Boxers whose premature deaths probably changed Boxing History.....

1. Luther McCarthy...........The Great White hope in Jack Johnson's era...Pretty boy and Marlon Brando clone....Huge at 6ft 4 and 220..

Owned wins over the respected Fireman Flynn who owned a win over Langford (Lost to him too) and who also fought Johnson and everybody else of his era....Also beat perennial Heavy Frank Moran.....Sadly Big Lu fell off his horse three days before fighting a big underdog in Arthur Pelkey  (unknown to him he had damaged a vertebrae in his neck).....Pelkey landed and broke McCarthy's neck and he died at the tender age of 21....

Two years later big lumbering Jess Willard beat Johnson in Havana......Could the sturdy and the much younger than Willard... McCarthy have outlasted Johnson in the 100 degree heat ?? I reckon so.....He was strong and had a great left jab by all accounts.....Could he have beaten Willard ??  Many observers of the time think he had more talent.....Never stopped and his 4 losses came early in his career..

An intriguing fighter sadly died before his time...1892-1913

2. Marcel Cerdan...........Elbows in.....Chin down and gloves up.......Boxed a clinic in winning the title from Zale.  Strong and talented.....Sure he lost his title to Lamotta but he dislocated his shoulder in the 1st and then lasted till the end of the 9th....Would he have won the rematch he died flying over for ???....Many experts think so...Could he have beaten Robbo at 160 others managed it.....Could he have beaten Olsen a few years later ??....He had more talent I reckon.....Alas we will never know...

1916-1949...

3. James Shuler......Sadly he lost his life 6 days after Hearns kayoed him.....In a bike crash......But he was only 26 and others moaned that it was so cold that night Fighters were struggling to get loose on the Hagler v Mugabi undercard (It was regarded as a 50/50)...(Hearns won in 50 seconds)......But what if Shuler lived ???

He was a highly rated Olympian.....He could fight Southpaw and Orthodox...Was he better than Barkley, Kalambay, Tate, Olajide ?? who would contest Leonard's vacant crowns a year and a bit later.....I reckon so....

Sadly Black Gold died before we found out.....(By the way Hearns wanted to give Shuler's family the NABF belt he won from him days earlier but Shuler's family said he would have wanted him to keep it...Nice touch from Tommy)....Bob Arum also said he was the nicest kid he ever promoted..

1959 - 1986...

4. Salvador Sanchez.......For Boxing fans this loss was truly tragic......A great already at 23 and with Chavez...Camacho.....Bramble.....Rosario and a Nelson return ahead of him.......An exotic feast right there..

Was Chavez a future P4P made for him ???....Quite probably.......Was Camacho all wrong for him ?? Quite probably...... The great Nelson claimed he lost to Sal because of the late notice of the fight....Could Azumah have turned it around ?? Doubtful but who knows...

Sanchez left a huge void when his Porsche turned over...So many great nights died with him..

1959 - 1982...

Excellent stuff again, Truss.

McCarty is a difficult one - had fate not intervened he'd have probably got a shot by 1914-15 and as we know Papa Jack was declining by then, regardless of whether or not you think the loss to Willard was legimitate. Willard proved a very poor champion so I'd have expected McCarty to do a better job than him if he'd have got his hands on the title, but that's not saying much. My best guess is that history might not have looked all that different had he lived - even if he'd have got to Johnson before Willard, it's a bit of a stretch to take him over Dempsey given the guesswork. But he might have managed a couple more defences than Willard and have been a more respectable caretaker champion in between two great ones.

Shuler is one I struggle with too. The only fight I've seen of his outside the Hearns one was against Kinchen, and he didn't look great in that one, being hurt and forced to hang on more than once...But then again, Kinchen had Hearns (albeit a fading version) hanging on even more desperately a few years later, so I guess there's no shame in that. Obviously Hearns could flatten anyone, but I do get the impression that Shuler's chin might have been a little bit tender which would have checked his progress at the highest level. I also don't think Shuler's road to being number one contender was all that tough when you look at the depth of the Middleweight division both a few years before and afterwards. The division went absolutely barmy with talent starting in the late eighties through to the mid nineties so I think Shuler's window of opportunity would have been very small. Not sure I see Shuler changing our views of that era all that much had he lived.

Cerdan is interesting. I struggle to rate him. Great win:loss ratio but even for the standards of his time there is a lot of filler on his record, especially when you see some of the round robin stuff going on at the same time between the Murderer's Row, and some speculate that he had been a better Welterweight than he was a Middle in any case. Even if he'd have beaten La Motta in a return, Robinson would have been knocking on his door not long afterwards, so it's hard to see him racking up more than one or two defences had he regained the title. For Cerdan I guess my main intrigue lies in how he might have got on had he been mixing it with tougher competition throughout the 1940s, rather than what he might have done in the 1950s. I think he might already have passed his peak at the time of his death.

Hate to be unoriginal but Sanchez really is the one to stand out here, because he was so massively experienced and proven for such a young guy, and by the age of 21 or 22 was already producing performances at the highest level which would rank amongst the very best any of us have ever seen against Lopez, Gomez and the like. Also would have had some mouth-watering, big time contests ahead of him: a Nelson rematch, a unification with Pedroza, potential showdowns with Camacho or Chavez further down the line at Super-Feather etc. Given the string of guys he'd already faced and beaten by 1982, you just know he'd have no hesitation in getting in the ring with any of them. The guys above were decent fighters - very good in Cerdan's case - but while I'm not blind to his struggles with Ford and Cowdell I genuinely believe Sanchez was a cut above those guys and had the potential to become a bona fide legend of the sport.

One to possibly add, with some similarities to Sanchez, would be Masao Ohba. Another who died at 23 but looked on course to become one of the greatest Flyweight champions, and had already produced classic performances and thrilling wins against the likes of Betulio Gonzalez and Chionoi. Canto, today considered arguably a top three Flyweight of all time, was just about to emerge on the world scene when Ohba died - a win or edging a series for either one of them againt the other might well have propelled them to number one spot.

Thanks for the excellent reply...

Willard is one of those Boxers that suffers over time and I'm as guilty as anyone..

Reasonable to assume like Tate v Weaver that the better Man in Johnson couldn't finish his Man and wore out in 100 degree heat....Ferdie Pacheco's book also claims that the author spoke to a friend of Doc Kearns who insisted Dempsey had a metal spike in his glove.. Lou Duva confirms it.

Certainly Willard was caught between two top 10ers regardless.

Shuler as you say was the weakest addition to the list...Looked better against Seales than Kinchen but Kinchen was an underrated performer... Nunn was perhaps a step too far on the IBF route..

But Kalambay..McCallum..Sims..Dewitt and the hapless Graham were all winnable..Plus a unification with Duran in 89..

Mccarthy v Dempsey...Durability..Gloves checked.. Youth...100 degree heat. Yes he starts an underdog but a sporting one.

Thanks again.