ok Jack Root again?

[donnellon]

I rate Jack Root highly. Maybe the best Austro-Hungarian biggish man ever.(Charley Weinert?)
He whipped McCoy when he was still useful, Hart, Gardner, Flynn were good scalps but most tellingly Root was just a big middleweight. Reading contempory accounts he was an excellent boxer who could punch a bit. Maybe he had chin or stamina issues as seen in the losing Gardner and Hart affairs. ps just seen on boxrec that he was born in the now Czeck republic(!)-some expert me!

[granberry]

Jack Johnson said Root had the ideal left jab.

In his one filmed fight, against Gardner, Root was fighting a wild man and didn't get much chance to do anything.

Talk about combinations of punches, Gardner threw a flock at a time.
And he could punch.

I think he must have been badly intimidated when he lost to Fitzsimmons.

[SaadOffTheDeck]

Somewhere around 75-100 on a Light Heavyweight list.

[dempseyfire]

I dare you to rate 50 light heavyweights over him, let alone 74.

He's top 40 for sure . . .at least top 50 (you are correct that 175 is a very stacked division). Marvin Johnson over him? For beating Eddie Davis and Galindez compared to McCoy, Gardner, Hart, Childs, drawing with Ryan? . . .Give me a break, that is no contest.

[SaadOffTheDeck]

I dare you to rate 50 light heavyweights over him, let alone 74.

He's top 40 for sure . . .at least top 50 (you are correct that 175 is a very stacked division). Marvin Johnson over him? For beating Eddie Davis and Galindez compared to McCoy, Gardner, Hart, Childs, drawing with Ryan? . . .Give me a break, that is no contest.

Galindez is the best Light Heavyweight you mentioned imo.

75 is a rough number and I would have to research an actual list.

Tunney
Spinks
Moore
Charles
Langford
Loughran
Lewis
T gibbons
Foster
Yaroscz
Rosenbloom
Mina
Dillon
Conn
Bivins
Jones, Jr
Qawi
Marshall
Walker
Greb
O' Brien
Norfolk
Michalczewski
Matthews
Maxim
Stribling
Hojo
Fox
Burns
Torres
Pastrano
Saad
Maske
Lytell
Hill
Galindez
Delaney
Dawson
Carpenteir
Bettina
Slattery
Tarver
Levinsky
Lesnevich
Harvey
Doug Jones
Al McCoy
Berlenbach
Mustapha
Mctigue


I'll offer this to your dare. making this shows he probably falls closer to 60-75 for me as opposed to 75-100. But I'm comfortable rating all of these guys ahead of him without research. Though a few of them are arguable.

[dempseyfire]

Not a bad list, I'm impressed.

However, Dawson over Root? Maske? Galindez? Mustapha? Yarosz? I can't find compelling arguments for those fighters over Root. Root's resume is far more impressive.

Who the heck is Hojo?

[SaadOffTheDeck]

Howard Johnson

I don't see much argument for Root over any of those guys you listed. In particularly Galindez. LOL at far more impressive.

Dawson beat Tarver, Glen Johnson twice & Adamek. Those four wins match up very comparably with Root's best and imo are superior.

[dempseyfire]

Howard Johnson

I don't see much argument for Root over any of those guys you listed. In particularly Galindez.LOL at far more impressive, what you list isn't impressive at all.

You asked for a list and I gave you one. I assume we can get on with our lives.

You mean Harold Johnson?

You seem to dismiss any of the credentials of Root's HOF opposition b/c they are from the turn of the century and you haven't seen their films, which I think is a fairly weak position. I wouldn't think many here would concur beating Mustapha, Lopez, Rossman and Ahumada is superior to wins over McCoy, Gardner, Craig, Hart, Flynn and drawing with Ryan. Plus Root only lost 3 times twice to HOFer Gardner and the much bigger Hart in his last fight. To someone say that resume 'isn't impressive at all' is pretty ridiculous and you seem to dismiss that whole era.

[granberry]

A person who used to into Howard Johnson's every afternoon for a cup of coffee and a grilled cheese sandwich told Sad that all the old fighters were no good.

[raylawpc]

In fairness, dempsey, the draw against Ryan was prearranged. The fighters had agreed that if both were on their feet at the end of six rounds, the referee would call it a draw. (Nothing shady about it - everybody at the fight knew it. It was common in those days in Chicago.) The majority at ringside thought that Ryan won. In their second fight, the ref tossed both for not trying and called it a no contest.

[SaadOffTheDeck]

Howard Johnson

I don't see much argument for Root over any of those guys you listed. In particularly Galindez.LOL at far more impressive, what you list isn't impressive at all.

You asked for a list and I gave you one. I assume we can get on with our lives.

You mean Harold Johnson?

You seem to dismiss any of the credentials of Root's HOF opposition b/c they are from the turn of the century and you haven't seen their films, which I think is a fairly weak position. I wouldn't think many here would concur beating Mustapha, Lopez, Rossman and Ahumada is superior to wins over McCoy, Gardner, Craig, Hart, Flynn and drawing with Ryan. Plus Root only lost 3 times twice to HOFer Gardner and the much bigger Hart in his last fight. To someone say that resume 'isn't impressive at all' is pretty ridiculous and you seem to dismiss that whole era.

LOL, yes.

I'm not particularly concerned with what people agree with. I state my case and read opposing positions. We are talking about a guy from over a century ago, there isn't anything but opinion.

I don't dismiss the entire era, that's a hell of a lot of speculation. But I don't consider it a strong one overall and while I consider Ryan to be a great fighter I fail to see how a 6 round draw adds to someones Light heavyweight resume.

We obviously differ on him. I meant not impressive in an all time sense. He certainly was one of the best of his era and far better than most.

You thought 75 was outlandish, I thought 25 was outlandish. We landed in the middle. I wasn't the one using words like I dare you and absurd. Even far more impressive is laughable when you state your case, arguable is much better and I said when I posted it that a few of them were arguable. You came up with a few, I disagree.

[SaadOffTheDeck]

And I've never said a word about not having film or mentioned head to head between Root and Dawson. I've been reading about those fighters since I was a kid. There are so many people that just shit on everything to do with old timers that a lot of people are quite defensive when it comes to any name from older eras. I don't feel obliged to call Jack root great because people think Wlad could carry Harry Wills jockstrap.

[raylawpc]

And I've never said a word about not having film or mentioned head to head between Root and Dawson. I've been reading about those fighters since I was a kid. There are so many people that just poop on everything to do with old timers that a lot of people are quite defensive when it comes to any name from older eras. I don't feel obliged to call Jack root great because people think Wlad could carry Harry Wills jockstrap.

Have you read contemporary accounts in the newspapers of the day, or have you read about them in boxing magazines that repeat the same mistakes over and over?

If you read the contemporary accounts you will find that Jack Root was very well respected in his day. He was considered an excellent fighter by his contemporaries, but not quite on the same level as a Jeffries, Fitzsimmons or Ryan.

If you are going by stuff you read in boxing magazines, I'm surprised you don't rank him higher. Root was one of the few fighters who hung onto his ring earnings, invested wisely, made smart post-boxing career moves, and died a rich man. He was also a master at self-promotion. In the early Everlast record books - which pre-date the Ring Record Book - George Gardner is listed as the first light-heavyweight champion. But Root was able to convince his friend Nat Fleischer to list him as the first light-heavyweight champion, based on a ten round win over Kid McCoy, and Root suddenly became a history-maker as the first light-heavyweight champion. It pays to have friends in high places.

But, that said, and despite his abilities at self-promotion, Root was highly respected in his day.

[SaadOffTheDeck]

I've read both newspaper accounts and obviously magazines. When it comes to fighters like that you can really just measure accomplishments and his don't overly impress me. Lists are arbitrary, he doesn't rate high on mine.

Foster doesn't have a great resume either, that is a situation where being able to watch the fighter helps evaluate them. But i find Bob overrated in a sense that I don't think he earned a spot in the top 10 of this division and I think the consensus differs there in a big way.

It isn't any particular era, from Root to Dempsey to Foster to Chavez. I just call them like I see them. I may come across more arrogant about it than I am. That's just the difference between correspondence in writing as opposed to in person.

One of these days somebody will bring up a turn of the century guy that I slobber on. I'm sure of it.

Edit: And I remember Root being the first champion in my Ring Record books when I was a kid.

[dempseyfire]

Howard Johnson

I don't see much argument for Root over any of those guys you listed. In particularly Galindez.LOL at far more impressive, what you list isn't impressive at all.

You asked for a list and I gave you one. I assume we can get on with our lives.

You mean Harold Johnson?

You seem to dismiss any of the credentials of Root's HOF opposition b/c they are from the turn of the century and you haven't seen their films, which I think is a fairly weak position. I wouldn't think many here would concur beating Mustapha, Lopez, Rossman and Ahumada is superior to wins over McCoy, Gardner, Craig, Hart, Flynn and drawing with Ryan. Plus Root only lost 3 times twice to HOFer Gardner and the much bigger Hart in his last fight. To someone say that resume 'isn't impressive at all' is pretty ridiculous and you seem to dismiss that whole era.

LOL, yes.

I'm not particularly concerned with what people agree with. I state my case and read opposing positions. We are talking about a guy from over a century ago, there isn't anything but opinion.

I don't dismiss the entire era, that's a hell of a lot of speculation. But I don't consider it a strong one overall and while I consider Ryan to be a great fighter I fail to see how a 6 round draw adds to someones Light heavyweight resume.

We obviously differ on him. I meant not impressive in an all time sense. He certainly was one of the best of his era and far better than most.

You thought 75 was outlandish, I thought 25 was outlandish. We landed in the middle. I wasn't the one using words like I dare you and absurd. Even far more impressive is laughable when you state your case, arguable is much better and I said when I posted it that a few of them were arguable. You came up with a few, I disagree.

Well, I think in writing I can come across as more arrogant/flippant than I intend, so we are both on that page.


Having seen that list, I think Root belongs in the top 50. You disagree. We'll leave it there.

[SaadOffTheDeck]

You mean Harold Johnson?

You seem to dismiss any of the credentials of Root's HOF opposition b/c they are from the turn of the century and you haven't seen their films, which I think is a fairly weak position. I wouldn't think many here would concur beating Mustapha, Lopez, Rossman and Ahumada is superior to wins over McCoy, Gardner, Craig, Hart, Flynn and drawing with Ryan. Plus Root only lost 3 times twice to HOFer Gardner and the much bigger Hart in his last fight. To someone say that resume 'isn't impressive at all' is pretty ridiculous and you seem to dismiss that whole era.

LOL, yes.

I'm not particularly concerned with what people agree with. I state my case and read opposing positions. We are talking about a guy from over a century ago, there isn't anything but opinion.

I don't dismiss the entire era, that's a hell of a lot of speculation. But I don't consider it a strong one overall and while I consider Ryan to be a great fighter I fail to see how a 6 round draw adds to someones Light heavyweight resume.

We obviously differ on him. I meant not impressive in an all time sense. He certainly was one of the best of his era and far better than most.

You thought 75 was outlandish, I thought 25 was outlandish. We landed in the middle. I wasn't the one using words like I dare you and absurd. Even far more impressive is laughable when you state your case, arguable is much better and I said when I posted it that a few of them were arguable. You came up with a few, I disagree.

Well, I think in writing I can come across as more arrogant/flippant than I intend, so we are both on that page.


Having seen that list, I think Root belongs in the top 50. You disagree. We'll leave it there.

[donnellon]

I'd have Root top 50 easy but it's a loaded division. I'm Irish but I wouldn't give McTigue a prayer V Root. Yarosz, Matthews, Lytell, Al McCoy, Berlenbach maybe Delanry are others I'd fancy Root with but I probably could name a few more that I fancy over him. As was said a loaded division, and BTW I agree on Foster.

[raylawpc]

I'd have Root top 50 easy but it's a loaded division. I'm Irish but I wouldn't give McTigue a prayer V Root. Yarosz, Matthews, Lytell, Al McCoy, Berlenbach maybe Delanry are others I'd fancy Root with but I probably could name a few more that I fancy over him. As was said a loaded division, and BTW I agree on Foster.

Interesting discussion, Matt. As you know, I love the old timers. But, personally, I would rate Berlenbach and certainly Delaney over Root. In the 1920s, the light-heavyweights were a tough and deep division and, after Tunney moved up to light-heavyweight, Berlenbach and Delaney were arguably the cream of the class. I agree that Root easily belongs in the top 50 - maybe the top 25.

[Chuck1052]

I think that the 1940s light-heavyweight crop is the best in history with the likes of Ezzard Charles, Jimmy Bivins, Lloyd Marshall, Archie Moore, Joey Maxim, Freddie Mills and a number of others being active during the decade.

- Chuck Johnston

[granberry]

McTigue did far better against Jack Sharkey than Delaney and Loughran did.