George Dixon

He sure does.

Firstly you would have to consider that he might well have been the greatest fighter of the 19th century in any weight class.

Despite being no more than a bantemweight, he was the longest reigning champion in the featherweight divisions history, in an era that was stacked.

Some sources indicate that he and not Joe Louis might hold the record for greatest number of title defences.

Even the great Gans was compared unfavourably to Dixon by some, during his prime.

 

Dixon is tough to grade. He never beat a hall of fame fighter.

 

I think that says as much about the era's and divisdions that the ibhof neglect as anything else.

Also, when you dig a bit deeper you will find that nearly all of his draws and decision bouts should have been scored in his favour.

 

A lot of his losses as well, according to most accounts.

 

Neither has Vitali.Nor will he.

 

Which of the decision loses should have been in his favor?

Dixon has prime decision losses to Erne, Smith and Pilmer.

IMO Dixon rates 4th as the best lower weight fighter from the 1890's to early 1900's behind Gans, Griffo, and McGovern.

 

Behind Griffo? Lollercopters!

 

In the reports I read, Young Griffo got the better of George Dixon by a small margin.

 

I really need to research Dixon.

 

Janitor,

I read that Griffo got the better of Dixon in the series.

How did Dixon give Mcgovern all he could handle? Mcgovern TKO'd him in 8, and beat him via decision in six?

McGovern Ko'd Palmer in 1, and Palmer " drew " with Dixon.

Of course McGovern romped Gans in two though some feel ( not me ) it was a fix.

The talent level in the lower weights was better in the early 1900's. In the 1890's it was not quite as good.