I haven't seen film of Blackburn but read that he was quite something at lightweight. And of course we know him for teaching Joe Louis everything he knew. We all know about Mayweather and at lightweight he had punching power. For those of you who may have seen film of Blackburn, how would you rate his chances of beating Mayweather at that weight?
I think he was a bit bigger than a lightweight tbh, didn't make the limit much at all I don't think. Weird career. Very good fighter. Nobody from that era is beating Mayweather under modern rules, not even Gans. Under those rules from way back when, Mayweather's hands are in bad trouble and he might not like some of what he gets. So as is often the case, whoever picks the yard has a serious advantage. Certainly wouldn't be mouthing off at any press conferences, I can tell you that.
Blackburn must have ended up fighting around middleweight as late in his career he fought Harry Greb.
Not sure what you mean by modern rules compared to around 1900? Number of rounds are a big difference as Gans would have almost shut out Nelson in all their bouts if they had been fifteen rounders as would have Corbett over Jeffries, etc. But aside from number of rounds what specific rules are you speaking of? Three minutes per round and minute rest were the same, fouls were the same, decisions often went to the local newsboys as knockouts were commonly the only clear verdicts but they are usually accepted as valid now.
3 ounce gloves with horsehair instead of 10 ounce gloves is a big one for a fighter with fragile hands. The left hook becomes a very dangerous punch with hands having so little protection. Fouls weren't the same; fighters were sometimes allowed to foul each other for 3 minutes if it was perceived to be even foul exchanges and lacing was possible and rarely resulted in a dq. Grapplilng was a part of the sport rather than a foul; alcohol was allowed (even encouraged) between rounds. Aggression was even more highly prized as a scoring attribute and "running" was absolutely unacceptable in some corners of the sport. You can see from the Dempsey-Willard fight that knockdowns were refereed very differently (even in cases where a neutral corner rule was in affect). You basically couldn't win on a cut unless the opponent quit (with one or two exceptions). Weigh ins were often ringside meaning you had to absolutely miss your mark; you had many fewer weight making tools and "supplements". The referee tended not to rescue hurt fighters so you had to finish a guy on his back. Fighting off the ropes were harder because there were often fewer of them and they were often looser, there were even world title fights where a rope would be formed of a barn wall, say, only a few years previous. There are so many differences it's impossible to list them all really.
Great response, some of these I knew and forgot, others I admit I didn't like the three ounce gloves.
Blackburn was a safety-first fighter, nowhere near Floyd in skills and cleverness. He wasn't a lightweight, though. Easy victory for Mayweather, regardless, even if we put him in mid-late 1900s.