Top 50 Non U.S. ATG LIST

[McGoorty]

I don't rate "old timers" or put them in fantasy fights so WTF are you talking about?

Exactly, your lack of knowledge is why you don't. If you don't like coming across old names, you're in the wrong place, you see this is called the history section....... I fart in your general direction.

[SCtrojansbaby]

Exactly, your lack of knowledge is why you don't. If you don't like coming across old names, you're in the wrong place, you see this is called the history section....... I fart in your general direction.

I don't mind coming across old names I just don't talk about them. You guys talk about them that is fine with me. I just choose not to talk about an era that there isn't a lot of footage of.

[Greatest1942]

I don't rate "old timers" or put them in fantasy fights so WTF are you talking about?

To put things in proper perspective you must always understand what was there in the past....

But you lack any perspective any way....

[McGoorty]

Maybe if Darcy had lived to age 33 he'd have had a few KOs and losses against lesser fighters. Two of those KOs were to Carlos Monzon (no disgrace there). While you're picking apart Benvenuti's career you can do exactly the same for Darcy's. He could easily have had a KO/TKO loss to Jeff Smith, McGoorty was near the end of the road by then and there have always been suspicions that some of his fights were not on the level.

The main issue I see with Darcy is we're talking about an incomplete career with unanswered questions. Mike Gibbons was probably the best fighter in the world at the time and would have been a different proposition to anyone Darcy beat. He was very good but at 21 it's hard to know just how good. Imagine if Mike Tyson had died before the Buster Douglas fight and how different his legacy would look now. I think he was better than Benvenuti but his career was hardly leagues better.

Mike Tyson hadn't beaten anybody by age 21................... nobodies at worst. Yes Monzon is a great fighter mate, but I'm talking about Nino's chin,.......... But how do losses help your resume when they are KO's. You say Darcy hadn't proved himself yet, doesn't the opinions of people who saw Darcy and Gibbons matter. Yes, some Americans at the time thought Gibbons could win against Darcy,.... but not those who had seen Darcy fight as well as Gibbons....... The only "experts" I know of who claimed that Gibbons was as good as Darcy HAD NEVER SEEN DARCY FIGHT,.................. I would like to see some proof otherwise....... Darcy was rated by those WHO WERE IN A POSITION TO JUDGE, as the best MW of his time. We are here to debate facts and visual evidence (if available),..... we are not here to re-write history (I'm not accusing you, but there are some I suspect),.......... Why do most around here hold some old-timers higher above others when records or resume are similar to others of their time ?????...... Why, because you read a book or an article (usually written by either a fan of the fight),........ that say's that this guy is the bee's knees, and gives you many compelling reasons,... We believe Gans, langford, Fitzsimmons etc are the best of the best because of books that say so. ----------------- Not in the case of Darcy though,.... the experts and fighters like Jack Kearns, Fred Dyer and McGoorty who were on the Darcy is the greatest bandwagon are somehow not to be believed. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- This is what really gets many Australians goat (no pun intended)........ There has always been a lot of U.S. bias against Darcy, did you know that FOR EVERY FIGHT DARCY EVER HAD AGAINST AN AMERICAN,,,,,,... Virtually every U.S. newspaper said Darcy would get a lesson and a beating before the fight took place. Things like 'young Darcy will get knocked out and humiliated by ( INSERT :- Christie, Holland, J. Smith, J. Clabby, Murray, Brown, Chip, or any other US opponent ),... ------------------ Yessiree !!!!! when our "good old boy" steps in with Darcy he'll get such a lickin' like Johnson did to Burns,.......... guess what US boxing ????....... ALL of your good old boys were the one given a severe lesson and sent home packing,,,,,, and apart from one single very poor loser (Smith,... who incidentally couldn't possibly have beaten Darcy by any but the foullest of means, and HOW THE **** could he get a TKO when he couldn't knock Darcy out in 100 fights- A TKO there would be a total disgrace,, Smith.. LOL)..... they all had nothing but the highest praise........ You have a lot more reading on Darcy to do....... try and read some stuff about Darcy that wasn't written in America for a start,... Then you might get a more balanced view........ If you don't trust an Aussies word for it,.... read some of NZ reports concerning Darcy.... I assure you the kiwis are neutral on the subject................................. But seriously,.... Darcy was a better fighter than Smith,,,,,,,,,,, and he was on his way to proving it when Smith hit Darcy low, and only because he wanted to be in a much safer place,..... Darcy was too hot for Smith in the real world.......... As for if McGoorty was on the slide at the time, what does that matter when Eddie himself says that Darcy was the greatest fighter he ever saw or fought, Eddie also admitted that he could never have beaten Darcy on his best day.... and that is a fact you can take to the bank.

[Kid McCoy]

Mike Tyson hadn't beaten anybody by age 21................... nobodies at worst. Yes Monzon is a great fighter mate, but I'm talking about Nino's chin,.......... But how do losses help your resume when they are KO's. You say Darcy hadn't proved himself yet, doesn't the opinions of people who saw Darcy and Gibbons matter. Yes, some Americans at the time thought Gibbons could win against Darcy,.... but not those who had seen Darcy fight as well as Gibbons....... The only "experts" I know of who claimed that Gibbons was as good as Darcy HAD NEVER SEEN DARCY FIGHT,.................. I would like to see some proof otherwise....... Darcy was rated by those WHO WERE IN A POSITION TO JUDGE, as the best MW of his time. We are here to debate facts and visual evidence (if available),..... we are not here to re-write history (I'm not accusing you, but there are some I suspect),.......... Why do most around here hold some old-timers higher above others when records or resume are similar to others of their time ?????...... Why, because you read a book or an article (usually written by either a fan of the fight),........ that say's that this guy is the bee's knees, and gives you many compelling reasons,... We believe Gans, langford, Fitzsimmons etc are the best of the best because of books that say so. ----------------- Not in the case of Darcy though,.... the experts and fighters like Jack Kearns, Fred Dyer and McGoorty who were on the Darcy is the greatest bandwagon are somehow not to be believed. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- This is what really gets many Australians goat (no pun intended)........ There has always been a lot of U.S. bias against Darcy, did you know that FOR EVERY FIGHT DARCY EVER HAD AGAINST AN AMERICAN,,,,,,... Virtually every U.S. newspaper said Darcy would get a lesson and a beating before the fight took place. Things like 'young Darcy will get knocked out and humiliated by ( INSERT :- Christie, Holland, J. Smith, J. Clabby, Murray, Brown, Chip, or any other US opponent ),... ------------------ Yessiree !!!!! when our "good old boy" steps in with Darcy he'll get such a lickin' like Johnson did to Burns,.......... guess what US boxing ????....... ALL of your good old boys were the one given a severe lesson and sent home packing,,,,,, and apart from one single very poor loser (Smith,... who incidentally couldn't possibly have beaten Darcy by any but the foullest of means, and HOW THE **** could he get a TKO when he couldn't knock Darcy out in 100 fights- A TKO there would be a total disgrace,, Smith.. LOL)..... they all had nothing but the highest praise........ You have a lot more reading on Darcy to do....... try and read some stuff about Darcy that wasn't written in America for a start,... Then you might get a more balanced view........ If you don't trust an Aussies word for it,.... read some of NZ reports concerning Darcy.... I assure you the kiwis are neutral on the subject................................. But seriously,.... Darcy was a better fighter than Smith,,,,,,,,,,, and he was on his way to proving it when Smith hit Darcy low, and only because he wanted to be in a much safer place,..... Darcy was too hot for Smith in the real world.......... As for if McGoorty was on the slide at the time, what does that matter when Eddie himself says that Darcy was the greatest fighter he ever saw or fought, Eddie also admitted that he could never have beaten Darcy on his best day.... and that is a fact you can take to the bank.

You'll get no US bias from me, as I'm not American... I try to rate fighters as I see them, regardless of where they're from and I certainly don't have an axe to grind with Darcy. I don't worship the guy either though. Tyson's opposition were a lot better than "nobodies at worst" but thats for another day. The point I was really making is had he died right at his peak, like Darcy did, he'd be more highly regarded than he currently is because we wouldn't have seen his weaknesses or his losses.

From what I've read Darcy did not prove he was the better fighter against Smith. Darcy went down from a body punch (it's unclear whether it was low or not), claimed a foul and refused to continue. If the referee doesn't give a foul (which he didn't) and the fighter can't or won't continue then that's a TKO. The Sydney Morning Herald had Smith ahead after 4 rounds or were they biased too? Smith had over 150 fights against the cream of his era, was never DQ'd before or after Darcy and I've not come across any evidence for him using the foulest of means to beat other fighters. At the very least the two Smith fights were inconclusive.

Regarding opinions on Darcy, George KO Brown fought Darcy and Billy Miske and he thought Miske would have beaten Darcy. Milburn Saylor, who didn't fight Darcy but did fight in Australia and saw Darcy fight also said he thought Gibbons would have beaten him. I've read quotes from McGoorty where he also picks Gibbons over Darcy. That's just to show there were dissenting views on Darcy as well. Personally I usually treat quotes like that with a pinch of salt. Being a famous boxer or trainer doesn't make your opinion infallible and quite often you get contradictory views, these being a prime example. I don't believe Gans or Fitz were great merely because somebody said they were, but because their achievements speak for themselves.

While Darcy's achievements are impressive, I stand by my point that he still had a lot to prove in order to be regarded on a par with say Robinson or Greb. He may have beaten Mike Gibbons and cleaned up in America but then again he might not have. The point is we never got to find out so I'd put him in a similar category to Salvador Sanchez: darn good but anything beyond that is speculation.

[McGoorty]

You'll get no US bias from me, as I'm not American... I try to rate fighters as I see them, regardless of where they're from and I certainly don't have an axe to grind with Darcy. I don't worship the guy either though. Tyson's opposition were a lot better than "nobodies at worst" but thats for another day. The point I was really making is had he died right at his peak, like Darcy did, he'd be more highly regarded than he currently is because we wouldn't have seen his weaknesses or his losses.

From what I've read Darcy did not prove he was the better fighter against Smith. Darcy went down from a body punch (it's unclear whether it was low or not), claimed a foul and refused to continue. If the referee doesn't give a foul (which he didn't) and the fighter can't or won't continue then that's a TKO. The Sydney Morning Herald had Smith ahead after 4 rounds or were they biased too? Smith had over 150 fights against the cream of his era, was never DQ'd before or after Darcy and I've not come across any evidence for him using the foulest of means to beat other fighters. At the very least the two Smith fights were inconclusive.

Regarding opinions on Darcy, George KO Brown fought Darcy and Billy Miske and he thought Miske would have beaten Darcy. Milburn Saylor, who didn't fight Darcy but did fight in Australia and saw Darcy fight also said he thought Gibbons would have beaten him. I've read quotes from McGoorty where he also picks Gibbons over Darcy. That's just to show there were dissenting views on Darcy as well. Personally I usually treat quotes like that with a pinch of salt. Being a famous boxer or trainer doesn't make your opinion infallible and quite often you get contradictory views, these being a prime example. I don't believe Gans or Fitz were great merely because somebody said they were, but because their achievements speak for themselves.

While Darcy's achievements are impressive, I stand by my point that he still had a lot to prove in order to be regarded on a par with say Robinson or Greb. He may have beaten Mike Gibbons and cleaned up in America but then again he might not have. The point is we never got to find out so I'd put him in a similar category to Salvador Sanchez: darn good but anything beyond that is speculation.

I was never inferring you were American, but I'm trying to get the point across that there has been a lot of undercutting or at least watering down of Darcy's greatness by U.S. writers, not all of course, but by many who are very patriotic to say the least. I have read articles from before Darcy's death through the 20's to the present day from the U.S. which have their facts skewed,,,,, like the one saying that McGoorty lasted the 20 rd distance with Darcy,... and if Darcy can't KO McGoorty then what chance has he against Gibbons sort of thing............ Which lying SOB did they get their facts from... I have film of that fight showing clearly that Darcy knocked Eddie down 4 times in which McGoorty stayed on the floor after the 4th...... KO 15..... You know it, 1942 knows it anybody should know it. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Fact :- Put Gibbons question aside for a tick,,,,, apart from Mike, who else had claims to Darcy's title ?????........ Dillon was now a LHW, McCoy couldn't beat Darcy with Mathew Haydens cricket bat, Greb was still a virtual novice, Carpentier was now a LHW....... Miske,...... mate for a start he was a LHW, yes Darcy wanted to fight him but it does nothing for the MW question,.... but for arguments sake, Les bears him anyway,... he's just too good,.... that is my opinion on that. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For the last time, Smith hit Darcy in the nuts, and Darcy did not go down to the canvas, he was folded up in pain,..... How the FU*K did Smith dent the metal protector......... the protector was immediately showed to hundreds of people,.... Darcy said it,.... HE DOESN'T LIE,.... if you think he did, you have read nothing of his character. ----------------- So somebody in Smith's team sent a cable to US newspapers with SMITH's VERSION OF EVENTS And You Fell for it just like those know-it-alls in the US newsrooms (real experts on events many thousands of miles away).... If Darcy had met Smith for a third bout, Les would have ripped his liver out..... Darcy admits to hating only one man during his entire life,.... and that was the man who was noted many times for his disgraceful tactics he employed,... and when Smith fouled Darcy in the second fight, it was because he was about to be knocked out, so the coward hit Darcy low again. The as*hole was booted out of the country,... All Australians know the real Smith did what we call down here "a dog act" and he "dogged it", as far far as I know, I know of no other opponent in Smith's career that had Smith so visibly frightened of the kid who was so good that his ability in the second fight was way improved in the space of a few weeks,..... Darcy got better every fight, by the time he'd have reached 25, you my friend would have him in your top 10 fighters P4P. Even if Gibbons managed a single win over the non-distance of 10 rounds, he would have lost the re-matches.... Darcy had youth in his favour........ What I;m trying to say with Gibbons is that Darcy was at worst 2nd best, but soon would have surpassed Mike,...... You won't find anybody back then that gives Gibbons a chance over the proper 20...... and Gibbons won't knock Darcy down a single time,..... unless of course Gibbon's dents Darcy's protector...... are you criticising Darcy for blinking when hit with full force ti the gonads, the balls, the testes,.. --------------------------------- You Have been hit in the nuts haven't you ??? --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The Sydney Morning Herald ???..... ahead on points means nothing if Smith is hurt in the 5th....... Smith dogged it, I have other accounts........ If Smith was beating Darcy up,.. which it is clear that by the 4th Darcy starts cleaning Smith up,,, otherwise why would Smith hit Darcy 6 inches under the belt......... Did you know that a fighter was DQ'd and lost the fight for that,.. EVEN IN DANIEL MENDOZA'S DAY............ Darcy won the first fight no matter how you look at it,...... What really happened was that the referee chose not to notice what everybody else clearly did........ It's simply that Harald Baker was the referee for the Jeff Smith V McGoorty fiasco, it was bakers decision alone to award McGoorty a fight he had clearly lost....... Seems old shifty Harald was evening up things for Smith............................................. ........... There were many rumblings that there was a deal made between Smith and the Stadium management,.... which Darcy was not aware of. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- So in regard to your last paragraph.... Darcy had only one top name in Mike left,.. he beats Gibbons and the division is cleared out, and secondly...... even though you have been reading up mate, there is still so much for you to read yet.... researching this era is very difficult.... stay tuned on my Darcy thread, it is just warming up,... when the whole book has been posted I think you will have many revelations.............. Not religious ones but, ....... just boxing ones.

[SCtrojansbaby]

To put things in proper perspective you must always understand what was there in the past....

But you lack any perspective any way....

IMO without footage you can't have much if any perspective

[JAB5239]

IMO without footage you can't have much if any perspective

What about the opinions of experts who not only viewed the sport but were part of it? Arcel, Futch, Dundee, Tunney, Moore and others who speak or have spoken about fighters with little or no film? Everything they say is supported by accounts of the day. For them to not be credible everyone would have to be lying back then and when they were spoken about later in life by men who didn't just know the sport, but lived and breathed it. Combine that with everything else we do to measure greatness and you get perspective.

[SCtrojansbaby]

What about the opinions of experts who not only viewed the sport but were part of it? Arcel, Futch, Dundee, Tunney, Moore and others who speak or have spoken about fighters with little or no film? Everything they say is supported by accounts of the day. For them to not be credible everyone would have to be lying back then and when they were spoken about later in life by men who didn't just know the sport, but lived and breathed it. Combine that with everything else we do to measure greatness and you get perspective.

Many experts call Manny Pacquiao the greatest fighter ever but you have watched Pacquiao many many times and formed your own opinion that he isn't. Unless you watch them you can only have someone else perspective you can't truly have your own.

But that is just my opinion you're entitled to your own.

[McGoorty]

Many experts call Manny Pacquiao the greatest fighter ever but you have watched Pacquiao many many times and formed your own opinion that he isn't. Unless you watch them you can only have someone else perspective you can't truly have your own.

But that is just my opinion you're entitled to your own.

We already know what your opinion is...... smell the coffee.