Just because a boxer might be good, it doesn't mean they're automatically getting rated by The Ring. Even if they're rated by The Ring in one year, it doesn't mean they're a mainstay in the top-flight of Boxing. It's as true today, as it was back then. Looking at some of the wins you cite for Gains, of which a few could be considered 'good', the first thing I notice is that they are scattered over an 8-year period. Was Gains consistently testing himself against a very high level of opposition, in any given year, so as to force a claim to be rated? I don't think so. Some of the opponents you mention, include a 14-2-2 Schmeling, in 1925. I'm not even sure why you mention Rojas, who'd already compiled a losing record by the time Gains met him in 1927; worsened still, during a year in which Rojas lost 11 of 13 matches. I am unsure of what significance you believe there is in Gains splitting a pair with Burke? I also wonder how Cook and Scott figure into your argument, given neither of them were ranked when they met Gains. Renault would be retired, less than a year later, going 0-4, until then. Gains beating the then Ring #3, Primo Carnera, deserved recognition in the low-end of the Ring Ratings. However, Carnera falling out of the NBA Rankings by September '32 probably had less to do with him losing to Gains, as it did him adding another loss in the shape of Poreda, during August '32. I'm glad you brought up Neusel, who invariably gets mentioned in any post with a connection to Carnera. He, McCorkindale, Gains and Charles (and Peterson) are intrinsically linked and are much of a muchness, in terms of their level. As I alluded to earlier, being good doesn't grant automatic entry into the Ring's Ratings, but a moment in the sun might get you there temporarily. In my opinion, Neusel piggy-backed into those Ratings, via his win over Gains (who we already know had beaten Carnera - I think McCorkindale and Peterson would gain similar recognition for the same reason, later on). He then scored good wins, on paper, against other ranked opponents - notably, Poreda ('33); Levinsky and Loughran ('34). All of these guys were heading towards the exit of top-flight boxing, by this time (and the Levinsky decision is disputed). Nonetheless, things are looking good for Neusel, until he meets his fellow countryman and a resurgent Schmeling, who embarrasses the pretender in front of their home crowd, in 1934. So, let's look at what actually happened, within given timeframes, instead of dropping random W/L numbers, across varying periods. For '33... ...Neusel has: Ray Impelletiere W Stanley Poreda W (Ranked above him) Les Kennedy W Harry Crossley W Jack Pettifer W Don McCorkindale L DQ Maurice Griselle W Don McCorkindale D Pierre Charles L George Cook W 1 win over a ranked contender (who ranked above him); 2 losses and 1 draw against unranked opposition. Levinsky has: Don McCorkindale W Jack Sharkey W (Ranked above him) Tuffy Griffiths W Charley Retzlaff W Johnny Risko L (Ranked above him) Unknown Winston W (Ranked below him) KO Christner W Tommy Loughran L 2 wins over ranked contenders (1 of whom ranked above him and 1 below him); 2 losses; 1 to a ranked contender (who ranked above him) and another to an unranked opponent. It's clear that Levinsky outdoes Neusel in 1933 and deserves to hold his ranking above him. Now, for 1934... ...Neusel has: Len Harvey D Max Schmeling L (Ranked above him) Tommy Loughran W (Ranked above him) King Levinsky W (Ranked above him) Natie Brown D 2 wins over ranked contenders (who ranked above him); 1 loss against a ranked contender (who ranked above him) and 2 draws against unranked opposition. Levinsky has: Art Lasky D Salvatore Ruggirello W Art Sykes W Art Lasky L Lee Ramage W (Ranked below him) Walter Neusel L (Ranked below him) Charley Massera W (Ranked below him) 2 wins over ranked contenders (both of whom ranked below him); 2 losses; 1 to a ranked contender (who ranked below him) and another to an unranked opponent; 1 draw. So, here we see something, which on paper, looks like it should go to Neusel. But, let's look at it like someone who's rating the performances on balance... ...Levinksy actually loses two places in his ranking, to Art Lasky and Steve Hamas. Why is that? The answer to Lasky is obvious, but Hamas shoots up from #9 to #1 contender. This is because Hamas beat both Schmeling and Lasky that year. Schmeling holds his own miraculous position, at #4. Neusel bombed out of the ratings, because he'd been soundly beaten by TKO, in what was described as a 'master vs pupil' type scenario. His SD win against Levinsky was unconvincing and Loughran probably had his worst year ever, managing to not win a single bout in 1934 and himself crashing out of the Ring's Ratings. Neusel's Drawn bouts speak for themselves. Len Harvey, in particular, sits alongside McCorkindale, Gains, Charles, Peterson and Neusel, at around the same/similar level. Perhaps Neusel did deserve to maintain his ranking - maybe just. But, he really doesn't have that strong an argument, once the opposition and performances are looked at more closely. No one in the mix suffered a defeat as badly as he did, that year.