BoxRec

I was just wondering what boxer has had the longest undeafted record,
i am not talking about boxers that have retired undeafted ie Joe calzaghe 46-0

one that i found was Julio Cesar Chavez went 89-0-1

gunners9191 wrote:I was just wondering what boxer has had the longest undeafted record,
i am not talking about boxers that have retired undeafted ie Joe calzaghe 46-0

one that i found was Julio Cesar Chavez went 89-0-1

Packy McFarland went 105-1 in 112 fights. His sole "loss" an obscure newspaper 6 rd decision, not an "official" loss.

Jimmy Wilde was 92-0-2 in 103 bouts when KOed by Tancy Lee for his first loss.

As to Julio Sr, supposedly a draw early in his Mexican career was mysteriously changed to a win to give him the win streak. Just like Rocky supposedly "lost" a pro bout under an assumed name and went back to the amateurs for another year.

All a bit too disingenuous for me to keep up with.

B-Hop

BroughtonRulesRefuge wrote: Packy McFarland went 105-1 in 112 fights. His sole "loss" an obscure newspaper 6 rd decision, not an "official" loss.

Jimmy Wilde was 92-0-2 in 103 bouts when KOed by Tancy Lee for his first loss.

Wilde supposedly has the record for the longest unbeaten streak at the start of a pro career.

There's some dispute over the nature of McFarland's lone "loss." Some sources list it as a KO or TKO loss, and thus official.


Kid Chocolate was reportedly undefeated in his first 160 or so fights - but that's counting both amateur and pro.

BroughtonRulesRefuge wrote:

gunners9191 wrote:I was just wondering what boxer has had the longest undeafted record,
i am not talking about boxers that have retired undeafted ie Joe calzaghe 46-0

one that i found was Julio Cesar Chavez went 89-0-1

Packy McFarland went 105-1 in 112 fights. His sole "loss" an obscure newspaper 6 rd decision, not an "official" loss.

Jimmy Wilde was 92-0-2 in 103 bouts when KOed by Tancy Lee for his first loss.

As to Julio Sr, supposedly a draw early in his Mexican career was mysteriously changed to a win to give him the win streak. Just like Rocky supposedly "lost" a pro bout under an assumed name and went back to the amateurs for another year.

All a bit too disingenuous for me to keep up with.

Wasn't the alleged 'draw' an alleged loss?

Was there some British guy called Hal Bagwell who went undefeated for years because of the old no-decision thing?

Jaywheel wrote:B-Hop

Hopkins lost his first fight so i dont think that counts

I think people have discussed Hal Bagwell before, I even remember someone saying Bagwell himself was surprised by the knowledge that he was 'undefeated' in so many fights, which suggest Hal knows he had a few loses.

I remember hearing it was something like 171 wins... which in British boxing at that time was common and true, however many Booth fights went 'un-recorded' for many, many fighters, even when it was against other Pro's in the Booths. Yet other fighters kept better records for themselves and they counted.

So it could have happened!

gunners9191 wrote:

Jaywheel wrote:B-Hop

Hopkins lost his first fight so i dont think that counts

oh the irony...

Kid Chocolate never had a 160 fight streak.

Many articles and books refer to Kid Chocolate as having been undefeated in 100 amateur fights, scoring 86 knockouts, but there is no truth to such numbers. The Cuban newspapers of the time, including “Diario de La Marina” and “La Noche” –a sponsor of amateur tournaments- covered the Cuban boxing scene very well. The publications and other research account for twenty one amateur fights for the undefeated fighter, including one against Mario Kid Sanchez that was described as “controversial.” Sanchez, from the city of Holguin, would also turn pro, becoming national bantamweight champion.

Some record books also state that Chocolate scored 21 straight knockouts when he entered the pro ranks in Cuba. Again, these numbers are really only press copy material, figments of a press agents imagination.

Kid Chocolate became a semi-pro at the age of seventeen. The semi-pro category used in Cuba at the time was professional competition but among newcomers to the pro ranks. It was a similar concept as the novice division for amateurs, which allowed the new pros to fight at an equal level of competition that would avoid overmatching.

The new rising star of the semi-pros was Johnny Cruz, a clever featherweight who had won amateur tournaments in New York and had scored three good wins in his first semi-pro bouts. Kid Chocolate was paid $40 to face Cruz, dancing and jabbing his way to a point victory over six rounds then stopping Johnny in five for a $100 rematch. Cruz would in later years become a top trainer and a well known referee.

The Kid had another seven wins in the pro and semi-pro ranks in Havana. Instead of twenty one knockouts, Chocolate’s early Cuban record is verified as nine fights with six of the victories by knockout.

Still, his real statistics are impressive.

A man who was undefeated in his amateur career -of over 100 bouts- and in almost seventy pro fights before tasting defeat was Nino Benvenuti.

McFarland, while undeniably great had at least one and if memory serves me correctly, two knockout losses. My good friend J. J. Johnson who has done a lot research into Chicago area fighters, and who is one of the greatest unsung historians in boxing has told me (again, if memory serves) that McFarland lost two fights on KO but that one is not mentioned in his record. That, however, should not detract from McFarlands sterling record which was phenomenal.

klompton wrote:McFarland, while undeniably great had at least one and if memory serves me correctly, two knockout losses. My good friend J. J. Johnson who has done a lot research into Chicago area fighters, and who is one of the greatest unsung historians in boxing has told me (again, if memory serves) that McFarland lost two fights on KO but that one is not mentioned in his record.

He mentions them in Chicago Boxing, but not a word about them being stoppage losses. The loss to Dusty Miller, as I commented on Packey's record, was mentioned by secondary source, Miller came up with clippings to prove it, but there also was not a word about it being stoppage loss, so I have my doubts that one was a KO loss, thus I changed it to newspaper decision until a better source is provided.
Strange also, if he was such a good historian of Chicago boxing, why he repeats common mistakes about Jimmy Barry in the book.

Like I said, I was quoting from memory so Im not 100% certain. That being said J. J. is one of the most knowledgeable boxing historians Ive ever had the pleasure of speaking with. I dont know what mistakes you are referring to and I dont pretend to be an expert on Jimmy Barry but I can say that J. J. grew up in Chicago where he boxed as an amateur, training in Johnny Coulon's gym. He knew a lot of those old timers and much of his knowledge is first hand. Hes forgotten more about boxing history than most of today's supposed experts will ever know. Guys like Bert Sugar, Herb Goldman, and Max Kellerman get their faces on TV and their names attached to books constantly but it guys like J. J. who really know the sport.

I'm talking about Barry turning pro in 1891, being undefeated, and supposed total number of KO's and fights (39KOs in 60 bouts). All three things are incorrect.

Who defeated him? When did he turn pro? And as for the KO thing its more of a minor mistake he says in the book Barry has 38 KOs in 60 fights, he probably meant 38 KOs in 60 wins. Boxrec lists 39 KOs in 59 wins. Whether J. J. was using a different record or what I dont know but I know Ive seen the number of fights on Greb's record change from 274 to as many 311 which is why rather than rely on Boxrec or anyone else Ive just compiled my own record for my Greb book. However, that being said I think the KOs in Wins in a fairly minor error and doesnt detract from the point of the statement which is that for the time Barry had a very high KO percentage and a lot of power.

Al Shrosbree beat him on points in 3 rounds, on 1890-02-07. It can be considered second loss, by newspaper decision, when he was worsted by Romeo Durand on 1892-11-07. It's difficult to figure when this or that fighter turned pro during those times, but Barry was fighting preliminaries on weekly boxing shows until at least late 1892, his earliest bouts are dated late 1889. More than 50% of bouts on his commonly referred "official" record have wrong dates (even when it's just the year that is listed), names and results. A lot of these supposed KO wins were mere exhibitions without official results and with no stoppages.

Newspaper decisions arent official losses and thus arent considered when tallying an undefeated record. If he was fighting professionally in 1889 it is not commonly known as his record both here and cyberboxingzone list his debut as having happened in 1891. If knowledge has come to light since then I cant see how you can criticize J. J. for not knowing that. Harry Greb supposedly had a pro fight in 1912 which has never been found so until that day he is listed as having turned pro in 1913. If some day after my book is published that bout is discovered I can hardly be criticized for not knowing something that I went out of my way to find, couldnt, and neither could anyone else.

McFarland's record here doesn't contain that second loss either, and neither does CBZ. So he did do his own research of Packey's early career. But at the same time he clearly hasn't done any research of Barry's early career, this I found to be strange, is all. I don't think Chicago newspapers from early 1890's are harder to find than mid 1900's, and Barry seems an obvious choice for research if one is into old-time Chicago boxing.
Like I said, only one of those losses was newspaper decision, the other was official loss.

Senya13 wrote:McFarland's record here doesn't contain that second loss either, and neither does CBZ. So he did do his own research of Packey's early career. But at the same time he clearly hasn't done any research of Barry's early career, this I found to be strange, is all. I don't think Chicago newspapers from early 1890's are harder to find than mid 1900's, and Barry seems an obvious choice for research if one is into old-time Chicago boxing.
Like I said, only one of those losses was newspaper decision, the other was official loss.

Senya, can you point us to the newspapers in which those losses are recorded? Name, date and page would be great. I will be in Chicago in August working at the Chicago Historical Society, and I'd like to pull the clippings.

The great Willie Pep won his first 62 bouts before losing to Angott. Not the longest streak mentioned here, but still, pretty long.

1890-02-08 The Chicago Herald (page 3)
1892-11-08 The Daily Inter Ocean (page 6)

Senya13 wrote:1890-02-08 The Chicago Herald (page 3)
1892-11-08 The Daily Inter Ocean (page 6)

Thanks. I'll check them out when I'm in Chicago.

103* Jimmy Wilde (1910-1923)
- 94 Fred Dyer (1908-1912)
- 93 Pedro Carrasco (1964-1972)
- 90*Julio Cesar Chavez (1980-1994)
- 89 Bob Cunningham (1885-1892)
- 87*Jaime Gine 87 (1954-1960)
- 80**Carlos Monzón (1964-1977)
- 76 Ansel Bell (1914-1923)
- 73 Duilio Loi (1952-1960)
- 72***Jimmy Barry 72 (1891-1899)
- 71 Nonpareil Jack Dempsey (1883-1889)

(*) Opening his career
(**) Until the end of his career
(***) All his career

Thanks to My2Sense, who signed Jimmy Wilde haven't his unbeaten record from the opening of his pro career

I dont consider Chavez on that list. His record is shady with his management members of the commission that changed the result of his loss to a win.

Martin Sosa Cameron wrote:- 103 Jimmy Wilde (1910-1923)
- 94 Fred Dyer (1908-1912)
- 93 Pedro Carrasco (1964-1972)
- 90*Julio Cesar Chavez (1980-1994)
- 89 Bob Cunningham (1885-1892)
- 87*Jaime Gine 87 (1954-1960)
- 80**Carlos Monzón (1964-1977)
- 76 Ansel Bell (1914-1923)
- 73 Duilio Loi (1952-1960)
- 72***Jimmy Barry 72 (1891-1899)
- 71 Nonpareil Jack Dempsey (1883-1889)

(*) Opening his career
(**) Until the end of his career
(***) All his career

There should be a * next to Wilde's name as well, correct?