View Full Version : George Dixon

Steve McV
11-03-2005, 11:39 AM
Does anybody know if George Dixon was ever champion at bantamweight?

The Ring Almanac doesn't have him listed as such, yet the Sports Illustrated 2005 Almanac and the Boxing Register have him listed as a bantam champ.

11-03-2005, 09:37 PM
The answer is no -- see our record at
www.cyberboxingzone.com/b...ixon-g.htm (http://www.cyberboxingzone.com/boxing/dixon-g.htm)

The confusion lies in that the FEATHERWEIGHT limit was around 116 to 118 pounds when Dixon held that title

Steve McV
11-04-2005, 04:51 AM
Thank you, Mr. D.

11-22-2005, 09:04 PM
Well, the answer might be a little more complicated -- Kevin Smith promises to weigh in on this one.

12-06-2005, 01:42 PM
Dixon was bantamweight champ--even though the weight class did not officially exist in the US fight circles of the time. Dixon was generally heralded as the Bantamweight Champion of the World when he defeated Nunc Wallace the English bantamweight champion in 1890. They fought at 115 pounds. That weight limit was then set by Dixon and his manager for all his bouts over the next few years. In 1891 Dixon also beat Abe Willis the Australian Bantamweight Champion in five rounds to further strengthen his claim. Both of his bouts with Cal McCarthy in 1890 and 1891 were also at 115 pounds. Dixon was considered to win the world featherweight crown in 1892 when he defeated England's feather champ Fred Johnson at New York and then defended that title against Jack Skelly at the carnival of champions in New Orleans a few months later.
Some of the confusion lies in the fact that basically George Dixon and more so his manager Tom O'Rourke, set the weight limits and therefore set the standards for what was a featherweight and what was a bantamweight. Also, the batamweight and featherweight classes in those days were in essence sort of muddled together. In those days, any fighter that weighed less than a lightweight was often times called a featherweight. The press added to this confusion by often times referring to a featherweight as a bantamweight and vice versa. However, the Boston Globe and several other sources bear out what I have explained above and therefore I think if correct and appropriate to label Dixon as a dual champion.