Tommy Loughran All Time Great?

The night of the fight Loughran was quoted as saying "The weight was too much for me. I did not put up the bout of which I am capable, but I have no alibis. After being knocked down in the first round I just couldnt get started. It really was not until the end of the seventh (of an eight round fight- K) that I found I was myself." Later the same night Tommy sobbed to his friends and relatives: "I know I didnt put up my best fight. I can box a lot better."

As for Braddock Im just not very impressed with him at any stage of his career. We have the film of Braddock Loughran and in it Braddock looks like an amateur. He really gives one of the poorest exhibitions of skill of a title challenger I have ever seen. He improved somewhat later but he was never as good as the size of his heart and his determination. Even against Baer that fight was a lot closer than the mythology would lead one to believe. Like I said, I understand that Braddock had a high rating and thats why he got his title shot, I dont dispute that, but his limitations had already been exposed against the better fighters he had fought before ever facing Loughran. Its not like Loughran suddenly came out of nowhere to explode this myth of Braddocks greatness. Braddock got his ranking by knocking out Jimmy Slattery, and it wasnt known at the time (I know hindsight is great) but Slattery was by now a terrible alcoholic who was starting the beginning of a run that saw some severely hot and cold performances due in large part to his addiction.

 

Or Jack Sharkey. Max Schmeling I haven't decided on yet....Loughran could probably beaten Max Schmeling too. Carnera only beat him because of the ridiculous size disparity.

 

I read on here that he refused to fight white fighters because they are inherently faster and have natural rhythm and big dicks.

...... or was it black fighters ?
:huh

I can't remember. Something anyway.

 

It's certainly a widely held view. Nobody should view that footage without also watching Loughran-Walker for context however. Mickey was certainly not inept at dealing with larger men, and he was close to peak form at the time.

Braddock was taller, had a longer reach, and had stopped Jimmy Slattery during a six year stretch when only HOF competition Rosenbloom, Strib, Berlenbach and Loughran was able to beat Slattery. Nobody else stopped Slattery between Berlenbach in September 1925 and the much heavier Belanger in August 1932. Inept opposition was not sufficient for beating a prime Slattery, let alone stop him. Braddock also beat up Tuffy Griffiths in two. How badly could Braddock have sucked to be able to do this?

Further concerning Slattery, do we know when his performance began succumbing to the bottle? Might it have been only after the Braddock disaster? Walker was also known to imbibe freely. It's one thing for Braddock to beat even a dissipating Slattery, but a nine round stoppage?

It was just one newspaper that favored him, and there's otherwise no question as to who had the best of it. Still, just to be able to compete with Gene when that young and out sized is a remarkable achievement. Tommy's chin wasn't all that, Gene could hit some, even at this stage, and Tunney was then looking to redeem himself for his loss to Greb. Loughran's performance as a teen upstart seems credible enough.

True for Charles as well, and even more so for SRR at 135 and 147 prior to WW II. (Especially Ray at LW after beating the reigning Angott in non-title competition. Robby and Hank should both have been four division champions decades before anybody else.)

Did it come across as indignant? Chalk it up to flawed and confusing phraseology on my part. In that naming of one "other" contender aside from Sharkey, I intended for that to be in reference to a second challenger after Strib who had yet to receive a HW title bid, if Schmeling had made a second defense prior to the rematch with Sharkey. I meant for it to be implicit that Strib was the best qualified challenger for Max in Cleveland.

Again, confusing grammar on my part. That 12-0 streak was in reference to Loughran's record between June 1930 and December 1931. (Blame it on my monochromatic addiction to parentheses. Maybe I should alter the type color slightly when I use them. Still, I wasn't sufficiently clear in my intent and meaning just then.)

Again, some poor phraseology on my part. Our only real point of contention seems to concern Braddock's merits and qualities as a challenger for Tommy. Braddock TKO 9 Slattery therefore deserves some scrutiny with respect to this. Was Slattery somehow compromised, or does Braddock's win demonstrate that he was a far, far better light heavyweight than the footage with Loughran may indicate?

King Levinski and Belanger were much heavier than Slattery. Throw those three losses out, and you have a peak Rosenbloom beating him 3X. Beyond Maxie, Slattery's prime conquerors aside from Braddock were Dave Shade and Strib, Loughran, Berlenbach and Greb. Elite competition, typically in prime form when beating Slattery. That's pretty racy company for Braddock to consort with.

Anybody who tries seriously arguing against Tommy as an ATG will face some entertaining and withering rebuttals here.

 

Sharkey pretty blew Loughran out of there in my opinion. Loughran did not hold a significant advantage over Sharkey in the first two rounds by any means, Sharkey was landing some telling blows of his own, and then knocked Loughran out in the third.

Both were washed up during the rematch and it was scored a draw, but a flash knockdown of Loughran's decided the win for him.

Loughran did score three wins over heavyweight champions, but none were all that important to his heavyweight ranking at the time.

 

On a side note here about Tommy, after losing his early goes with Greb its interesting to note he said the secret to beating Harry was to take control with body punching.

 

Maybe but both his draw and win over Greb were pretty controversial with plenty of people feeling Greb won.

 

Sharkey was an " off and on " fighter, but he had too much skill, size and power for Loughran, who really was not a good puncher at light heavy.

Schemling was too big, too strong, too technical, and in my opinion would be an even harder match up for Loughran. Loughran moved well, and had a good left jab, but was not Roy Jones type of quick, and like I said was not going to over power anyone at heavyweight.

 

Hardly a justifiable question

 

I consider him an all-time great. He beat plenty of good LHW and HWs-

Jimmy Darcy, Mike McTigue, Yale Okun, Georges Carpentier, Harry Greb, Johnny Risko, Young Stribling, Jimmy Slattery, Leo Lomski, Pete Latzo, Ernie Schaaf, Jimmy Braddock, King Levinsky, Max Baer, Tuffy Griffiths, Paulino Uzcudun, Steve Hamas, Jack Sharkey, Arturo Godoy, and Al Ettore among others. He lost a close fight to Gene Tunney. He beat many of these guys several times... he also lost to some of these guys... sometimes more than once.

I do count Newspaper Decisions. I consider his record to be 127-31-12 (18) 4 No-Decisions overall in 174 fights. He was only stopped 3 times... LKOby5 Johhny Viggi (he suffered broken ribs, his 7th pro fight, no rematch), LKOby3 Jack Sharkey (he also beat Sharkey), and LKOby2 Steve Hamas (he also beat Hamas).

 

Never thought Casey was up to much, myself.

 

Used a lot of quotes from 'experts', I think he is a brilliant story teller and can get you interested in fighters and tell you abit about them.

 

Yeah, I enjoy Mr Casey work, he is a not bad painter also

Loughran is a ATG for sure