I’m starting to think so. Been spending a lot of time researching the Lightweight and below scene from the turn of the century through to the 20s recently. A lot of great fighters stand out from this period, including several I had never taken much notice of before. Lockport Jimmy Duffy, Joe Mandot, Joe Shugrue, Carl Tremaine, etc. being among the most notable. Most are familiar with Dundee, I’d wager. He’s that guy that fought a whole lot, got some good wins, but also a lot of losses. Won a title at one point or another. Too many losses to delve any further into, really. Borderline ATG. Probably not in the top 100. That’s more or less how I saw him, anyway. Now, that’s become “indisputable ATG, possibly top 50.” As far as quality and quantity of opposition faced, he’s hands down among the top handful of fighters to ever put on a pair of boxing gloves. Any era. Any weight. He was facing this class of opponent pretty routinely throughout his 334 fight career, ranging from Flyweight to Lightweight over 22 years and vastly different eras of the sport. He turned pro a year after Joe Gans retired and retired a year after Henry Armstrong turned pro. I don’t really see how his number of losses can be held against him given these circumstances. Unless someone was trying to make a case for him being another Harry Greb or something. He wasn’t. He didn’t prove his superiority over his class of opponents the way the very greatest did. However, he clearly proved himself among the best of them time and time again. And he did so against a class of opponents as great as any in history. Some of his more favorable outcomes against top contenders, champions, and fellow all time greats. Bear in mind most of these men were significantly larger: 2 wins and 2 draws against Benny Leonard 20 round draw against Johnny Kilbane 3 wins and 1 draw against Rocky Kansas 3 wins and 1 draw against Charley White 1 win and 1 draw against Willie Ritchie 2 wins and 1 draw against Richie Mitchell Win against Lou Bogash 12 round draw against Johnny Griffiths Win against Benny Valger 2 draws against Joe Mandot (along with a highly controversial 20 round loss) 3 wins and 2 draws against Joe Shugrue Win against Eugene Criqui Win against Leach Cross 20 round draw against Patsy Cline 2 wins against Philadelphia Pal Moore Draw against Tommy O’Toole Win against Jack Bernstein 6 wins and 1 draw against George KO Chaney Win against Eddie Martin 3 wins and 1 draw against Joe Welling Win against Jimmy Goodrich 12 round draw against Matty Baldwin 2 wins against Matt Wells Win against Pal Moran 2 wins against Ever Hammer Draw against Mel Coogan 5 wins against Frankie Callahan 4 wins and 2 draws against Frankie Britt Win against Patsy Kline Win against Eddie O’Keefe 2 wins against Johnny O’Leary 2 wins and 4 draws against Willie Jackson
I've always thought he was underrated, but I've never rated him that high. But now you've spelt his résumé out for me, and I've looked into a few of the names I didn't know about (for shame, I know), I'm starting to agree that my position of the mid 90s was too low for Dundee. I'll be sure to do some side by side comparisons with guys much higher, see where he ends up. Great thread, Bujia.
He fought from the caveman era to the pseudo modern era, I wonder how different his style would have looked from the beginning to the end.
He is, for a variety of reasons. First, his world title record is spotty. I can't remember exactly what it is but he's something like 50.50 with a world title on the line. So certainly, he was not a great champion. Second, he fought at the junior weights before anyone really cared about them and even when he was involved in other weight divisions he tended to do it at a weird weight. Third, he moved about the weights a fair little bit but he yo-yoed which is weird. Combined with his limited title success it created a bit of confusion - this was deepened by the fact that there were so many Dundees around at the time - check it out, there really were quite a few. Next, some of his biggest wins were over short distances in the NWS era. Both are undermining. He missed out, too, on Ring's renaissance, he was rated by Ring but only for a couple of years, he never really benefitted there. Finally, he has an absolute stack of losses. And tbf, you can't ignore these.
Good points that make sense as to why he was overlooked in the pre-internet era, even though some would be misconceptions. I just figured he’d be one of the guys that gained new life in the modern age, and he hasn’t. The number of losses are the main reason, I’m sure. Which is odd, given how many Langford and Charles fans there are. Those are consensus top 5 guys who you figure would be a lot more heavily scrutinized by comparison. Not the case, though. I just find it odd that a heavily mixed record would deter almost everyone from really examining his career, regardless of where you rate him. I don’t see that kind of disregard for Zivic, Angott, or an even more obscure fighter that gained that sort of new age following in Memphis Pal Moore. People love these guys. You bring up their losses and you’re looked at as a Floyd joyboy who’s only interested in perfect records. You bring up Johnny Dundee’s amazing wins resume to those same people and it’s “Uh-uh, too many losses. Next!” Well, damn it! I’ve had it! Time for some respect to be put on the man’s name.
