Still a couple of hours before the whole family comes over. Hoping I could get your thoughts on Packey McFarland. Enlighten me on this man. And maybe where you'd rank him. ATG? Record varies: 103-1, 68-0, etc,. Happy Thanksgiving! :hi:
A phenomenal fighter. One of the trickiest ever. Could do pretty much anything. Battling Nelson wouldn't touch him. Neither would Ad Wolgast. Our comrade Senya has done a ton of research on Packey. Pick his brain the next time he logs in. I rank McFarland in my top 10 all time lightweights. Easily.
McFarland, the conqueror of Britton, Murphy and Freddie Welsh. The main fights I know him for. Arguably top 50, in my top 60.
And does anyone know of McFarland's lone loss to Dusty Miller? I've read it was by disqualification, newspaper decision, McFarland's head hitting the floor, it wasn't even Packey McFarland but Eddie McFarland! :huh
From 1909 until 1913 he was arguably P4P #1. Up until his retirement in 1913 only once, I think, a newspaper voted for his opponent as the victor, in his (officially) drawn battle with Jack Britton in January 1911 one Memphis newspaper wrote it thought Britton had got the better of it, the others scored for Packey or a draw. The Gibbons bout was only the second time during his career that somebody voted him the loser (still he got the majority of votes as the victor). He lost to Dusty Miller by DQ, pre-fight Chicago Tribune listing it as "Dusty" Miller vs. "Patsy" McFarland, 110 pounds avenged it by KO, although I haven't been able to track that bout down. J. J. Johnston and Sean Curtin claimed in their book that he lost another bout to Patsy O'Brien, but without any details when and how. Still to be researched are Milwaukee newspapers around 1904-1905, when he supposedly fought for some time there as an amateur, as Carl Tinrick of Holland or some similiar name (secondary source scan is of bad quality, reads like Carl Tmrick).
Both Battling Nelson and Ad Wolgast refused to negotiate for a bout with McFarland other than at 133 pounds ringside. Although they (Packey and Wolgast) were scheduled to meet at Milwaukee once, but the police prevented the bout from taking place, and after that Wolgast insisted on 133 pounds ringside or no bout. Packey was ready to make 133 pounds at 3 PM, or make 135 pounds ringiside (both things pretty common for title bouts during McAuliffe, Lavigne, Erne, Gans reigns), but both champions outright refused to accept such offers.
Ive always been puzzled by the number of writers who voted against Gibbons when he fought McFarland. In the unedited film of the fight McFarland spends most of his time concentrating on defense. I thought he was too safety minded and Gibbons won fairly handily.
If we go by when he became the best lightweight out there head-to-head, then, probably, Freddie Welsh bout on July 4, 1908, whish proved that Packey could do good in long-distance bouts, not just the short ones. Although some writers still doubted he could win over Nelson or Wolgast in a 45-round fight, but admitted in a 10-round or shorter bout neither of the two would have a chance. Ray Bronson 20-round draw? McFarland finished much the stronger of the two, although not being able to finish his opponent, who weakened considerably somewhere around the 15th round and held a lot, trying to survive, may count against Packey's chances. 20-round draw with Welsh? McFarland forced the fight in every round and finished much the stronger of the two. 20-round bout with Tommy Murphy? Many were disappointed with his chances after this bout also, as usual claiming Packey didn't show the punch necessary to become a champion. He won practically every round, but claimed he injured his right wrist around the 13th round, and was generally not feeling well during his training there and during the fight. Both fought furiously till the end, although both were tired. All in all, I don't think the long-distance would be that much of a disadvantage for Packey if he could persuade either Nelson or Wolgast to drop the condition of weighing in at 133 pounds ringside. As for the punch, he said in some interviews that once he gets a championship fight, he'd not try to save his hands in that one. It's not like Nelson or Wolgast were big punchers themselves.
like for instance I know McFarland was never the world champion but to put into a modern context: Igarashi is the lineal world champion at flyweight but when viloria beat Marquez I don't think anyone would doubt he's the best flyweight out there. Would you say the same is true when packer beat welsh? That gave him the credence of the best lightweight?