Turn of the century tournament of all time contenders. 1890- 1902

[Dr. Z]

Up next is Goddard vs. Dooley. I know they actually fought each other. What can I say? I did the draw randomly and these Aussie contenders tended to fight one another! Goddard is the my pick. After this fight finishes we advance to the next round where the picks get harder and more interesting. Honestly any man left can win this thing.


An American, an Irishmen, an Aussie and Englishmen walk in to a bar. They all have too much to drink...

[mattdonnellon]

Goddard has to be the pick of course but reports of their fights suggest Dooley did quite well. Only the shear agressiveness and physicality of Joe and indeed Slavin proved too much for him. He was an excellent boxer and fought a who's-who of Aussie fighters, Jackson, Lees, Hall, Fitz, Goddard, Foley, Slavin, O'Donnell, McCarty, Felix, Doherty and Ryan as well as Costello, Choynski and Donaldson. He was a nervous type and later fell victim to John Barleycorn but a pure boxer who bested the early Fitz and O'Donnell. By the way he was under six foot, listed as 5-11 1/2 and rated Jack Johnson as the best fighter he ever saw.

[Dr. Z]

I pick Goodard to knock Dooley out just like he did in real life, The semi finals matched will be hard to call. Goddard was about even with Peter Jackson. He was that good, but never got a shot at John L Sullivan or Jim Corbett. But he did beat Joe Choynski, Peter Maher, and Ed Smith in addition to Mick Dooley.

You could argue Goddard was an all time top 5 guy in the 1890s.

[Marchegiano]

Man, Dooley fought some greats. You have to respect a guy who fights so many top men.

That said, I think you have to go with Goddard. Unless I am reading the CBZ record wrong:

Goddard KO'd Dooley three times, every time they met.


So Goddard by KO in what is modern mid to late rounds. 6-10.

[Willow The Wisp]

Picking Godard

[Dr. Z]

We advance the elite eight where the quality of the fighters and the picks between them becomes difficult.

Up first is Choysnki vs. Slavin. I pick Slavin to come from behind on points and catch the speedy Choynski is a sizzling knockdown. Choynski beats the count. He survives the round and lasts the distance of 15 rounds! But who won the fight? This judge picks Slavin.

[mattdonnellon]

Straight away I thought Slavin, Joe, good as he was almost always failed to win the big ones, Corbett, Goddard, Maher, Sharkey, Ruhlin, Jeffries, Fitz, all great fighters and he did defeat a load of good, next level fighters, Hall, Childs, Wilson, Ed Smith, Dooley, Sullivan, McAuliffe, Dunkhorst, Everett, O'Donnell and more. Slavin won a lot of clutch fights, Farnan, Laing, Dooley, Burke, Kilrain and McAuliffe so I give him that but after Jackson, he was gone. In summary, I think Choynski has the better resumee but styles wins fights, Slavin was rough, a la Sharkey and Goddard and Joe was a bit chinny, so a tentative vote for the Aussie by late KO.

[Dr. Z]

Up next is Ruhlin vs Killen. A true coin flip of a match. I can see it going 3 ways. Killen via KO, Rhulin via KO, or Ruhlin in points.

[Willow The Wisp]

I pick Choysnki, and then Ruhlin.

[mattdonnellon]

Well, as I've said before, I think Killen is not an 1890's fighter and this is shown by the fact that he hasn't one single common opponent with Ruhlin. Still, an intriguing contest. Pat was an outstanding puncher and the ko win over Cardiff was impressive. However the rest of his resume is thin, the draw with Cardiff, wins over Lannon, St Joe Kid and Duncan McDonald probably the pick of them. Ruhlin has a fantastic portfolio, the battles with Sharkey, Maher, Hart and Jeffries, wins over Choynski, O'Donnell and a slew of good second raters. But Gus could have the odd stinker, think Kennedy, Jeffords and Kenney. Killen's career was cut too short to really access him, the los to McAuley is damning, even if he was under the influnce of alcohol, surely a sign of weakWell, as I've said before, I think Killen is not an 1890's fighter and this is shown by the fact that he hasn't one single common opponent with Ruhlin. Still, an intriguing contest. Pat was an outstanding puncher and the ko win over Cardiff was impressive. However the rest of his resume is thin, the draw with Cardiff, wins over Lannon, St Joe Kid and Duncan McDonald probably the pick of them. Ruhlin has a fantastic portfolio, the battles with Sharkey, Maher, Hart and Jeffries, wins over Choynski, O'Donnell and a slew of good second raters. But Gus could have the odd stinker, think Kennedy, Jeffords and Kenney. Killen's career was cut too short to really access him, the los to McAuley is damning, even if he was under the influnce of alcohol, surely a sign ofWell, as I've said before, I think Killen is not an 1890's fighter and this is shown by the fact that he hasn't one single common opponent with Ruhlin. Still, an intriguing contest. Pat was an outstanding puncher and the ko win over Cardiff was impressive. However the rest of his resume is thin, the draw with Cardiff, wins over Lannon, St Joe Kid and Duncan McDonald probably the pick of them. Ruhlin has a fantastic portfolio, the battles with Sharkey, Maher, Hart and Jeffries, wins over Choynski, O'Donnell and a slew of good second raters. But Gus could have the odd stinker, think Kennedy, Jeffords and Kenney. Killen's career was cut too short to really access him, the loss to McAuley is damning, even if he was under the influence of alcohol, surely a sign of physiological weakness, so a tentative nod for Ruhlin.