The Top 100 Pound for Pound All-Time Greats

Discussion in 'Classic Boxing Forum' started by McGrain, Feb 15, 2013.


  1. Flea Man

    Flea Man มวยสากล Full Member

    82,426
    1,467
    Sep 7, 2008
    Okay, then I disagree.
     
  2. McGrain

    McGrain Diamond Dog Staff Member

    113,022
    48,138
    Mar 21, 2007
    Yeah, Armstrong and Langford are pretty different for sure. And Langford was anything but a brawler, more a trapsmith like Fitz or a stalker like Louis. Too little film to be sure I guess. He forces the lead. Armstrong is more a brawler than Langford. He's more the pure pressure-swarmer.
     
  3. Senya13

    Senya13 Boxing Junkie Full Member

    12,971
    2,414
    Jul 11, 2005
    Short Dec 1913 article by John Edward Wray, sporting editor of St. Louis Post-Dispatch.

    Welsh, Ritchie and McFarland Are a Wonderful Mitt Wielding Trio.
    --------
    BY JOHN E. WRAY.

    ST. LOUIS, Mo., Dec. 12.--...

    The Big Three of Pugilism.

    Perhaps in the history of the boxing game no such trio of wonderful mitt artists in the same weight class ever contemporaneously existed as fans find today in Packy McFarland, Freddie Welsh and Willie Ritchie. McFarland seems to be edging above the others in weight, but he still claims to be able to do 135 pounds at 3 o'clock, and until it is shown that he can't, why he must be considered.

    Perhaps in all the country there is no one better able to offer an opinion on the three than Harry Trendall, who has fought all three men.

    Against Welsh, Trendall suffered a knockout.

    Against Ritchie, Trendall lost a rattling good fight.

    Against McFarland he was utterly outclassed.

    Packey Has Everything.

    Here's what Trendall thinks of the men:

    "Packey McFarland is undoubtedly the most wonderful boxer of the day. The McFarland I met was wonderfully strong. He was at all times able to handle me with ease, which is more than I can remember of any other lightweight. Several times Packey lifted me up and practically placed me where he wanted me.

    "Then, too, his boxing is simply bewildering. I could seldom tell from one moment to another what to expect. His style consists of an endless variety of attack. You almost never catch him off balance or in such a position that he can not lead, block, advance or break ground.

    "As for his punch, it's solid and it hurts. I'm told that he 'pulled' most of his punches, in his bout against me. If he did, Packey has the force to stop anybody, if he chooses to try.

    Ritchie Depends on His Left.

    "Ritchie is a one style man. He has a wonderfully good left hand, but that about lets him out. He has a good head, is fast and game and has some sting to his blows. But when I fought him I felt that I had a chance.

    "He puzzled me for four rounds and then I found him and almost made up, in the last two rounds, the ground I had lost in the first four. I would feel that I had a good chance with Ritchie today.

    "When i fought Welsh in 1908 I was green and had not had experience. He put me away cleanly enough and beat me decisively up to the knockout. Nevertheless, I am sure that I could give Welsh a good argument today and would, as with Ritchie, feel that I had a rattling chance to land on top.

    "I don't think there's another man of my weight in the world can do to me what McFarland did in the seventh and eighth rounds--bewilder me completely. I'm free to say that I did not know from what direction the gloves were coming, at times."
     
  4. McGrain

    McGrain Diamond Dog Staff Member

    113,022
    48,138
    Mar 21, 2007
  5. Senya13

    Senya13 Boxing Junkie Full Member

    12,971
    2,414
    Jul 11, 2005
    Charles Mathison on Benny Leonard. He was sporting editor of multiple newspapers since mid-1880s, starting at Detroit Free Press, then moving through different New York newspapers, and ending up at Ring magazine as the associate editor.

    1917-06-24 The Sun (New York, NY) (page II5)
    Leonard the Superior of Preceding Champions
    --------
    Present Title Holder Proficient in Every Detail of Boxing Science.
    --------
    By CROSS COUNTER.

    The assertion that Benny Leonard, the present lightweight champion of the world, is superior in boxing and fighting to the best of the former holders of the title may shock and surprise many of the old timers who never admit that any ring men of modern times are the equals of the glove gladiators of the past.

    Having closely watched the former lightweight kings in important contests, and having studied Benny Leonard in action at close range, I have no hesitation in declaring that in general efficiency he excels any of his predecessors in the championship.

    I have in mind Jack McAuliffe, an aggressive, hard hitting battler, but with only a modicum of the scientific attainments of Leonard.

    George Lavigne, a youngster of tremendous power, combativeness and punching ability, but entirely lacking in defensive skill, and powerless to reach clever boxers, as witness his unsuccessful efforts to land on Kid McPartland, Griffo and Frank Erne.

    Frank Erne, a clever boxer and fair hitter, but lacking the generalship and aggressiveness of Leonard.

    Joe Gans, the greatest lightweight of his time, a skilful, crafty boxer and knockout hitter with either hand. In my opinion Leonard is speedier than Gans, is a better defensive boxer (Gans seldom entered a bout that he was not hit hard and in trouble) and hits quite as effectively.

    Griffo a Clever Boxer.

    Nelson and Wolgast cannot be mentioned in the same breath with Leonard. Neither had anything except strength and ability to take punishment to commend them, and their wild swings never would have found lodgment on Leonard. Nelson's defeat of Gans was due entirely to the fact that the champion was forced to make a weight at which it was impossible for him to fight with vigor. Gans was compelled to weigh with trunks and shoes, and he entered the ring for his battles with Nelson at 131 1/2 pounds. If Nelson and Wolgast at their best could be pitted against Leonard to-day the new champion would make short work of them.

    Willie Ritchie, in the form he showed when he was outpointed in twenty rounds by Welsh, would be decisively defeated by Leonard in his present form.

    Of the non-title holders Young Griffo at his best would have outpointed Leonard in the champion's best form.

    Jem Carney, the British champion, who decisively defeated Jack McAuliffe, would if he could to-day enter the ring in his form of 1887 give Leonard a hard battle, London rules.

    Leonard is supreme because he combines in himself nearly all the good qualities of his predecessors and has none of their faults.

    His defence is practically impregnable, his offensive swift and destructive, his generalship of the first rank, his coolness icy and his confidence superb.

    It will be a long time before Leonard's superior is developed, but in the course of progress it will come about. This is evident from his marked superiority over the champions who preceded him.
     
  6. Flea Man

    Flea Man มวยสากล Full Member

    82,426
    1,467
    Sep 7, 2008
    Both of those pieces are very much appreciated. Thanks Senya.
     
  7. Senya13

    Senya13 Boxing Junkie Full Member

    12,971
    2,414
    Jul 11, 2005
    Too bad Mathison has omitted Packey from consideration vs Leonard. It is my personal opinion that prime McFarland would be too much for prime Leonard.
     
  8. Flea Man

    Flea Man มวยสากล Full Member

    82,426
    1,467
    Sep 7, 2008
    Do you agree with his assessment of Gans and Leonard's respective attributes?
     
  9. Senya13

    Senya13 Boxing Junkie Full Member

    12,971
    2,414
    Jul 11, 2005
    Gans wasn't as easy to hit as Mathison states. He wasn't as fleet on his feet as Leonard, but he had better blocking skills and was a better counter puncher.
     
  10. Flea Man

    Flea Man มวยสากล Full Member

    82,426
    1,467
    Sep 7, 2008
    That was my thought. I did think it weird he dismissed Gans, but perhaps the writer was a product of his time as others were, and didn't fancy Gans' stylings for other reasons (maybe, I gave read nothing else if the guy bar this, so if I'm being unfair I apologise)
     
  11. Senya13

    Senya13 Boxing Junkie Full Member

    12,971
    2,414
    Jul 11, 2005
    Mathison worked for New York papers, so I'm not sure how many Gans' fights he had seen after Aug. 31, 1900. Certainly, Willie Lewis and Jabez White are not very meaningful in such an assessment.
     
  12. lora

    lora Fighting Zapata Full Member

    10,305
    544
    Feb 17, 2010
    how many gans fights have you seen to make stylistic comparisons with Leonard?
     
  13. Flea Man

    Flea Man มวยสากล Full Member

    82,426
    1,467
    Sep 7, 2008
    I was only referring to him not being as hittable as the writer stated.
     
  14. Mr Butt

    Mr Butt Boxing Junkie Full Member

    14,678
    183
    May 16, 2009
    Considering the amount of footage available to watch on gans and leonard are we really able to call to much question over the observations of those that were around at the time .
     
  15. PetethePrince

    PetethePrince Slick & Redheaded Full Member

    28,760
    84
    May 30, 2009
    1. Interesting

    2.
    This content is protected


    3.
    This content is protected


    4.
    This content is protected