Harry Wills fought 43 fights from 1919 to 1925 who really had a chance

But skill in boxing isn't necessarily the bottom line. Was Jeffries the most skilled guy out there. Was he a "master craftsman?" Was Willard? In boxing one can be less skilled but still be better because of strength, stamina, power, size, speed, etc.

"Wikipedia should not be the standard to which we defer."

At least the definition they printed actually means something.

The definitions you are trying to impose mean nothing, because there is no comparison between plumbing or woodworking and boxing.

 

Yes, and that only strengthens my argument. A journeyman can become a contender, or a champion even. Because skill isn't everything. And in fact a man with LESS THAN journeyman skill can become a contender too.

If there was no comparison, the word "journeyman" would never have made it into the boxing lexicon.

Journeyman boxer means someone who is good and solid at the craft of boxing.
It's not difficult.

You can have your own definition if you want.

 

Edgren, while debating the "one hand free" rule, is refering to old-time referees Charlie White and George Siler as being competent as opposed to "modern" referees. I have a long write-up by Siler in Chicago Tribune on Jan 28, 1906, where he discussed Queensberry rules in details and Edgren is plainly wrong in his claim, based on what Siler said. In Britain, they were more strict regarding clinches, and there Wills would have been disqualified for what he had done, but in USA they had a different understanding of it.

 

The rules are the rules.
I think British and Americans should be able to interpret the rules in the same way, after all we almost speak the same language.

Whether Edgren was right or wrong about that, I don't know. There I assume he's referring to Wills constantly 'holding and hitting'.
But the hit on the break was a different matter.

 

That's what Siler discussed in his write-up. It's a bit too long, though, so I don't want to spend time retyping it. The point is, most of the time, it was up to the referee or what the fighters agreed to prior to the fight, how to interpret this or that paragraph of the rules. And this includes hitting on the break.

 

"The rules are the rules"

Set by the governing body, and that would be by the state in the USA for the most part.

"we almost speak the same language"

I had a professor back in the day fond of saying the British and Americans were two peoples separated by a common language.

Bottom line--it is obvious watching films that Americans had a different take on the rules from the British or Europeans.

 

This post assumes that the term "journeyman" was adopted by boxing from what it meant in plumbing or something.

Are you certain about that?

I think journeyman first came into American sports from baseball, where average players were frequently traded from one team to another and so were "journeymen" journeying around the country from one city to another or from one league to another and sometimes from one position to another.

 

Arcels statement must be taken with some level of truth. Arcel had way too much knowledge of the fighters from this time to just brush his statements off as being completely off base. Instead of trying to interpret a strict definition of the term "journeyman" instead I believe it should be looked at in a broader sense. Arcel is emphasizing that Wills was not in Dempseys league.