread about him here.
Jack Johnson All Time Ranking
Discussion in 'Classic Boxing Forum' started by SwarmingSlugger, Jul 4, 2026.
I didn't post on it.
You're seriously stupid aren't you.lol

 

Wow, you found one! Congratulations! Please be sure to continue taking every comment literally! LOL

 

Neither lost to anyone out of their era.

That is the problem with this "weak era" argument. There is no factual foundation to it. Supposedly there is no competition. But everyone who competed in that era lost in that era, including Liston, Patterson, Cleveland Williams, Folley.

The reverse? Harold Johnson beat Machen and Doug Jones in the sixties. Moore ko'd Lavorante in the sixties.

So there is no basis for the weak era argument except unsupported opinion. Or as you put it, "just plain shite."

Now Willie James? Have you seen him on film? Contemporaries thought he had promise. 6' 3" over 200 lbs., a strong punch and some boxing skills. He seemed to be putting it together when he killed Olympic gold medalist Ed Sanders in a match. Not surprisingly, it seems to have affected him strongly, and after one more fight he was out of boxing.

Matthews? Hadn't lost in 9 years and more than fifty fights and was on a 35 bout winning streak when he outpointed Layne. Had risen to the #1 ranking in the light-heavyweight division. In a long career, 20 years, he lost after he left his teens only to an undefeated champion and three men who were ranked in the top five of their division.

Hurley trashing Matthews? Classic scapegoating, I think. "Genius Jack" passed up a winnable shot at Maxim and the light-heavy title to go after Marciano and Walcott and the big prize. It was a bad move. Hurley couldn't take the justified criticism and so dumped on Matthews. We see this kind of behavior quite a bit among egoistic politicians, and so it is not surprising from an egoistic boxing guru.

*on Matthews challenging Maxim. I think it would have been a toss up fight.

 

Matthews? Hadn't lost in 9 years and more than fifty fights and was on a 35 bout winning streak when he outpointed Layne. "



Only 10 of those prior to Layne were heavies ,and 2 of them were marginal.

Let's take a look at them.
Buford 20-14-6 won 2 of last 6
Beshore30 -12-1 won2 of last 10
Peterson 59-39-8 won 4 of last 15
Culbertson 20-17-3 won 1 of last 13
Whitlock 28-10-1 lost last 7
Jones13-8-2 won 2 of last 5
Henri 14-22-1 won 2 of last13
Eagle 32-25-7 won 3 of last11
Kaplan 24-9-0 lost previous 4
Not quite so impressive looking now is it?
NB Hurley told Mathews ,when he began managing him,you don't know how to fight yet". ps James was 19-5-1when he faced Sanders 4 of those losses were by ko.

 

Matthew’s looks good on film. He was thought of well by his contemporaries. Layne didn’t think Marciano had a chance against him. Although I do take fighters opinions the same as any other boxing fan he did fight both of them. He was carefully managed like many but he was still a good fighter if not a natural LHW. Many have moved up and done great things so I don’t even look at that as a knock.
Layne was on the down swing and was not good w training by then but he was still formidable losing a many of close decisions to LaStarza, Baker, and a few others. Many think he won both the LaStarza and Baker (2 fight) matched

 

Honest opinions like this one are always welcome ,and valued.