BoxRec

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

Very nice effort.

Cheers,
P

This is very interesting. Looking at what you have come up, it looks very pretty realistic.

thanks guys, its quite difficult to do and any comments or criticisms or suggested alterations welcome.

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!

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.

Boy have Langford and Wills been screwed in their careers.

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.

Thanks, Donnellon; great, great work, it's admirable!