Best fighter of each decade not to win a championship

Packey McFarland's a good call except he didn't have the same longevity in those decades nor span as many weight classes as Sam Langford.

 

Langford of that period was outpointed by Danny Duane, Jack Blackburn, Dave Holly.

 

Packey had consistency and dominance at or around the weights he fought at, something Langford was missing.

 

He also won against Joe Gans and drew with Joe Walcott (some say robbed).

McFarland never fought Blackburn. That would have been an interesting fight too.

 

Langford was fighting the top fighters over and over again for a very long period of time. Consistency is relative to circumstances.
Also, it was reckoned that he agreed not to go all out against many opponents, simply so he could get the fights. He was a killer puncher and was feared in that respect.

Anyhow, I pick Langford as the best not to win a championship.

 

Packey would have outworked and outpunched typical cautious Blackburn.
1903-12-31
Mike (Twin) "Sullivan never showed better in his life. He had speed and was very clever. On account of the lightweight he made a trifle over 132 pounds, he could not hit as hard as he has in the past. Blackburn had many pounds the better of Sullivan and was close to 140 pounds, but despite this, Sullivan had him backing most of the time. The Cambridge boy was the aggressor from the beginning to the end of the bout."

 

McFarland was fighting top fighters over and over again for several years, making them look like second or third-raters in most cases.

If Langford wasn't doing his best (and he often didn't, appearing unprepared/out of shape), that's his problem.

 

Herol Graham 80s has often been cited by us Brits as being a great non champ.

 

In the 1900s Langford had 15 fights against future HOFers - McFarland had 2.
in the 1910s Langford had 42 fights against future HOFers - McFarland had 6.

IBRO ranks Langford #6 all-time, p4p. McFarland is not in their Top-30... where, incidentally, Langford is the only non-champion listed!

 

Teofilo Stevenson

 

I've got Ibeabuchi for the 90s.

Ayala has a case for the 80s.

I'm tempted to say Eric Harding for the 2000's. He beat Tarver and then gave Jones a difficult fight despite blowing out his biceps early in the fight. He would also beat George Khalid Jones, David Telesco, and Daniel Judah.

Or maybe Zahir Raheem. He got jobbed by the ref against Rocky Juarez, easily beat Morales as an underdog, and almost beat Freitas.

 

HoF means **** to me. Their "experts" who are/were picking old-timers don't know much beyond the heavyweight division and a certain set of name fighters. Where are Benny Yanger, Harlem Tommy Murphy, Young Erne, Matt Wells, etc, among their inductees?

Same for IBRO. I have pointed out many times, these so-called "experts" have Jack Blackburn ranked at lightweight (and ahead of McFarland at that). That outright tells me they have done little to none research on that period.

 

Then he does not qualify ,unless he had professional fights that we don't know about?

You chose the 1960's.

"For the ninteen-sixties I think it is likely Laszló Papp" .

Now you want to say Papp for the 50's ? Papp didn't turn pro till May 1957. Or do you think his amateur wins qualify him as the best fighter not to gain the pro title in the 1950's too?
After twice asking you who Papp beat to justify your picking him you haven't replied to the question.
Last chance to name the ranked professional contenders he beat .If you don't respond we can take it that there aren't any !

 

i'm shocked lucas never got a belt. not that he was particullarly great or anything but many lesser guys managed it in that period.

80's is an interesting one, have to think about that.

 

From the '80s on it begins to get a little murky. There were so many belts available that they were practically handing them out. Therefore, very few standouts who did not win a title. Offhand, from that period on I can only think of Oba Carr, David Tua and Ike who I considered standouts that did not win a strap.