Ring mag. produced year-end top 10 ratings from 1924. Below is an attempt to replicate thes ratings from 1892 to 1923. Hindsight not allowed!
1892
Champion Corbett
2. Jackson
3. Goddard
4. Slavin
5. Choynski
6. Fitzsimmons
7. Hall
8. Godfrey
9. McAuliffe
10. Kilrain
1893
Champion Corbett
2. Jackson
3. Fitzsimmons
4. Denver Smith
5. Hall
6. Goddard
7. Slavin
8. Choynski
9. McAuliffe
10. Godfrey
1894
Champion Corbett
2. Jackson
3. Fitzsimmons
4. Smith
5. Choynski
6. Maher
7. Goddard
8. Hall
9. Slavin
10. Godfrey
1895
Champion Maher
2. Fitzsimmons
3. Jackson
4. Slavin
5. Smith
6. Choynski
7. Felix
8. Hall
9. Creedon
10. O’Donnell
1896
Champion Corbett
2. Fitzsimmons
3. Choynski
4. Sharkey
5. Armstrong
6. Creedon
7. Goddard
8. Ruhlin
9. O’Donnell
10. Slavin
1897
Champion Fitzsimmons
2. Maher
3. Sharkey
4. Choynski
5. Childs
6. Corbett
7. Ruhlin
8. Jeffries
9. O’Donnell
10. Armstrong
1898
Champion Fitzsimmons
2. Jeffries
3. Sharkey
4. Maher
5. Corbett
6. McCoy
7. Ruhlin
8. Childs
9. Armstrong
10. Choynski
1899
Champion Jeffries
2. Sharkey
3. Fitxsimmons
4. Maher
5. McCoy
6. Corbett
7. Kennedy
8. Ruhlin
9. Childs
10. Martin
1900
Champion Jeffries
2 Fitzsimmons
3 Corbett
4 McCoy
5 Ruhlin
6 Sharkey
7 Childs
8 Maher
9 Kennedy
10 Martin
1901
Champion Jeffries
2 Ruhlin
3 McCoy
4 Childs
5 Sharkey
6 Root
7 Martin
8 Maher
9 Griffin
10 Gardner
1902
Champion Jeffries
2 Fitzsimmons
3 Ruhlin
4 Martin
5 Johnson
6 Gardner
7 O’Brien
8 Root
9 Hart
10 Carter
1903
Champion Jeffries
2 Fitzsimmons
3 Johnson
4 Ruhlin
5 Gardner
6 Root
7 Hart
8 O’Brien
9 Armstrong
10 McVey
1904
Champion Jeffries
2 Johnson
3 Hart
4 Root
5 O’Brien
6 Gardner
7 Ruhlin
8 Ferguson
9 Martin
10 McVey
1905
Champion Hart
2 Johnson
3 O’Brien
4 Jeanette
5 Root
6 Fitzsimmons
7 Ruhlin
8 Kaufman
9 J Twin Sullivan
10 Schreck
1906
Champion Burns
2 Johnson
3 O’Brien
4 Langford
5 Jeanette
6 McVey
7 Kaufman
8 Schreck
9 Hart
10 Ruhlin
1907
Champion Burns
2 Johnson
3 Kaufman
4 Langford
5 Jeanette
6 McVey
7 O’Brien
8 Schreck
9 Jim Flynn
10 Sullivan
1908
Champion Johnson
2 Langford
3 Kaufman
4 Burns
5 Jeanette
6 McVey
7 O’Brien
8 Hart
9 Ross
10 Schreck
1909
Champion Johnson
2 Langford
3 Jeanette
4 McVey
5 Kaufman
6 Ketchell
7 O’Brien
8 Ferguson
9 Lang
10 Schreck
1910
Champion Johnson
2 Langford
3 Jeanette
4 McVey
5 Kaufman
6 Burns
7 Lang
8 Jim Flynn
9 Dan Flynn
10 Curran
Top
1911
champion Johnson
2 McVey
3 Langford
4 Jeanette
5 Wells
6 Jim Flynn
7 Al Palzar
8 Carl Morris
9 Dan Flynn
10 Clarke
1912
Champion Johnson
2 Langford
3 Jeanette
4 McVey
5 Gunboat Smith
6 Willard
7 Ross
8 Mc Carthy
9 Jim Flynn
10 Palzar
1913
Champion Johnson
2 Smith
3 Langford
4 Jeanette
5 McVey
6 Jim Johnson
7 Pelkey
8 Willard
9 Moran
10 Carpentier
1914
Champion Johnson
2 Langford
3 Jeanette
4 McVey
5 Carpentier
6 Clarke
7 Dillon
8 Wills
9 Levinsky
10 Coffey
1915
Champion Willard
2 Johnson
3 Moran
4 Dillon
5 Wills
6 McVey
7 Jeanette
8 coffey
9 Langford
10 Morris
1916
CHAMPION Willard
2 Wills
3 Miske
4 Dillon
5 Morris
6 Levinsky
7 Moran
8 Weinert
9 McVey
10 Jeanette
1917
Champion Willard
2 Wills
3 Fulton
4 Langford
5 Norfolk
6 Miske
7 Greb
8 Dempsey
9 Jeanette
10 Gibbons
1918
Champion Willard
2 Wills
3 Dempsey
4 Fulton
5 Gibbons
6 Greb
7 Miske
8 Meehan
9 Madden
10 Jeanette
1919
Champion Dempsey
2 Wills
3 Fulton
4 Greb
5 Gibbons
6 Carpentier
7 Miske
8 Johnson
9 Norfolk
10 Brennan
1920
Champion Dempsey
2 Wills
3 Fulton
4 Greb
5 Gibbons
6 Carpentier
7 Miske
8 Norfolk
9 Tunney
10 Weinert
1921
Champion Dempsey
2 Wills
3 Fulton
4 Gibbons
5 Tunney
6 Carpentier
7 Miske
8 Greb
9 Beckett
10 Brennan
1922
Champion Dempsey
2 Wills
3 Greb
4 Gibbons
5 Miske
6 Tunney
7 F.Johnson
8 Brennan
9 Beckett
10 Carpentier
1923
Champion Dempsey
2 Wills
3 Firpo
4 Tunney
5 Carpentier
6 Miske
7 Gibbons
8 Greb
9 Renault
10 F.Johnson
top 10 HWTS year-end 1892-1923
-
Ambling Alp
- Heavyweight
- Posts: 3627
- Joined: 15 Jul 2005, 22:31
-
Ambling Alp
- Heavyweight
- Posts: 3627
- Joined: 15 Jul 2005, 22:31
This is really pretty well researched. I don't think people have any idea how much time this must have taken. There are a few few minor changes that I would make, but not many. Anyway here they are:
Charley Mitchell probably would have been ranked in 1892 and 1893. He was still regarded as one of the top 10 heavyweights in the world. (Even though he was really more of a middleweight)
I don't think that Ring Magazine would have considered Peter Maher as the champion in 1895. Corbett did retire and named Maher the champion but Ring Magazine probably wouldn't have accepted that. If they were convinced that Corbett was really not going to fight again, they probably would have declared the title vacant.
Corbett probably wouldn't ranked in 1899. He was inactive for the whole year, so Ring Magazine probably would have dropped him from their ratings, unless there is some evidence of a fight that hasn't been offically recorded.
In 1914, Moran would have stayed in the top 10. He was ranked #3 the previous year, he wouldn't drop completely out the top 10 after losing a 20 round decision to the champion (Johnson).
In 1915, McVey should probably be ranked. He did win a newspaper decison against Wills and beat Langford.
In 1916, Langford probably should be ranked. He did have lose two newspaper decisons to Wills and one to Tate, but he did knockout both Wills and Jeanette that year.
As you can tell, I'm really nitpicking here. The rankings seem very logical. It doesn't seem that there is any bias for or against any particular fighter. There was a few times that I thought a particular fighter was missing from a specific year, but after checking that particular year I would see that his results for that year and it would make sense why he wasn't rated for that year.
This is really a good piece of work. This can be used as resource in judging a fighter's career. You can also get a better idea of how big a win (or embarrassing a loss) a fighter had in this period by looking up to see if an opponent was in the top 10 during the year (and if so where in the top 10).
I hope more people look at this. Great job!
Charley Mitchell probably would have been ranked in 1892 and 1893. He was still regarded as one of the top 10 heavyweights in the world. (Even though he was really more of a middleweight)
I don't think that Ring Magazine would have considered Peter Maher as the champion in 1895. Corbett did retire and named Maher the champion but Ring Magazine probably wouldn't have accepted that. If they were convinced that Corbett was really not going to fight again, they probably would have declared the title vacant.
Corbett probably wouldn't ranked in 1899. He was inactive for the whole year, so Ring Magazine probably would have dropped him from their ratings, unless there is some evidence of a fight that hasn't been offically recorded.
In 1914, Moran would have stayed in the top 10. He was ranked #3 the previous year, he wouldn't drop completely out the top 10 after losing a 20 round decision to the champion (Johnson).
In 1915, McVey should probably be ranked. He did win a newspaper decison against Wills and beat Langford.
In 1916, Langford probably should be ranked. He did have lose two newspaper decisons to Wills and one to Tate, but he did knockout both Wills and Jeanette that year.
As you can tell, I'm really nitpicking here. The rankings seem very logical. It doesn't seem that there is any bias for or against any particular fighter. There was a few times that I thought a particular fighter was missing from a specific year, but after checking that particular year I would see that his results for that year and it would make sense why he wasn't rated for that year.
This is really a good piece of work. This can be used as resource in judging a fighter's career. You can also get a better idea of how big a win (or embarrassing a loss) a fighter had in this period by looking up to see if an opponent was in the top 10 during the year (and if so where in the top 10).
I hope more people look at this. Great job!
Last edited by Ambling Alp on 14 Jan 2008, 15:44, edited 1 time in total.
Thanks for the generous and interesting comments. You are possibly correct about Mitchell, particularly as regards 1892 but from the Sullivan draw until the loss to Corbett in 1894 he only scored one reasonable win, over Upham. Its really an arguement between who would have been rated against who [/u]should have been rated.
You are probably correct on the Maher question but there was a surprising amount of support for Maher as champion at the time. The view of many was that he could be considered champion but would have to prove himself against the other top claimants.
Frank Moran was no.9 in 1913 so droping him out in 1914 would not be unreasonable. I agree with your point on Corbett's inactivity, he probably would not be rated. McVey was rated constantly from 1903-1916 except for 1905 so i think you just missed him.
You are spot on about Langford, i dont know how i left him out in 1916, the loss to Tate should put him down a bit but i probably have McVey, Jeanette and Sam all rated a tad too low. Again thanks for the interesting comments.
You are probably correct on the Maher question but there was a surprising amount of support for Maher as champion at the time. The view of many was that he could be considered champion but would have to prove himself against the other top claimants.
Frank Moran was no.9 in 1913 so droping him out in 1914 would not be unreasonable. I agree with your point on Corbett's inactivity, he probably would not be rated. McVey was rated constantly from 1903-1916 except for 1905 so i think you just missed him.
You are spot on about Langford, i dont know how i left him out in 1916, the loss to Tate should put him down a bit but i probably have McVey, Jeanette and Sam all rated a tad too low. Again thanks for the interesting comments.
-
bill.lockhart
- Heavyweight
- Posts: 249
- Joined: 01 Nov 2005, 11:40
Ratings 1892-1923
Donnellon, That was superb. Any chance you could continue on with the ratings? It would be a great reference. One question. How did Burns rate his title chance with Hart? He wasn't rated at all in 1905.
Bill, Ring rated the fighters in the same way from 1924 on, the 1983 Record Book has the complete listings.
Burns got his shot at Hart and took it well but on his record at the time he didn't deserve a title fight. Late 1905 he lost to Jack Twin Sullivan and his best performances at that point were two draw encounters with Hugo Kelly. Schreck had beaten and drawn with him, Philadelphia Jack O'Brien defeated him and Sullivan had drawn with him in another bout.
Burns got his shot at Hart and took it well but on his record at the time he didn't deserve a title fight. Late 1905 he lost to Jack Twin Sullivan and his best performances at that point were two draw encounters with Hugo Kelly. Schreck had beaten and drawn with him, Philadelphia Jack O'Brien defeated him and Sullivan had drawn with him in another bout.
-
Martin Sosa Cameron
- Heavyweight
- Posts: 1012
- Joined: 31 Aug 2005, 19:44