What about the Light Heavies?

ucclark · 07-30-2003, 12:52 PM

Why not? Here is my list of top 10 light heavyweights, all time:

1) Archie Moore - I should rate Ezzard Charles ahead of Moore. After all, Ezzard spanked Moore a couple of times, and was also denied a shot at the title. But Moore's incredible longevity just wins me over.

2) Ezzard Charles - see above

3) Gene Tunney - The only division where 2 of the 3 top guys never held the title, and the third didn't get a shot at it till he was 974 years old.

4) Michael Spinks - A Terrific fighter who could have held his own in the "Golden Age" of Moore, Charles, Burley, Maxim, et al.

5) Bob Foster - Too bad all we ever see are clips of heayweights battering him around.

After that, it gets tougher.....

6) Philadelphia Jack O'Brien - awesome defensive fighter

7) Slapsie Makie Rosenbloom - 209 fights, only 19 KOs. Compared to Maxie, Leonard Dorin is George Foreman.

8) Tommy Loughran - another LH who tried to move up to Heavyweight without much success.

9) Young Stribling - fought 288 times in 12 years, then died at age 29. Another great who never held the title.

10) Roy Jones - I'm not really comfortable rating him yet, and he did his best work at 160 and 168. Still, assuming he is done at 175, it was a pretty good run, and he probably deserves to be rated higher.

Mark42661 · 07-30-2003, 03:56 PM

ucclark,

That's a nice list, but I would think that Harry Greb would be ranked up there pretty high. An arguement could be made that he would be better ranked as a middleweight, but Greb fought alot of quality light-heavyweights and even some heavyweights. Afterall, he was the only man to defeat Gene Tunney and that was a sanctioned light-heavyweight fight for a regional title. He also got the better of Tommy Loughran in there series of fights. Greb fought 300 times and only lost 9 during his career. He was an amazing fighter and a very strong argument could be made for him being on of the top 5 greatest ever pound for pound.

I was glad to see you mention Young Stribling. He was a great fighter that doesn't get mentioned as much as he probably should.

Your top 5 is very solid, but I would probably rank them:

1. Gene Tunney
2. Harry Greb
3. Ezzard Charles
4. Archie Moore
5. Bob Foster

Of course, this is just my opinion, and your's is every bit as valid as mine. I love Michael Spinks and the only reason I don't have him in the top 5 is because I feel that Greb should be there.

You obviously know your boxing.

ucclark · 07-30-2003, 04:08 PM

I would rate Greb as the #1 middleweight of all time, which is why I leave him out at Light Heavy....but you have a good point. Greb would certainly be up high, but below, in my mind, Tunney (who got the better of him overall), Charles, Moore, and maybe Spinks and Foster as well.

The amazing thing in the LH division is how many great fighters never held the world title - Tunney, Charles, Stribling, Greb...Jack O'Brien sort of held the title, when he beat Fitzsimmons in a heavyweight eliminator, but he never actually defended it.

Cap · 07-30-2003, 07:47 PM

O'Brien took the light heavyweight title from Fitzsimmons, then lost it to Tommy Burns in their second fight. Burns never bothered to defend it.

Cap

Jim Trunzo · 07-31-2003, 07:56 AM

Nice lists and certainly highly representative of the best. For the record, I like Ezzard Charles as the best, followed by Moore

ucclark · 07-31-2003, 10:37 AM

No, O'Brien never lost the title to Burns, because the Burns fight was for the Heavyweight title. It couldn't have been for the LHW title, because Burns was over the LHW limit, and never claimed the title.

After beating Fitzsimmons (in a fight O'Brien would later claim was fixed), O'Brien lost 3 times - to Tommy Burns (who weighed 180) for the heavyweight title, to Stanley Ketchel (who never claimed the title, although he could be considered "linear" champ at that point) and to Sam Langford (who might have claimed the title, but was never really recognized). In reality, the title was more or less vacant -- O'Brien was going for the heavyweight crown, and never had an official defense.

The history of the LHW title is a gigantic mess, largely because the champ almost always makes a move to heavyweight, often without success. To make matters worse, during the one period of true greatness in the division, the best fighters were locked out and never got to fight for the title.

I don't think you can even create a rational "linear" title, since so many guys abandoned the belt. At least at HW, there are only two breaks in the lineage (Tunney and Marciano). At LHW, there must be a dozen.

PittPanther · 07-31-2003, 12:00 PM

No Billy Conn in anyone's top 10 LH lists?

ucclark · 07-31-2003, 12:36 PM

I totally forgot about Billy Conn (brain fart). Probably belongs in there somewhere 7,8,9,something like that. A little hard to rate, because he served in the armed forces during WWII, which cost him several years of his career.

Also, and I don't want to start a big stink about this, but his list of opponents is a little "pale"-- no names like Archie Moore, Holman Williams, Ezzard Charles, Charley Burley, Kid Cocoa, etc.

As soon as I posted the list, I knew it was just a matter of time before some Steelhead brought up Billy Conn.

For some weird reason, I always conflate him in my mind with Joey Maxim, and when I eliminated Maxim from my mental list, I think I forgot about Conn as well.

07-31-2003, 12:54 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by ucclark

The history of the LHW title is a gigantic mess, largely because the champ almost always makes a move to heavyweight, often without success.

I agree that the constant movement of light heavies to the heavyweight division makes it hard to judge just how good a person really was as a light heavy. Boxing history is filled with great light heavies moving to heavyweight without success. Unfortunately, this lowers their ultimate all-time ranking, in the eyes of many.

For instance, what is your perception of such fighters as Jack Dillon, Jack Delaney, Young Stribling, Tommy Loughran, John Henry Lewis, Freddie Mills, Gus Lesnavich, Bob Foster and Dwight Qawi? While most think highly of Foster, the others aren't considered to be all time great light heavies. However, they all performed magnificently as light heavies, but poorly as heavies. Their overall perception is strongly influenced by their failure as heavies.

ucclark · 07-31-2003, 12:58 PM

Hey, 3 of those guys are in my top 10 all-time, and I always loved Qawi. Holyfield/Qawi I is the best fight I have ever watched "as it happened" (as opposed to seeing a tape of an old fight).

Cap · 07-31-2003, 06:58 PM

uuclark

Get a chance, check out a recent book by Dan McCaffery titled "Tommy Burns: Canada's Unknown World Heavyweight Champion. Take a peek at the credits. That's my name in there. Then look up Burns' record at Cyberboxingzone. That's my name at the bottom. I spent more than a few hours digging up the goods on Noah Brusso.

When Burns defended his heavyweight title against O'Brien several contemporary sources listed Tommy's weight as 174. Most historians accept this as fact. Tommy whipped O'Brien in both fights, but only got credit in the second because Jim Jeffries umpired the first bout and had a dislike for the dark-haired Canuck. Jeff went so far as to declare publicly that he thought O'Brien was the better man, before the fight!

When Burns finally got a decision over O'Brien, he was below the established light-heavyweight limit. Many papers in Canada called him the light heavyweight champion. He could have made a few bucks defending it after he lost the big one to Johnson, but he went into semi-retirement instead.

Forgive me if I seem to toot my own horn, but the shabby treatment of Burns by the American press has always galled me, and I did my best to set the story straight.

Cap

ucclark · 07-31-2003, 10:14 PM

Well, if Burns was indeed under 175, he could have claimed the light heavyweight title. On the other hand, O'Brien never officially defended the title, not just against Burns, but against anyone. It was obviously pretty lightly regarded.

So, while (retroactively) Burns perhaps can be considered to have won the lineal title, the fact that O'Brien never officially put the title on the line, and the fact that Burns never bothered to lay claim to it, minimize the significance quite a bit. I think it would be safe to say that the title was moribund pretty much from the time O'Brien won it until the mid-teens.

BTW, maybe you should drop a line to the folks at boxrec.com: http://www.boxrec.com/phpBB2/index.php

and clear them up about the 2nd Burns/O'Brien fight, if indeed Burns was only 174 (they list him at 180).

Buddy Whatshisname · 08-03-2003, 10:50 AM

About those guys at box.rec.com, uuclark. They have my respect in that they are involved in a mighty big job there, but I don't take everything they say as gospel. I have an old Ring Magazine around here somewhere that said that Burns could've claimed the light heavyweight title off that second fight. I also remember reading something within the last year or so that said that O'Brien was so afraid of Burns' body blows, he had it put into their contract that he would not fight if Burns was allowed to hit him to the body! Makes what Cap said about Johnson's ribs sound more plausible don't it?

Buddy

By the way. How many guys here ever read that boxing newsgroup? This guy Erick reminds me of somebody there. I think he is trying to disguise himself by pretending to be illiterate. No body could possibly be that imbecilic, eh?

erickdamac · 08-03-2003, 12:04 PM

Buddy

By the way. How many guys here ever read that boxing newsgroup? This guy Erick reminds me of somebody there. I think he is trying to disguise himself by pretending to be illiterate. No body could possibly be that imbecilic, eh?

I could Be the bigger man and just keep my mouth shut!

Or i could be me and go at ya?

All im trying to do is express my opinon, and talk about boxing. And learn from people. I've never came in and said your wrong im right if someone said erick NoO jim jefries was a hard hitter I simply went to excite and typed his name in and read then came to the conclusion that e was a hard hitter..

I know i don't spell word right. sometimes you might see infact instead of in fact, or sometim instead of sometimes. Thats because i type fast and i just learned we can go back and correct anything wrong. I put my head down and type then send. and afterwords i read along with you and say "Oh my god they must think im a ******" But i get over it.

Im here to express my feelings about boxing, enjoy the boxing game and help jim and tom spread the word about this game.

Mark42661 · 08-03-2003, 11:34 PM

Erick,

You and I have disagreed on some points, but I'm of the opinion that you're a good guy and I'm glad you're posting on this forum.

I especially appreciated the message you just posted above and applaud you for taking the high road.

As Danny would say..."Cheers"

Buddy,

I don't think that I'm going too far out on a limb by stating that just about everyone who is a part of this little community would not approve of making degrading remarks about another member.

Buddy Whatshisname · 08-04-2003, 02:12 AM

Erick, if you are who you say you are and not a certain "small Mexican dog", then I do sincerely apologize. Hang around and absorb the collected wisdom of some of the folks in this group. There are quite a number of them worth heeding: Panther, Danny, Mark, etc. These guys have been around the block and recognize the maxim that history didn't begin the day you were born. There is a universe of exciting prize fighters you've never even heard of...yet.

(Buddy tips his silver-studded sombrero, swings up into the saddle of his jet-black stallion, and gallops off in a trail of dust.)

Mark42661 · 08-04-2003, 02:35 AM

Buddy,

Thanks

That was a classy response.

And I would like to apologize too if I came across as too harsh concerning your previous post.

I guess I feel somewhat protective of this forum because there's a great bunch of knowledgeable boxing fans who post here and I'd hate to see it ever degenerate into a place with rampant flame wars like you see on alot of forums.

I hope you stick around too...there's alot all of us can learn from each other.

PittPanther · 08-05-2003, 11:18 AM

Let's hold our breath and hope the game comes out mid-August.

dempsonny · 08-05-2003, 02:31 PM

To all,
Nice move Buddy, with your last responce. Mark, good to see someone step in to keep tempers from flaring. I too jump on Eric when he posts his DEMPSEY overated remarks. I read a Trunzo remark about Dempsey being overated which got me thinking. I looked back at his record and cases could be made for the lack of quality of some of his opponents. Willard old, Firpo crude. He did duck black fighters but that was a sign of the times not fear. In fact he had agreed to fight Wills but the governor of NY blocked the fight.
He beat some good fighters, some of which would probably have held some titles in todays's world. Fulton beat Sam Langford twice. Fulton and Coffey were 6'4". He fought Brennan who was 47-2-3, Fulton 42-4, Morris 41-4-1, Miske 27-1-2, Gibbons 48-2 and Firpo 26-2.
I'm getting off track talking about Dempsey. My point was let's not take any of the remarks personally. There are plenty of boxing experts kicking in here as well as those new to the game. We want the new ones to stay interested and let them learn. We can all learn from each other as well. Let the game decide the arguments about the different era's.
Dempsonny

07-30-2003, 03:56 PM	#2
Mark42661 All Star Starter Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: Home of the Kansas City Chiefs! Posts: 1,080	ucclark, That's a nice list, but I would think that Harry Greb would be ranked up there pretty high. An arguement could be made that he would be better ranked as a middleweight, but Greb fought alot of quality light-heavyweights and even some heavyweights. Afterall, he was the only man to defeat Gene Tunney and that was a sanctioned light-heavyweight fight for a regional title. He also got the better of Tommy Loughran in there series of fights. Greb fought 300 times and only lost 9 during his career. He was an amazing fighter and a very strong argument could be made for him being on of the top 5 greatest ever pound for pound. I was glad to see you mention Young Stribling. He was a great fighter that doesn't get mentioned as much as he probably should. Your top 5 is very solid, but I would probably rank them: 1. Gene Tunney 2. Harry Greb 3. Ezzard Charles 4. Archie Moore 5. Bob Foster Of course, this is just my opinion, and your's is every bit as valid as mine. I love Michael Spinks and the only reason I don't have him in the top 5 is because I feel that Greb should be there. You obviously know your boxing. __________________ A Man of the World Site dedicated to Sailor Tom Sharkey

07-30-2003, 07:47 PM	#4
Cap Hall Of Famer Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: Large Province in God's Country Posts: 8,043	O'Brien took the light heavyweight title from Fitzsimmons, then lost it to Tommy Burns in their second fight. Burns never bothered to defend it. Cap __________________ "...There were Giants in Those Days.."

07-31-2003, 12:00 PM	#7
PittPanther All Star Starter Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Pittsburgh Posts: 1,235	No Billy Conn in anyone's top 10 LH lists? __________________ Commitment Teamwork Pride Hail to Pitt!

07-31-2003, 06:58 PM	#11
Cap Hall Of Famer Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: Large Province in God's Country Posts: 8,043	uuclark Get a chance, check out a recent book by Dan McCaffery titled "Tommy Burns: Canada's Unknown World Heavyweight Champion. Take a peek at the credits. That's my name in there. Then look up Burns' record at Cyberboxingzone. That's my name at the bottom. I spent more than a few hours digging up the goods on Noah Brusso. When Burns defended his heavyweight title against O'Brien several contemporary sources listed Tommy's weight as 174. Most historians accept this as fact. Tommy whipped O'Brien in both fights, but only got credit in the second because Jim Jeffries umpired the first bout and had a dislike for the dark-haired Canuck. Jeff went so far as to declare publicly that he thought O'Brien was the better man, before the fight! When Burns finally got a decision over O'Brien, he was below the established light-heavyweight limit. Many papers in Canada called him the light heavyweight champion. He could have made a few bucks defending it after he lost the big one to Johnson, but he went into semi-retirement instead. Forgive me if I seem to toot my own horn, but the shabby treatment of Burns by the American press has always galled me, and I did my best to set the story straight. Cap __________________ "...There were Giants in Those Days.."

08-03-2003, 10:50 AM	#13
Buddy Whatshisname Minors (Double A) Join Date: Mar 2003 Posts: 115	Boxrec.com About those guys at box.rec.com, uuclark. They have my respect in that they are involved in a mighty big job there, but I don't take everything they say as gospel. I have an old Ring Magazine around here somewhere that said that Burns could've claimed the light heavyweight title off that second fight. I also remember reading something within the last year or so that said that O'Brien was so afraid of Burns' body blows, he had it put into their contract that he would not fight if Burns was allowed to hit him to the body! Makes what Cap said about Johnson's ribs sound more plausible don't it? Buddy By the way. How many guys here ever read that boxing newsgroup? This guy Erick reminds me of somebody there. I think he is trying to disguise himself by pretending to be illiterate. No body could possibly be that imbecilic, eh?

07-30-2003, 12:52 PM	#1
ucclark Minors (Triple A) Join Date: Jan 2003 Posts: 220	What about the Light Heavies? Why not? Here is my list of top 10 light heavyweights, all time: 1) Archie Moore - I should rate Ezzard Charles ahead of Moore. After all, Ezzard spanked Moore a couple of times, and was also denied a shot at the title. But Moore's incredible longevity just wins me over. 2) Ezzard Charles - see above 3) Gene Tunney - The only division where 2 of the 3 top guys never held the title, and the third didn't get a shot at it till he was 974 years old. 4) Michael Spinks - A Terrific fighter who could have held his own in the "Golden Age" of Moore, Charles, Burley, Maxim, et al. 5) Bob Foster - Too bad all we ever see are clips of heayweights battering him around. After that, it gets tougher..... 6) Philadelphia Jack O'Brien - awesome defensive fighter 7) Slapsie Makie Rosenbloom - 209 fights, only 19 KOs. Compared to Maxie, Leonard Dorin is George Foreman. 8) Tommy Loughran - another LH who tried to move up to Heavyweight without much success. 9) Young Stribling - fought 288 times in 12 years, then died at age 29. Another great who never held the title. 10) Roy Jones - I'm not really comfortable rating him yet, and he did his best work at 160 and 168. Still, assuming he is done at 175, it was a pretty good run, and he probably deserves to be rated higher.

07-30-2003, 04:08 PM	#3
ucclark Minors (Triple A) Join Date: Jan 2003 Posts: 220	I would rate Greb as the #1 middleweight of all time, which is why I leave him out at Light Heavy....but you have a good point. Greb would certainly be up high, but below, in my mind, Tunney (who got the better of him overall), Charles, Moore, and maybe Spinks and Foster as well. The amazing thing in the LH division is how many great fighters never held the world title - Tunney, Charles, Stribling, Greb...Jack O'Brien sort of held the title, when he beat Fitzsimmons in a heavyweight eliminator, but he never actually defended it.

07-31-2003, 07:56 AM	#5
Jim Trunzo OOTP Developments Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Leechburg, PA Posts: 739	Nice lists and certainly highly representative of the best. For the record, I like Ezzard Charles as the best, followed by Moore

07-31-2003, 10:37 AM	#6
ucclark Minors (Triple A) Join Date: Jan 2003 Posts: 220	No, O'Brien never lost the title to Burns, because the Burns fight was for the Heavyweight title. It couldn't have been for the LHW title, because Burns was over the LHW limit, and never claimed the title. After beating Fitzsimmons (in a fight O'Brien would later claim was fixed), O'Brien lost 3 times - to Tommy Burns (who weighed 180) for the heavyweight title, to Stanley Ketchel (who never claimed the title, although he could be considered "linear" champ at that point) and to Sam Langford (who might have claimed the title, but was never really recognized). In reality, the title was more or less vacant -- O'Brien was going for the heavyweight crown, and never had an official defense. The history of the LHW title is a gigantic mess, largely because the champ almost always makes a move to heavyweight, often without success. To make matters worse, during the one period of true greatness in the division, the best fighters were locked out and never got to fight for the title. I don't think you can even create a rational "linear" title, since so many guys abandoned the belt. At least at HW, there are only two breaks in the lineage (Tunney and Marciano). At LHW, there must be a dozen.

07-31-2003, 12:36 PM	#8
ucclark Minors (Triple A) Join Date: Jan 2003 Posts: 220	I totally forgot about Billy Conn (brain fart). Probably belongs in there somewhere 7,8,9,something like that. A little hard to rate, because he served in the armed forces during WWII, which cost him several years of his career. Also, and I don't want to start a big stink about this, but his list of opponents is a little "pale"-- no names like Archie Moore, Holman Williams, Ezzard Charles, Charley Burley, Kid Cocoa, etc. As soon as I posted the list, I knew it was just a matter of time before some Steelhead brought up Billy Conn. For some weird reason, I always conflate him in my mind with Joey Maxim, and when I eliminated Maxim from my mental list, I think I forgot about Conn as well.

07-31-2003, 12:58 PM	#10
ucclark Minors (Triple A) Join Date: Jan 2003 Posts: 220	Hey, 3 of those guys are in my top 10 all-time, and I always loved Qawi. Holyfield/Qawi I is the best fight I have ever watched "as it happened" (as opposed to seeing a tape of an old fight).

07-31-2003, 10:14 PM	#12
ucclark Minors (Triple A) Join Date: Jan 2003 Posts: 220	Well, if Burns was indeed under 175, he could have claimed the light heavyweight title. On the other hand, O'Brien never officially defended the title, not just against Burns, but against anyone. It was obviously pretty lightly regarded. So, while (retroactively) Burns perhaps can be considered to have won the lineal title, the fact that O'Brien never officially put the title on the line, and the fact that Burns never bothered to lay claim to it, minimize the significance quite a bit. I think it would be safe to say that the title was moribund pretty much from the time O'Brien won it until the mid-teens. BTW, maybe you should drop a line to the folks at boxrec.com: http://www.boxrec.com/phpBB2/index.php and clear them up about the 2nd Burns/O'Brien fight, if indeed Burns was only 174 (they list him at 180).

08-03-2003, 12:04 PM	#14
erickdamac All Star Starter Join Date: Jul 2003 Posts: 1,592	Buddy By the way. How many guys here ever read that boxing newsgroup? This guy Erick reminds me of somebody there. I think he is trying to disguise himself by pretending to be illiterate. No body could possibly be that imbecilic, eh? I could Be the bigger man and just keep my mouth shut! Or i could be me and go at ya? All im trying to do is express my opinon, and talk about boxing. And learn from people. I've never came in and said your wrong im right if someone said erick NoO jim jefries was a hard hitter I simply went to excite and typed his name in and read then came to the conclusion that e was a hard hitter.. I know i don't spell word right. sometimes you might see infact instead of in fact, or sometim instead of sometimes. Thats because i type fast and i just learned we can go back and correct anything wrong. I put my head down and type then send. and afterwords i read along with you and say "Oh my god they must think im a *****" But i get over it. Im here to express my feelings about boxing, enjoy the boxing game and help jim and tom spread the word about this game. Last edited by erickdamac; 08-03-2003 at 06:25 PM.*

08-03-2003, 11:34 PM	#15
Mark42661 All Star Starter Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: Home of the Kansas City Chiefs! Posts: 1,080	Erick, You and I have disagreed on some points, but I'm of the opinion that you're a good guy and I'm glad you're posting on this forum. I especially appreciated the message you just posted above and applaud you for taking the high road. As Danny would say..."Cheers" Buddy, I don't think that I'm going too far out on a limb by stating that just about everyone who is a part of this little community would not approve of making degrading remarks about another member. __________________ A Man of the World Site dedicated to Sailor Tom Sharkey

08-04-2003, 02:12 AM	#16
Buddy Whatshisname Minors (Double A) Join Date: Mar 2003 Posts: 115	Point Taken Erick, if you are who you say you are and not a certain "small Mexican dog", then I do sincerely apologize. Hang around and absorb the collected wisdom of some of the folks in this group. There are quite a number of them worth heeding: Panther, Danny, Mark, etc. These guys have been around the block and recognize the maxim that history didn't begin the day you were born. There is a universe of exciting prize fighters you've never even heard of...yet. (Buddy tips his silver-studded sombrero, swings up into the saddle of his jet-black stallion, and gallops off in a trail of dust.) Attached Images

08-04-2003, 02:35 AM	#17
Mark42661 All Star Starter Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: Home of the Kansas City Chiefs! Posts: 1,080	Buddy, Thanks That was a classy response. And I would like to apologize too if I came across as too harsh concerning your previous post. I guess I feel somewhat protective of this forum because there's a great bunch of knowledgeable boxing fans who post here and I'd hate to see it ever degenerate into a place with rampant flame wars like you see on alot of forums. I hope you stick around too...there's alot all of us can learn from each other. __________________ A Man of the World Site dedicated to Sailor Tom Sharkey

08-05-2003, 11:18 AM	#18
PittPanther All Star Starter Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Pittsburgh Posts: 1,235	Let's hold our breath and hope the game comes out mid-August. __________________ Commitment Teamwork Pride Hail to Pitt!

08-05-2003, 02:31 PM	#19
dempsonny Major Leagues Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: long island, n.y. Posts: 325	To all, Nice move Buddy, with your last responce. Mark, good to see someone step in to keep tempers from flaring. I too jump on Eric when he posts his DEMPSEY overated remarks. I read a Trunzo remark about Dempsey being overated which got me thinking. I looked back at his record and cases could be made for the lack of quality of some of his opponents. Willard old, Firpo crude. He did duck black fighters but that was a sign of the times not fear. In fact he had agreed to fight Wills but the governor of NY blocked the fight. He beat some good fighters, some of which would probably have held some titles in todays's world. Fulton beat Sam Langford twice. Fulton and Coffey were 6'4". He fought Brennan who was 47-2-3, Fulton 42-4, Morris 41-4-1, Miske 27-1-2, Gibbons 48-2 and Firpo 26-2. I'm getting off track talking about Dempsey. My point was let's not take any of the remarks personally. There are plenty of boxing experts kicking in here as well as those new to the game. We want the new ones to stay interested and let them learn. We can all learn from each other as well. Let the game decide the arguments about the different era's. Dempsonny __________________ A house without a dog is not a home.