Can anyone tell me about Jimmy Barry (Bantamweight)

I think overly focusing on lineage tends to cost a lot of important detail.

Bantamweight is kinda extreme in terms of 105 vs 116 or so, but a lot of the divisions were all over the place, and in terms of who's included in the lineage, I think it's often been done pretty arbitrarily with the early champions and not questioned enough.

I'm not sure what the best solution is. I would agree with not including Barry with modern bantamweights, but that seems to be how he was generally considered at the time, so I don't think it's right to lump him in with another group of fighters, who fought largely at a different limit, in a division that didn't exist yet.

I think Welterweight had a similar split, between 142 and 147 at one point, but I'll need to look into it. There were definitely similar splits with Featherweight.

I'm more and more thinking the whole idea of the champion lineage is basically a flawed concept

 

Bantamweight is the most extreme one tbh. I mean Coulon could be classed as a two weight champion with what he achieved by merging the two lines but he's never once been seen that way.

Featherweight had a split but one wasn't generally recognised. So Murphy continued to claim his title at 118 but no one took it seriously. Dixon didn't continue his title claim when he lost. McGovern definitely claimed a Bantamweight crown and the succession that came before him all did as well. Some tried taking the championship to 130 pounds but it never really got any traction as a legitimate title claim in the featherweight division.

Lineage is flawed, I fully agree with that. But what I try to do is look at who the best in the division was at a given moment.

With every single other division its reasonably easy to do because it's either the lineal champ or the outstanding but ducked contender.

In bantamweight we have two parallel title claims at the same time using different weights. It doesn't help that the lower end was considered paperweight by some and the upper end was considered bantamweight by some.

But ultimately if we are to say who's the most legitimate bantamweight champion in 1900 you have to consider whether or not you want to accept the "paperweight" lineage or the "small featherweight" lineage. And it stays like that until Coulon unified the two claims and Kid Williams then unified every single claim on the planet.

I get what you mean about saying Barry and Coulon never once claimed to be Flyweights.

It's just such a unique division in its pioneer years.

 

@BitPlayerVesti

https://boxrec.com/media/index.php/Paperweight

 

I'm enjoying this BTW, very few care enough about the lower divisions.

I wonder if @Flea Man is gonna give his two cents on the old paperweight situation.

I've read his bantamweight top ten breakdown on the other site so I know what his thought once were (that made me really rethink my rating of Herman BTW so thanks for that)

 

Paperweight
Jimmy Barry Sept 1894-Dec1898
Casper Leon April 1899-June 1899
Patsy Donovan June 1899-October 1899
Steve Flanagan October 1899-March 1900
Danny Dougherty March 1900-April1901
Kid McFadden April 1901-May1901
Danny Dougherty May 1901-November 1901
Harry Forbes November 1901-August 1903
Frankie Neil August 1903-October 1904
Joe Bowker October 1904-May 1905

118
George Dixon February 1890-Jan1901
Terry McGovern January 1901-March 1901
Harry Harris March 1901-Nov 1901

As far as I can tell, the claim of Kid Murphy, followed by Coulon, whilst it shares the label Bantamweight, it doesn't follow any sort of indication championship line from either Barry or Dixon.

Still don't think I can realistically include the paperweight champions alongside the bantamweight champions. Even if in some parts of the world they shared the same name.

 

I rank Jimmy Barry in my combined 105/108 rankings.

Not sure he makes the top 10 but he’s a contender for the no.10 spot. The Chicago scene was very deep, and of course he also beat one of the best tiny Brits of the era as well.

Barry also one of the few fighters to concede that the era that came after him was full of better fighters.

 

Just from reading this thread, it seems to me he fought in the same weight range as Jimmy Wilde and he should be classified as a predecessor of what was soon to become the flyweight division. So, for comparison purposes with future champions, it would be best to rate him against flyweight champions. Seems like a no-brainer to me. Am I missing something?

 

Yeah, the problem is the Paperweight lineage was seen as the spiritual predecessor to the Bantamweight lineage.

The Flyweight lineage came many years later.

I think it should be PW - > FLW, but that's more based on the weights than reality.

 

Most of his ‘paperweight’ claim fights were 105 to 108 (think he might’ve had a few 110lb ‘defences’) too so more a precursor to light fly/straw

Johnny Coulon similar defending title claims at 108 AND 112, before the ‘bantam’claim settled at 116 and later 118lbs (which is the bantam division we have known and loved ever since)

Wilde did establish the first ‘official’ flyweight lineage after annexing IBU/British titles and beating the best couple of American flyweights. This coincided with the National Sporting Club (Covent Garden) setting their ideas of what the weight classes should be: flyweight at 112lbs was one of them and a few years later Wilde became the first universally recognised World flyweight champ

 

But aren't weights be the best measure of the classification?

 

I personally think so, it's just at the time paperweights where considered small bantamweights.

When the Flyweight division started I don't think anyone considered it the new paperweight.

 

According to BoxRec, Wilde weighed 105 pounds in the fight his last fight before winning international recognitions as flyweight champion and 106 pounds in his first fight following. Still seems to me for the practical purpose of discussing Barry's place in the vast pantheon of great fighters that he should be compared with fighters from other eras in the flyweight division.

 

Wilde used to weigh in fully dressed, atleast for a number of fights, so you can't take his weights at face value

 

Yes, but that only adds strength to my point that Barry's career should be evaluated at flyweight. If Wilde, weighing anywhere from 97 to 110 pounds fit into the flyweight classification then so did Barry.

 

To be clear, in terms of comparing Barry with other boxers, I'd agree with comparing him to flyweights, light flyweights and minimumweights.

In terms of championship lineage it's more complex.