That you place Maher at the top.No criticism intended, your opinion is as valid as mine or anyone else's.
Choynski at 1 not sure where I place 2 and 3 but Choynski I definitely feel at 1. I need to get his bio. Expensive though.
Maher beat Choynski at peak, McCoy caught the other two slightly on the slide, McCoy has the thinnest resume, Maher probably the bigger number of good wins, you could swap them any which way.
Not easy as there is not boxing film on any of them in the ring, outside of shadow boxing and very light contact sparring. I think they are close. Maher was the best pure puncher of the three, but I think he was a bit of a glass cannon and the least skilled of the three. He lasted 1 round vs Fitzsimmons, and just three vs Peter Jackson and Joe Goddard, suggesting defense, and the ability to take a big punch were weaker parts of his game. McCoy took him out in 5, Ruhlin in 2. Maher's resume has a lot of unknown types on it. McCoy was an excellent boxer mobile type of boxer with a pound for pound type of punch, and perhaps has the best resume of wins. He beat both Maher and Choysnki via stoppage, plus owns a win over Ruhlin, and a draw vs O'Brien. McCoy probably would have been a better than average title opponent for Jack Johnson in 1909, as he was still winning late in his career, and could have beaten either Hart or Burns in 1904-1906 if given a chance. Choysnki had the fasted feet, of the three ( Based on how quickly he moved in his 1910 clip with Jeffries ) but also lost via KO to Both Maher and McCoy. On the other hand, he has some big wins over Johnson, Godfrey, and draw with a green Jeffries. For a guy who can hit, Choynski's KO % is very low. So he either played it safe or did not hit as hard as some think. I think he had the ability to land stinging type of blows that could be delivered with speed, but he did not hit hard enough to stop say Jim Corbett, Joe Goddard ( pas this best ), Armstrong or Tom Sharkey so... Best guess: 1. McCoy 2. Choynski 3. Maher *Although Maher is better in head to head match up with Choynski. I think Choynski had a better chance to upset the better fighters.
He has a lot of short fights on Boxrec, so that'll skew it. Plus back then you sometimes got stuff like police stoppages going down as points wins. You can't take early boxrec raw stats too seriously.
Maher beat Goddard, Choynski, Slavin, Ruhlin, Godfrey, Craig, O'Donnell, CC Smith, Klondike, Kennedy, Russel and drew Sharkey. He effectively beat Hall and McAuliffe as well. The wins were all knockouts. However Choynski and McCoy probably had more marque wins but Maher's debt is impressive. Also from the exhibition loss to Jackson in 1889-Maher basically an amateur quit as he was outclassed, no knockdowns- until the McCoy loss in 1900 when Peter was nearly 34, he lost only to Goddard(avenged) and Fitz in hundreds of fights.
I get the idea, that Maher was the most outstanding contender of the three, over the longest period of time. He seems to have been unlucky that Fitz was around!
You havent seen either Maher or McCoy and only a short clip of a 42 years old Choynski sparring, yet from that you say Choynski had the fastest feet? you must be psychic! What is a glass cannon? Never heard the expression before!
