Was the 20s the golden era of boxing talent?

If you wanna keep McLarnin, I'll keep Walcott, who bested Lavigne, even though the decision was given against him.
Berg beat a featherweight and this gave him significant status at lightweight? Sorry, but no.
I didn't include McFarland on my list, because he was a nobody during that timespan.
I also didn't include Jack Blackburn, because he wasn't really a lightweight, he was a welterweight. I didn't add McGovern, because he was a featherweight. So what do we end up with?

1895-1905
first-raters:
Joe Gans, Kid Lavigne, Joe Walcott, Young Griffo, Frank Erne, Jimmy Britt, Battling Nelson, Philadelphia Jack O'Brien

second-raters:
George McFadden, Kid McPartland, Dal Hawkins, Spike Sullivan, Wilmington Jack Daly, Bobby Dobbs (although probably can be considered a welter, I'm not sure), Owen Ziegler, Young Peter Jackson, William Kid Parker, Willie Fitzgerald, Harry Lewis

What's your list?

But without even comparing the lists, another reason why I rate the turn of the century higher is they were more successful against heavier opposition, they didn't mind fighting (and often beating) welterweights, middleweights, some of them even went on to beat heavyweights. The same reason why I rate Gans over Leonard, or Ted Lewis over Britton (Lewis was naturally smaller).

 

I'm fine with that, although we both know McLarnin was more of a lightweight than Walcott ever was.

Beating Canzoneri, Chocolate and drawing with Petrolle is plenty credibility for a lightweight.

Well he did KO Jimmy Britt, even though he was over the lightweight limi twhen he did so.

So why add the likes of Walcott and Philly Jack? Are they any more lightweights than Blackburn? Of course not.

The Gans fight being the sham that it is, it's probably best to leave him off.

First Tier: Benny Leonard, Tony Canzoneri, Sammy Mandell, Jackie Kid Berg, Lew Tendler

Second Tier: Jimmy McLarnin, Billy Petrolle, Johnny Dundee, Rocky Kansas, Kid Kaplan

Third Tier: Ray Miller, Jimmy Goodrich, Charley White, Jackie Fields, Sid Terris, Bruce Flowers, Jack Bernstein, Ritchie & Pinky Mitchell (I think you've included some third tier fighters in your list, so I did the same)

Many of the fighters you've listed weren't lightweights in their primes though. Guys like Walcott and O'Brien and such that did move up and have succesful careers were not really lightweights. How many genuine lightweights in your list moved up and had that success?

The 20's featured a lot more featherweights moving up to the lightweight division and chocking the lightweight division out, and though there wasn't such expansive movement out of the lightweight division as there was at the turn of the century, the fact that more fighters hanged around in the division only meant that it strengthened it.

 

Walcott beat reigning lightweight champion, while himself weighing as a lightweight. He wasn't that far away from lightweight limit in his other bouts from the time. The previous fight, with Dick O'Brien, Walcott was 138 lbs, only 5 pounds above lightweight limit. McLarnin beating Sid Terris at lightweight is obviously not even close in significance.

Philadelphia Jack O'Brien was considered a first-rate lightweight for a couple of years, and there were talks of him fighting for the lightweight championship, or, at least, him standing in the way for anyone else wanting to challenge the champion. He had outgrown this weight soon, but before that he basically achieved a top3 lightweight status (together with Erne and Gans).

I have no idea how you end up with Berg among first-tier boxers.

So McLarnin gains his status at lightweight for beating Terris, and Berg gains equal status by beating Canzoneri, even though neither had done much else at this weight? If they hadn't beat the champ, there should be at least some longetivity and consistency, without it neither belongs of the two.

Jackie Fields at lightweight?
Equalling Mitchell's to the fighters I listed is not funny. Ray Miller, totally lacking any kind of consistency, being their equal?

I included which third-tier fighters?

My choices might've been not in their prime or at their natural weight, indeed, but they were top contenders at lightweight for some time, before they outgrew it.

 

He didn't need to cut weight for Dick O'Brien fight, but he still only weighed 138 lbs, 12 pounds less than his opponent. Two days before the fight it was reported Walcott weighed 137 and claimed he'd be strong at 133 lbs. The day before the fight it was reported Walcott was only 6 pounds over 133 lbs when he started his preparations for the fight, and had no trouble reducing it. O'Rourke (Walcott's manager) didn't expect to have any troubles with weight either. Both weighed a pound or so under the limit.

 

Why should Walcott be given credit for beating Lavigne when he weighed 136 pounds, and McLarnin should not be given credit for beating Kid Kaplan when he weighed 135 1/2?

Furthermore, when you consider the terms under which Walcott-Lavigne 1 took place, what exactly was the incentive for Lavigne to go all out and beat Walcott? So long as he stayed on his feet, he won. He completed the task.

And when Walcott actually DID get down to the lightweight limit, he got dealt with by Lavigne.

Did he beat a lot of quality lightweights though in any meaningful bouts to garner that standing? Which bouts do you know of that occured at the lightweight limit against quality opponents that he won?

Kinda like saying I have no idea how you end up with Roy Jones Jr. among the first-tier boxers of the middleweight division.

Analogy: Jones beat Hopkins before Hopkins had done anything significant at middleweight, just like Berg beat Tony Canzoneri before he did anything significant at lightweight. But both Canzoneri and Hopkins would go on to be well established at the weight, and were good fighters at the weight when they were beaten by Jones and Berg respectively.

And disanalogously, Canzoneri had already proved he was on the elite lightweight level by losing a close split decision to Sammy Mandell for the lightweight title before the Berg bout.

What else does Jones have on his middleweight ledger? Jorge Vaca? Well, analogise him to Berg's Kid Chocolate shall we?

I don't know who to analogise Billy Petrolle to on Roy's ledger... oh well.

Is Roy not a top-tier middleweight?

I put McLarnin as second tier. I'll gladly drop him to third tier the second you drop Walcott to at least second tier, for he done nothing all to significant at the lightweight limit other than get knocked out by Lavigne.

Probably shouldn't be there, he didn't beat anyone significant at lightweight, but you'd probably put him at least second tier for beating the lightweight champ at 136

So you're saying all the fighters you put up there were consistent? Of course they weren't.

As for the Mitchell's, they consistently lost to the top dogs of the division, but usually beat everyone else - until they were shot of course.

Willie Fitzgerald and Harry Lewis for instance.

You still haven't shown me that lightweight from 1895-1905 was clearly better than lightweight from 1920-30.

 

First Walcott-Lavigne fight, according to report, "Each weighed a pound or so under the limit of 133 pounds." What 136lbs are you talking about?

I'm not ready to answer about O'Brien, I didn't research him much, only talking about him based on clippings I have on Gans.

Berg got to the top of lightweight contenders for a very short time, having no longetivity there. But unlike Walcott, he didn't get the better of reigning champion. Jr. lightweight, Berg was a first-tier boxer, but his lightweight career was too short-lived, Canzoneri only got ranked at lightweight for the first year also when Berg beat him. Roy Jones won the title and defended it a couple of times, and was ranked at middleweight for several years.

Anything above 135lbs (or 133lbs for my timespan, unless it was title fight at agreed catch-weight), doesn't count, in my opinion.

They had more consistency than Miller during the time they were considered worthy at lightweight, mostly gaining their status by drawing or even getting the better of fights with other top contenders or the champion. Unlike Mitchells.

Willie Fitzgerald.
1903-05-29 Oakland Tribune:
Of the many pugilists now in the lightweight division there are only two who have any legitimate claim to a match with the champion and they are Willie Fitzgerald and Jimmy Britt. Gans has met and defeated a long string of aspirants for the coveted title, but it has been pointed out that none of them were of Fitzgerald's calibre.

Ok, take Harry Lewis out, he probably belongs to welter more than lightweight, although he did get the better of Yanger, Erne, and drew with Herrera and Fitzgerald.

When we finish debating the lists, the result should be obvious enough not to require any more argumentation.

 

I first saw the 136 pound thing on Monte Cox's article on Joe Walcott. I queried him on the issue and this is our correspondence:

Me:
Hi Monte, I have a question to ask that you could perhaps help me with:
Did Joe Walcott come in at the lightweight limit for his first fight with Kid Lavigne? In your article on Joe Walcott you claim he trained down to 136 pounds for the first contest. That would mean that he didn't quite make the lightweight limit. Is that correct? I am confused however, because on Boxrec it says that their first fight was billed for the 133 pound title. Hopefully you can clarify his for me.

Monte:
One must realize that their were no commissions in those days. They agreed to meet at 136 pounds with the title at stake, but also Walcott had to score a knockout to win meaning that if it went the distance Lavigne was entitled to the decision. Notice also that Lavigne's next couple of bouts were also billed for the lightweight title and the weight agreement was 138 pounds. The actual weight for the lightweight title at the time was considered to be 133 pounds and did not become standardized at 135 pounds when Willie Ritchhie was the champ.
Hope that helps

Again though, even if we accept Walcott as being a lightweight the day he beat Lavigne, which is contentious in and of itself, what incentive was there for Lavigne to win that fight? Why would he press and possibly get stopped? It didn't make sense for him to do that.

As for Roy Jones, let's call it like it is, he won a strap which was vacant at the time. As if that lends him any more credibility than Berg beating Canzoneri. What exactly had Hopkins achieved at the time, and what was Hopkins rating when they fought? 6th as a Middleweight according to Boxing Illustrated. Does that make Jones a top-tier middleweight? Perhaps beating Vaca does....

Jones is top-tier, just as Berg is, because both Hopkins and Canzoneri were good in their respective divisions AT THE TIME they were beaten, irrespective of what Hopkins and Canzoneri were ranked at the time. With hindsight we can pice together how good they were AT THE TIME. No semantics about where they were ranked or what they had achieved at the time, can cover that.

Why count catch-weight fights and not fights where the title isn't on the line and guys come in a pound or two over? That seems too much like double standards to me.

Miller was inconsistent, but when he was on, he was on. I think he deserves a mention.

The Mitchell's beat some contenders, but they didn't get any wins against the very best fighters so they can be removed from my list. Not much rests on the guys I have in the third tier in any case. The names in the first and second tiers are the ones that really do the business for my list.

How can we be sure that this isn't just hype? By looking at his results. Do his results do justice to this hype? I don't think so.

I'd like to hear the opinion of some others here, to see if they are convinced by your arguments. I'm not ready to say the turn of the century guys were better than the fighters from the 20's.

 

Alright, compare these lists:

1895-1905
first-tier (6):
Joe Gans, Kid Lavigne, Young Griffo, Battling Nelson, Frank Erne, Jimmy Britt

second-tier (10):
Philadelphia Jack O'Brien, Joe Walcott, George McFadden, Kid McPartland, Dal Hawkins, Spike Sullivan, Wilmington Jack Daly, Owen Ziegler, Young Peter Jackson, William Kid Parker

third-tier (3):
Willie Fitzgerald, Bobby Dobbs, Harry Lewis


1920-1930
First Tier (3):
Benny Leonard, Sammy Mandell, Lew Tendler

Second Tier (6):
Tony Canzoneri, Jackie Kid Berg, Billy Petrolle, Johnny Dundee, Rocky Kansas, Kid Kaplan

Third Tier (7):
Jimmy Mclarning, Ray Miller, Jimmy Goodrich, Charley White, Sid Terris, Bruce Flowers, Jack Bernstein


Even if you insist a couple more names moved to third-tier on my list, that will not make much difference.

 

Why are guys like Battling Nelson appearing as first tier fighters? Distinguish him from someone like a Rocky Kansas who you have as a second tier.

And you might be down playing Kid Berg to the second tier by bringing down his wins against Canzoneri and Chocolate, but at least unlike Nelson Berg was beating the featherweights he was facing.

I also don't think much separates a Canzoneri from a Nelson. Someone like a Jimmy Goodrich also, you'd probably put up as a second tier fighter for beating Mandell twice amongst a few other wins against contenders.

 

Skillwise, Nelson wasn't first-rater, but achievement-wise he's far-far ahead of the fighters you name (for what they had done in 1920-1930 timespan), not even close.

 

He was the goods for barely 1 year. Second win over Mandell was above 135lbs limit, do you want me to add Sam Langford (140lbs against Gans) to second-tier also?

 

Erm, I wasn't quite awake when I wrote about Nelson being far-far more accomplished. I take my words back, I didn't think about limiting it to 1905. Ok, move him to second-tier if you want, he was still good with wins over Britt, Corbett (a feather, yeah, but they were still felt to be very good wins), a loss to Attell would have been Nelson's win if the fight was scheduled not for 6 rounds, but longer, a win over Herrera, throw in English and Nelson is a very solid second-tier boxer.

 

I with Janitor. The 20s was the best I've ever seen by far and will never be equalled again. I'd hate to be a media darling in this era-the expectations and pressure would be back breaking.

 

Between Lightweight and Light Heavyweight, arguably yes.