Who do you think would have won, had Johnson and Jeffries fought eachother in their primes? Mind you, the real fight that they had was scheduled for 45 rounds, so this will go under those same rules and conditions.
For my money, I think Jeffries might have won. I only say this because, for one he didn't want to fight Johnson but came back because of public opinion (after he lost he said 'I hope they will leave me alone now').
Also, he had to lose over 100 pounds and get in shape for a 45 round fight in a period of around 6 months. Then throw in the fact that due to the weight loss he got sick on the day of the fight. Then throw in how he hadn't so much as boxed a round in over six years.
Only til then, was he able to lose. And he still went almost 15 rounds, and it wouldn't be until the 15th, that he was knocked down for the first time in his career.
Something tells me that a prime Jeffries would have been one helluva hoss to have handled, for any champion in history.
Jeffries was well conditioned and could track down an opponent for 20 rounds or more (like he done with Corbett; KO 23), and he could brawl and maim for 20+ rounds (like he done against Sharkey twice). Johnson would have had his hands full, thats for sure.
The rub is this, even if Johnson beat Jeffries round after round, I think Jeffries would have came on strong in the latter rounds, and would have eventually knocked out Johnson. Jeffries proved one thing, and that was he could take a helluva lot of punishment only to come back late.
Johnson was used to going 20 rounds, yes, but you never really saw him come on strong after the 20 round stretch...though you can argue that he was passed his best against Willard, he was knocked out in the 26th. He had dull, lackluster matches with the likes of Moran that went the distance, etc.
Jeffries was capable of pulling off all the stops late in a fight, I don't think Johnson was that kind of guy. He used alot of energy in the first 12-15 rounds, knocking down, wrestling, his opponents, and would go slower and slower from then on out.
Jeffries vs Johnson: Prime Against Prime
-
HomicideHenry
- Heavyweight
- Posts: 18722
- Joined: 08 Sep 2005, 00:43
I think Johnson has the style and talent to beat Jefferies even if James J was in tip top shape, which he was, and even if he was much younger and had far less ring rust.
I think the reality is however, that the fight would have been ALOT more competitive. That much in-activity, no tune up fight and being at that age would have affected a great many fighters. NOw I have not seen many films or even snippets on Jefferies. I have seen most of the 1910 fight with Johnson, this however is as we all know is mis-leading.
What fights of Jefferies are available for us to watch and review ?
Kym
I think the reality is however, that the fight would have been ALOT more competitive. That much in-activity, no tune up fight and being at that age would have affected a great many fighters. NOw I have not seen many films or even snippets on Jefferies. I have seen most of the 1910 fight with Johnson, this however is as we all know is mis-leading.
What fights of Jefferies are available for us to watch and review ?
Kym
-
Goodnight, Irene
- Heavyweight
- Posts: 9463
- Joined: 24 Sep 2007, 04:43
At 45 rounds or more, Jeffries is unbeatable. You know what? I would venture as far as to say that with referees allowing a fighter to endure endless streams of punishment, with fights taking place in the middle of the day in blazing heat, with wrestling considered as much a legitimate tactic as sticking & moving if not moreso, Jeffries would defeat every Heavyweight who ever lived. Ali, Foreman, Liston, Dempsey, Tyson, Lewis, Louis, & any one else you care to mention. I really think under those conditions & at that distance, he beats them all.
The thing about him is that you just could not stop him. So the question becomes this --- can Johnson outbox him for 45 rounds? Corbett was a great fighter, & lasted more than twenty, leading Jeffries around the ring. Johnson was not the most durable of all fighters. His chin wasn't great & he was adverse to getting hit period. Jeffries was a real puncher. & I have my doubts that Johnson could tie this version of the Boilermaker up repeatedly. Jeffries was stronger & somewhat larger.
I think the first fifteen or twenty stanzas are good ones for Johnson. But he is just not elusive enough on his feet to escape forever, & not tough enough to survive when hurt by a prime Jeffries. I think Jeffries bulls Johnson aross the ring in the mid-rounds (rounds 20-25!) & imposes his will on the weaker (& weakening) Galveston Giant.
Prime-to-prime, Jeffries by clean-cut KO.
The thing about him is that you just could not stop him. So the question becomes this --- can Johnson outbox him for 45 rounds? Corbett was a great fighter, & lasted more than twenty, leading Jeffries around the ring. Johnson was not the most durable of all fighters. His chin wasn't great & he was adverse to getting hit period. Jeffries was a real puncher. & I have my doubts that Johnson could tie this version of the Boilermaker up repeatedly. Jeffries was stronger & somewhat larger.
I think the first fifteen or twenty stanzas are good ones for Johnson. But he is just not elusive enough on his feet to escape forever, & not tough enough to survive when hurt by a prime Jeffries. I think Jeffries bulls Johnson aross the ring in the mid-rounds (rounds 20-25!) & imposes his will on the weaker (& weakening) Galveston Giant.
Prime-to-prime, Jeffries by clean-cut KO.
What film have you seen to base all this on ?
So under such conditions is it fair to say that a prime Randall Cobb could
defeat and out last any HW in history ?
I think Jefferies could be stopped like any man. And should he meet a good hard hitting boxer-puncher or a fellow hard nosed slugger he would get stopped or beaten. Sure those conditions do make a difference. BUT the wrestling you speak of is more a clinching game, and this is something one does to 'rest' being a more active puncher and 'mover' takes more fitness and is alot more draining than the type of clinching that was common place at this time. I am a national level Greco Roman silver medalist and state champion so I am very familiar with the clinching aspects of the fight game. From what I have seen of Jefferies, his 'wrestling' is more to tie the man up, and he often over poweres smaller guys. So the draining parts of the game like level changes, throwing and 'hand fighting' in the more traditional sense aren't there. Instead he is grabbing and pulling (hence grappling). That is not boxing. He is smart under the rules. BUT the rules would go on to get refined as they do in other sports.
Lets have a look at some of James J Jefferies toughest fights...
In his huge career (20 fights) he never faced any one over 200lbs, nor any one that towered over him. Sure he faced alot of tough men from his era, guys who were warriors and SOBs who could hurt and bleed. BUT to say under those rules he could Beat ANY HW is a tall claim. He never faced a man of the cailbre or even size of the men you listed.
I will say this about Jefferies, he beat the best white guys going in an interesting and culturally rich period of HW history. He conquered Corbett, stomped Fitzsimmons and beat contenders Sharkey and Ruhlin. Was drawn by clever though small (170lb) Choynski.
Available on youTube is of course footage of the Johnson, Sharkey and Ruhlin fights. You can also see some film of the Fitzsimmons re-enactment. I have been unable to find any more film on the big man :(
Kym
So under such conditions is it fair to say that a prime Randall Cobb could
defeat and out last any HW in history ?
I think Jefferies could be stopped like any man. And should he meet a good hard hitting boxer-puncher or a fellow hard nosed slugger he would get stopped or beaten. Sure those conditions do make a difference. BUT the wrestling you speak of is more a clinching game, and this is something one does to 'rest' being a more active puncher and 'mover' takes more fitness and is alot more draining than the type of clinching that was common place at this time. I am a national level Greco Roman silver medalist and state champion so I am very familiar with the clinching aspects of the fight game. From what I have seen of Jefferies, his 'wrestling' is more to tie the man up, and he often over poweres smaller guys. So the draining parts of the game like level changes, throwing and 'hand fighting' in the more traditional sense aren't there. Instead he is grabbing and pulling (hence grappling). That is not boxing. He is smart under the rules. BUT the rules would go on to get refined as they do in other sports.
Lets have a look at some of James J Jefferies toughest fights...
In his huge career (20 fights) he never faced any one over 200lbs, nor any one that towered over him. Sure he faced alot of tough men from his era, guys who were warriors and SOBs who could hurt and bleed. BUT to say under those rules he could Beat ANY HW is a tall claim. He never faced a man of the cailbre or even size of the men you listed.
I will say this about Jefferies, he beat the best white guys going in an interesting and culturally rich period of HW history. He conquered Corbett, stomped Fitzsimmons and beat contenders Sharkey and Ruhlin. Was drawn by clever though small (170lb) Choynski.
Available on youTube is of course footage of the Johnson, Sharkey and Ruhlin fights. You can also see some film of the Fitzsimmons re-enactment. I have been unable to find any more film on the big man :(
Kym
-
dagosd2000
- Heavyweight
- Posts: 8638
- Joined: 01 Sep 2007, 03:31
Johnson's greatest ability as a fighter was his defense. He could parry an opponent's punches as well as any heavyweight. I think he learned this skill from playing with cats. He could catch another opponent's punches out of the air before they could land. He would take the offense when he finally got a guy tired. Most of his title fights looked boring and onesided because his opposition was smaller and weaker or just not very good.
Jeffries in his prime was not only a great fighter but an amazing athlete. He would lift a calf when it was born and do that everyday until the animal was full grown. (I think he got that from the story of Cronos). He could run the 100 yd. dash in under 12 seconds. High jump 6 feet. And skip rope like a lightweight. If he hadn't fought Johnson,he would have been undefeated and had an easier time of it than Marciano.
Here's the point. I don't see Johnson playing cat and mouse with Jeff. I don't see Johnson parrying Jeffries strength.I think Jeffries would catch him like he caught Corbett.
Championship fights in those days often were scheduled for 20 rds. I can't see Johnson lasting that long.
One of the biggest tragedies in boxing was enticing Jeffries to make a comeback.
Jeffries in his prime was not only a great fighter but an amazing athlete. He would lift a calf when it was born and do that everyday until the animal was full grown. (I think he got that from the story of Cronos). He could run the 100 yd. dash in under 12 seconds. High jump 6 feet. And skip rope like a lightweight. If he hadn't fought Johnson,he would have been undefeated and had an easier time of it than Marciano.
Here's the point. I don't see Johnson playing cat and mouse with Jeff. I don't see Johnson parrying Jeffries strength.I think Jeffries would catch him like he caught Corbett.
Championship fights in those days often were scheduled for 20 rds. I can't see Johnson lasting that long.
One of the biggest tragedies in boxing was enticing Jeffries to make a comeback.
Im sure Jefferies enjoyed the lime light again, shedding those fatty pounds, getting fit and making the $ he made, so I doubt he had any regrets.
He himself admitted that even at his best, he would have lost that fight. So for whatever its worth that is on his own admission.
As for the whole carrying a calf story, sure thats not Myth stemming from the always creative newspaper men of the time, or is it documented fact ?
No doubt about it Jefferies is a great fighter of his time. BUT just how great a legacy can one have with 19 fights (if we ignore the Johnson come back fight), no amateur bouts and with a colour line draw.
I just dont see him as being as great as you guys do.
Kym
He himself admitted that even at his best, he would have lost that fight. So for whatever its worth that is on his own admission.
As for the whole carrying a calf story, sure thats not Myth stemming from the always creative newspaper men of the time, or is it documented fact ?
No doubt about it Jefferies is a great fighter of his time. BUT just how great a legacy can one have with 19 fights (if we ignore the Johnson come back fight), no amateur bouts and with a colour line draw.
I just dont see him as being as great as you guys do.
Kym
Jeffries is generally very underrated these days but I think even at his peak Johnson would have been too much for him, he was just too fast and too clever... if the fight was 45 rounds Johnson would just use his defensive skills and outbox and cut up Jeffries.... Jeffries was probably unbeatable toe to toe and would have beaten Dempsey and Marciano imo but Johnson would use his skills and brains, and he also had the power too...
Re:Johnson vs Jeffries
I think while Jeffries was both strong and durable the defensive minded Johnson would control the fight and most importantly the clinches. When matching great fighters in their primes it could be said that on any given night the other may defeat the other especially with a powerful fighter like Jeffries. In watching Johnson on film in most cases he seems to be toying with the other fighter. When he chose to be offensive he appeared to be dominant. In those days it appeared that the heavyweight fighters fought in short bursts and spent much time wrestling and clinching. Johnson would control this part of the fight even against the stronger Jeffries and land the more precise punches to take the fight by decision.
Last edited by Crssbones on 25 Nov 2007, 12:14, edited 1 time in total.
-
HomicideHenry
- Heavyweight
- Posts: 18722
- Joined: 08 Sep 2005, 00:43
He himself admitted that even at his best, he would have lost that fight. So for whatever its worth that is on his own admission.
As for the whole carrying a calf story, sure thats not Myth stemming from the always creative newspaper men of the time, or is it documented fact ?
In Jack Johnson's autobiography, he was quoted as saying that Jeffries was the greatest Heavyweight champion who ever lived. Who else had this opinion of Jeffries? Jack Dempsey. Alot of men, up until the late 1950's usually had Jeffries at #1 or #2. Modern day historians and critics like Tracy Callis have him also at #1.
Not to say that this is accurate or biased, but Jeffries was a special fighter. Who else can you name could have won the Heavyweight title in his 13th professional bout? Who else can you name could have fought the three best Heavyweights in Europe all in a night and knock them out? Who else can you name who challenged Fitzsimmons, Corbett and Sharkey to defend his title against in a day?
Oddly enough all three of those men denied Jeffries. If that isn't enough, the legendary Sam Langford used to promote himself as: "Willing to take on all comers; except Jim Jeffries."
This man was a fighting machine, to say the least, and everybody feared him, even the best of the black fighters.
From what I understand, even Johnson, was leary of Jeffries, pushing himself harder than he ever done before, trying to make himself better in the clinches and more of a power puncher; as he always grew up hearing the phenomenal strength of Jim Jeffries and how an opponent was helpless when Jeffries grabbed ahold of them.
The result was possibly the best conditioned Johnson, who realized real quick, that he was facing not a prime/invincible Jeffries but a man who was a shell of what used to be arguably up until then the greatest fighter the world ever known.
And Decagon, we're talking 45 rounds because the "Fight of The Century" was scheduled for 45 rounds; as was Willard-Johnson, and some other fights that Jeffries and Johnson took part in.
Winning the HW title in the 13th round is a great accomplishment. Leon Spinks was great for this deed as well.
Like I said no doubt about it Jefferies was a tough bugger, and a true legend. BUT me personally from what I have seen of the man, I just don't see those qualities that would convince me of him being no. 1 on a list of champions.
Now to me, beating those guys is a great achievement, however in a 19 fight career before his retirment and with most of his opponents floating around the 170lb mark, it is hard for me to conjure up the notion that he could beat some of the other greats peak for peak.
At 6'2, 220lb and athletic it is easy to over power much smaller men, and I am in the honest belief that should he have met a BIGGER and athletic fighter, with skills his tactics and abilities would have neen nulified.
Kym
Like I said no doubt about it Jefferies was a tough bugger, and a true legend. BUT me personally from what I have seen of the man, I just don't see those qualities that would convince me of him being no. 1 on a list of champions.
Now to me, beating those guys is a great achievement, however in a 19 fight career before his retirment and with most of his opponents floating around the 170lb mark, it is hard for me to conjure up the notion that he could beat some of the other greats peak for peak.
At 6'2, 220lb and athletic it is easy to over power much smaller men, and I am in the honest belief that should he have met a BIGGER and athletic fighter, with skills his tactics and abilities would have neen nulified.
Kym
-
dagosd2000
- Heavyweight
- Posts: 8638
- Joined: 01 Sep 2007, 03:31
[quote="Robinson"]Im sure Jefferies enjoyed the lime light again, shedding those fatty pounds, getting fit and making the $ he made, so I doubt he had any regrets.
He himself admitted that even at his best, he would have lost that fight. So for whatever its worth that is on his own admission.
As for the whole carrying a calf story, sure thats not Myth stemming from the always creative newspaper men of the time, or is it documented fact ?
No doubt about it Jefferies is a great fighter of his time. BUT just how great a legacy can one have with 19 fights (if we ignore the Johnson come back fight), no amateur bouts and with a colour line draw.
I just dont see him as being as great as you guys do.
The calf story could have been a biographer stretching the truth,but Jeffries had a lot of debt at the time. He needed money. As far as his mental condition before the fight,he went through periods of depression. He knew he was up against it. Guys like Jack London,Corbett,and Sullivan had to give him pep talks. Jeffries didn't draw the color line. He KO'd Peter Jackson and decisioned Bob Armstrong in 1898. As far as Jeanette and McVea their pro careers started a year before Jeffries retired.
He himself admitted that even at his best, he would have lost that fight. So for whatever its worth that is on his own admission.
As for the whole carrying a calf story, sure thats not Myth stemming from the always creative newspaper men of the time, or is it documented fact ?
No doubt about it Jefferies is a great fighter of his time. BUT just how great a legacy can one have with 19 fights (if we ignore the Johnson come back fight), no amateur bouts and with a colour line draw.
I just dont see him as being as great as you guys do.
The calf story could have been a biographer stretching the truth,but Jeffries had a lot of debt at the time. He needed money. As far as his mental condition before the fight,he went through periods of depression. He knew he was up against it. Guys like Jack London,Corbett,and Sullivan had to give him pep talks. Jeffries didn't draw the color line. He KO'd Peter Jackson and decisioned Bob Armstrong in 1898. As far as Jeanette and McVea their pro careers started a year before Jeffries retired.
-
dagosd2000
- Heavyweight
- Posts: 8638
- Joined: 01 Sep 2007, 03:31
Look,you're splitting hairs. If those two were to fight each other in their primes it would be an interesting fight. I think Jeffries would win, you go with Johnson. Neither of us are out of line with our handicapping.Robinson wrote:Can you name any fighter in history who does not suffer from a form of depression ?
As far as a fighter who never was depressed at one time or another? You can ask that about anyone. As the fight got closer ,Jeffries,who had lost a lot of his ability was, let's say "concerned"
When Johnson finally lost the title to Willard,he lost to a fighter who was in his prime and Johnson was old and fat. Johnson,in a way, was like Jeffries was in Reno. Johnson looked futile and then years later said he took a "dive" At least Jeffries said that he probably couldn't have ever beaten Johnson.
-
HomicideHenry
- Heavyweight
- Posts: 18722
- Joined: 08 Sep 2005, 00:43
The argument of Jeffries beating men who were 175+ means he couldn't beat guys today is rather ignorant or is less significant, least in my mind. Back then the weight classes were far more open than they are today; hell Heavyweight was 176 and up, and even then guys like Bob Fitzsimmons came around at 168 and win the belt.
This doesnt necessarly mean that smaller is therefore weaker, lesser, worse than bigger. In my mind, the men of yesterday were much better conditioned, as they always kept in shape and always fought reguarly. Hell, Jeffries when not training usually weighed around 260-280, but when in form was around 226.
In my mind, with today's Heavyweights being 245-325+, I don't believe that alot of them are naturally that big. If a fighter should weigh in at 225 but is fighting at 245, he should hit the gym til he makes the weight where he is at his most agile. But that doesn't happen much these days. It's train three or four months, then fight, and take five or six months off and get fat.
You can't really say that guys like Tommy Gibbons wasn't a good Heavyweight, when he was more or less a Light Heavyweight, and he gave Dempsey and other men hell. You can't take away from Fitzsimmons, just because he was 168 pounds, as he hit as hard as a super heavyweight and faired very well on his own against the best of three different weight classes.
Tommy Burns, for all intents and purposes, on a p4p sense was one of the best ever. At 5'7" and just a tad over 175 pounds, he did remarkably well against Heavyweights who were what we would call Cruisers today.
Look at some of Ali's opponents; Cooper wasn't big, neither was Bob Foster, neither was Archie Moore (sure Moore was over the hill but work with me here). And the rub is this, they weren't bad fights, nor were the fighters bad. Just because they were 20-30 pounds lighter than Ali didn't quite mean off the bat that the fighters wouldn't stand a chance or wouldn't be competitive...it was Ali's skill alone, and his speed, that set him apart from those men. Not because of size.
All the men Jeffries fought were all capable, all were leading contenders, and all of them probably fought 20 or more times a year against the best competition in the world. Just because Jeffries was the first 'big man' Heavweight champion, doesn't mean he won purely on size alone.
Jeffries was tough, had an abundant amount of strength, grit, determination, and he wasn't the slow and awkward fellow people have made him out to be. He was arguably the first all-around athlete of his time. It was his power, imposement of his will and ferocity, and sheer ferocity that made him a winner against those men. Not because he was almost 6'2" and 226 pounds.
Besides, Jeffries fought in an usual style to where he fought from a crouch with his left arm fully extended...which would have taken away any height advantage that he had.
This doesnt necessarly mean that smaller is therefore weaker, lesser, worse than bigger. In my mind, the men of yesterday were much better conditioned, as they always kept in shape and always fought reguarly. Hell, Jeffries when not training usually weighed around 260-280, but when in form was around 226.
In my mind, with today's Heavyweights being 245-325+, I don't believe that alot of them are naturally that big. If a fighter should weigh in at 225 but is fighting at 245, he should hit the gym til he makes the weight where he is at his most agile. But that doesn't happen much these days. It's train three or four months, then fight, and take five or six months off and get fat.
You can't really say that guys like Tommy Gibbons wasn't a good Heavyweight, when he was more or less a Light Heavyweight, and he gave Dempsey and other men hell. You can't take away from Fitzsimmons, just because he was 168 pounds, as he hit as hard as a super heavyweight and faired very well on his own against the best of three different weight classes.
Tommy Burns, for all intents and purposes, on a p4p sense was one of the best ever. At 5'7" and just a tad over 175 pounds, he did remarkably well against Heavyweights who were what we would call Cruisers today.
Look at some of Ali's opponents; Cooper wasn't big, neither was Bob Foster, neither was Archie Moore (sure Moore was over the hill but work with me here). And the rub is this, they weren't bad fights, nor were the fighters bad. Just because they were 20-30 pounds lighter than Ali didn't quite mean off the bat that the fighters wouldn't stand a chance or wouldn't be competitive...it was Ali's skill alone, and his speed, that set him apart from those men. Not because of size.
All the men Jeffries fought were all capable, all were leading contenders, and all of them probably fought 20 or more times a year against the best competition in the world. Just because Jeffries was the first 'big man' Heavweight champion, doesn't mean he won purely on size alone.
Jeffries was tough, had an abundant amount of strength, grit, determination, and he wasn't the slow and awkward fellow people have made him out to be. He was arguably the first all-around athlete of his time. It was his power, imposement of his will and ferocity, and sheer ferocity that made him a winner against those men. Not because he was almost 6'2" and 226 pounds.
Besides, Jeffries fought in an usual style to where he fought from a crouch with his left arm fully extended...which would have taken away any height advantage that he had.
Last edited by HomicideHenry on 19 Nov 2007, 17:01, edited 1 time in total.
I never said anything about todays HWs.
The point I was trying to make is that Jefferies for all of his qualities
was never challenged by a bigger man who is as athletic.
Alot of big guys bully smaller guys inside the ropes, but themselves
struggle against some one there own size or bigger.
It is easy for you to make the claim that he could beat every other HW under 45 round rules under the blazing sun. Who is to say he would see the 45th round ?
You use Ali, in regards to his fights with Moore, Foster they were champions at a lower weight class. Not just guys who fought at that weight. Cooper was small sure, so was a lot of guys from that era. Ali however still went on to face ALOT of bigger men, and tougher guys who were over 200lbs.
Hitting a 200+lb that is athletic and hard bodied takes it out of you. It is a simple fact that SIZE does make some difference. Not all the difference. BUT if you face some one who is active, fit and agile and can use there size then you have yourself a fight.
Outweighing nearly all of your 19 opponents by around 20+ lbs and then over powering in the ring, does not imply that you can do the same thing agsint bigger, skilled men. It means you need a B game. Did Jefferies have this ?
He did fight from a crouch yes, he still had reach, that big torso and when he clinched from what I have seen he leaned down into his foe, and made them carry his big bulk as a modern day Lewis would do.
I think Johnson was tricky, and talented in the sense he had good reflexes and was un-conventional. And unlike the tough guys Jefferies had faced in the past, including Corbett and Fitzsimmons, Johnson had much better defensive skills and his counter punching had enough sting in it to make Jefferies wary of bull rushing tactics.
Kym
The point I was trying to make is that Jefferies for all of his qualities
was never challenged by a bigger man who is as athletic.
Alot of big guys bully smaller guys inside the ropes, but themselves
struggle against some one there own size or bigger.
It is easy for you to make the claim that he could beat every other HW under 45 round rules under the blazing sun. Who is to say he would see the 45th round ?
You use Ali, in regards to his fights with Moore, Foster they were champions at a lower weight class. Not just guys who fought at that weight. Cooper was small sure, so was a lot of guys from that era. Ali however still went on to face ALOT of bigger men, and tougher guys who were over 200lbs.
Hitting a 200+lb that is athletic and hard bodied takes it out of you. It is a simple fact that SIZE does make some difference. Not all the difference. BUT if you face some one who is active, fit and agile and can use there size then you have yourself a fight.
Outweighing nearly all of your 19 opponents by around 20+ lbs and then over powering in the ring, does not imply that you can do the same thing agsint bigger, skilled men. It means you need a B game. Did Jefferies have this ?
He did fight from a crouch yes, he still had reach, that big torso and when he clinched from what I have seen he leaned down into his foe, and made them carry his big bulk as a modern day Lewis would do.
I think Johnson was tricky, and talented in the sense he had good reflexes and was un-conventional. And unlike the tough guys Jefferies had faced in the past, including Corbett and Fitzsimmons, Johnson had much better defensive skills and his counter punching had enough sting in it to make Jefferies wary of bull rushing tactics.
Kym
-
pound per pound
- Heavyweight
- Posts: 1593
- Joined: 13 Jan 2005, 14:36
winner
Old fighters sometimes say odd things when the lose. Louis said he would never have beaten Marciano. Johnson said he took a dive vs Williard. and the beat goes on. Jeffries did say he would not have beaten Johnson, but did he mean that, or did he just want to go home un-hounded by the press? I think Jeffries just wanted to go home after the loss.Robinson wrote:Im sure Jefferies enjoyed the lime light again, shedding those fatty pounds, getting fit and making the $ he made, so I doubt he had any regrets.
He himself admitted that even at his best, he would have lost that fight. So for whatever its worth that is on his own admission.
As for the whole carrying a calf story, sure thats not Myth stemming from the always creative newspaper men of the time, or is it documented fact ?
No doubt about it Jefferies is a great fighter of his time. BUT just how great a legacy can one have with 19 fights (if we ignore the Johnson come back fight), no amateur bouts and with a colour line draw.
I just dont see him as being as great as you guys do.
Kym
Jeffries also claimed he was poisoned, and judging on how quickly his gas tank hit " E " on the film of a very boring and slow fight, something might have been up. Or Perhaps Jeffries was just too old and inactive to come back. Perhaps it was Billy Delaney, Jeffries old trainer in Johnson corner that meant something. The 1910 fight means nothing when you are talking about a prime vs prime match up. A prime vs prime match up would have been very different and judging on the troubles Johnson had on the way up and as champion vs guys who can fight a bit, Jeffries would have likely been the winner.
If Johnson could cleanly beat he likes of Choynski, Hart, Griffin, O'brien, or Jim Johnson, and drew with others, does he really stand chance vs a prime Jeffries? Not likely. Even though Jeffries was coming back for the 1910 fight, most of the fight experts and fighters familiar with the two though Jeffries would win the fight. This includes top black fighters such as Langford and Jeanette. Of course their prediction was based on Jeffires returning to his old form, which clearly did not happen.
I believe a prime and active Jeffries defeats Jack Johnson
-
HomicideHenry
- Heavyweight
- Posts: 18722
- Joined: 08 Sep 2005, 00:43
And who were these men who were "ALOT" bigger than Ali? Foreman was 6'3" and 215 pounds, Joe Frazier was like 5'11" and 220 pounds. Norton was similar in height and weight as well. I can't really name any fighter who was significantly bigger than Ali, except for maybe Joe Bugner, but even Aussie Joe weighed 215-220 and was I think 6'4".You use Ali, in regards to his fights with Moore, Foster they were champions at a lower weight class. Not just guys who fought at that weight. Cooper was small sure, so was a lot of guys from that era. Ali however still went on to face ALOT of bigger men, and tougher guys who were over 200lbs.
If you are to use the argument against Jeffries that he never fought the same kind of big athletic men as himself...would you hold it against Ali for not fighting men who were A) as fast as himself, or B ) were much bigger than himself?
Let's look at it from a realistic stand point...who out there were big, athletic man in Jeffries era?
Mind you, McCarty, Willard, Fulton, Morris, and other gigantic HW's were more than likely just starting their careers when Jeffries walked out and retired from the ring. How about overseas battlers like Billy Wells or Jim Coffey? Primarily the same scenario, as they started to bloom while Johnson was near the end of his title reign.
Had Jeffries fought these men when they were green horns, I suspect that Jim would have pulverised them inside of two-three rounds.
How about the black HW's? Sam Langford was scared shitless of Jeffries. Jeanette was as well. Johnson was still a greenhorn when Jeffries was champion. Or how about the gigantic, powerful, but slow and ponderous Sam McVey? While he may have been the hardest hitting HW of the time, he wasn't in Jeffries league or in Langford's or in Johnson's.
Jeffries more than proved himself, in my mind, as he beat the most SKILLED Heavyweights of his time in Corbett and Fitzsimmons, as well as the legendary Peter Jackson (though he was passed his best), and a few other black men [it is reported that he fought more black men than originally realized]. Throw in Sharkey, who was the dirtiest, one of the strongest, well conditioned, toughest opponents in the era (if not all time), as well as his tours in Europe were he knocked out the best in England, Ireland and the like.
So the point you are making is that Jefferies is the ABSOLUTE best HW in any generation. And you have gotten this from watching his 19 pre retirement fights. Good for you.
I dont personally feel he is that great. He is no doubt a togh SOB, but to me I wouldn't pick him.
The point I was making in regards to Ali is that he did face guys at all weights. And those who he did face that were around the 170-185lb had a lot of champions and top guys from the LHW div. Ali also faced men such as Foreman, Lyle, Williams, Liston who were above 200lb and who were tough, good 'bigger' men.
Guys like Willard and Fulton and all that ulitmately had just size on there side. I do not buy into the notion that they were super talents or more athletic than say a Michael Grant.
Kym
I dont personally feel he is that great. He is no doubt a togh SOB, but to me I wouldn't pick him.
The point I was making in regards to Ali is that he did face guys at all weights. And those who he did face that were around the 170-185lb had a lot of champions and top guys from the LHW div. Ali also faced men such as Foreman, Lyle, Williams, Liston who were above 200lb and who were tough, good 'bigger' men.
Guys like Willard and Fulton and all that ulitmately had just size on there side. I do not buy into the notion that they were super talents or more athletic than say a Michael Grant.
Kym
-
dempseyfire
- Heavyweight
- Posts: 5534
- Joined: 29 Oct 2003, 22:56
They were indeed very athletic big men. Do you know how many 6'5ish 240 lb fighters existed in the White Hope era?? If all they (Fulton, Willard) had was size on their side why didn't those other guys (Jim Stewart, Dan Daily etc.) become leading contenders/champions???Robinson wrote:So the point you are making is that Jefferies is the ABSOLUTE best HW in any generation. And you have gotten this from watching his 19 pre retirement fights. Good for you.
I dont personally feel he is that great. He is no doubt a togh SOB, but to me I wouldn't pick him.
The point I was making in regards to Ali is that he did face guys at all weights. And those who he did face that were around the 170-185lb had a lot of champions and top guys from the LHW div. Ali also faced men such as Foreman, Lyle, Williams, Liston who were above 200lb and who were tough, good 'bigger' men.
Guys like Willard and Fulton and all that ulitmately had just size on there side. I do not buy into the notion that they were super talents or more athletic than say a Michael Grant.
Kym
-
HomicideHenry
- Heavyweight
- Posts: 18722
- Joined: 08 Sep 2005, 00:43
Never said he was the absoloute best in any generation. In the 12-15 round eras, Jeffries would have been a likely contender still, maybe even pick up a title, but with all the rules being against him, as he was a man of endurance coming on late in a fight, and known for taking punishment even when he was bleeding and battered beond repair...he wouldn't have made quite the mark today that he would have when he was around.So the point you are making is that Jefferies is the ABSOLUTE best HW in any generation. And you have gotten this from watching his 19 pre retirement fights. Good for you.
Jeffries in matches scheduled for 20-45 rounds, or hell even fights to the finish with no rounds scheduled, would probably be the greatest of all time.
I don't know if your familiar with MMA, but that is like saying
that a Royce Gracie could beat anyone under HIS rules of the
old days of MMA.
So its safe to say that a Tom Cribb could beat any modern HW
under the old prize rules ?
Yes they were athletic I am sure. Compared to what though, that
is the question.
Kym
that a Royce Gracie could beat anyone under HIS rules of the
old days of MMA.
So its safe to say that a Tom Cribb could beat any modern HW
under the old prize rules ?
Yes they were athletic I am sure. Compared to what though, that
is the question.
Kym
-
dagosd2000
- Heavyweight
- Posts: 8638
- Joined: 01 Sep 2007, 03:31
We had a good give and take with Johnson/Jeffries. But there are fighters out there who I've run across that didn't seem depressed.Robinson wrote:Can you name any fighter in history who does not suffer from a form of depression ?
I said I knew Archie Moore when he was running his boys club in San Diego. He always displayed a hopefull and positive outlook on life and when he looked back on his past(especially his marrages) it was nothing worse than a bitter sweet little shake of the head. What a pleasant man. A real gentleman who never talked down to you. Always patient and made you feel like he enjoyed talking to you. You wanted to revisit him because he welcomed your presence.
Another one,Mantequilla Napoles. I've posted before that he was my personal favorite. I saw him fight in Tijuana and LA a lot,but figured I'd never meet him. My wife has family in Tijuana and one day when I was down there (around 1985) I saw a billboard saying Mantequilla Napoles and his tropical music group were going to perform at a club on Revolution St. So I decided to go and introduce myself.
Well this club,The Rio Grande,wasn't exactly Caesar's Palace. It was upstairs,the linoleum floor was cracked,cigarette stained walls ;something out of one of those film noir 50's movies. I get there around midnight and the crowd is starting to fill up and I think everybody was drunk and loaded before they got there. No one was checking for guns or knives at the door so I figured the crowd felt comfortable. I see Napoles and his band up on the bandstand and all I know is that they played loud. Napoles is no Dizzy Gillespie but he was really getting into it.
I figure I got to make up for lost time so I'm drinking double shots of tequila. After 4 or 5 Jose decides to take five. The artists go to a room in the back to repair so I follow along. I open the door,I don't know what I was about to say,but Jose says to me in Spanish to get my ass inside. I'm sitting with the artists and here comes the booze,the drugs and nobody knows who I am. Everybody is passing everything around and having the time of their lives. I'm really getting f----- up and as I go to say something to Jose they get up and go out to play music again--real real loud this time. I see a girl with lots of makeup and big tits and figure she would like to dance or something.
Next thing I know some guy goes flying by my feet in the prone position. 3 or 4 guys jump on top of him behaving in a rude and inappropiate manner. A couple of cops come running in ,I guess to help out, and now they're getting the shit kicked out of them. I guess Napoles and the artists have been through this before and they start playing "the Gillette Blue Blades Song" I haul ass down the stairs. I'll introduce myself to Jose some other time.I hear glasses breaking and Napoles and the artists are still playing as I get out to the street.
When you asked if I ever knew of a fighter who was not depressed.I figured Napoles might qualify.
-
HomicideHenry
- Heavyweight
- Posts: 18722
- Joined: 08 Sep 2005, 00:43
Yes I am familiar with MMA, and Royce "The Hair Puller" Gracie. lol
I am just saying, you can't really compare apples to oranges with this sport, or in any sport. It would be like saying who would win in a London Prize Ring Rules bout between Ali and Sullivan...the general idea is that Ali more than likely wouldn't have been successful in a sport that allowed wrestling tactics, bare fists, no amount of rounds scheduled, with not so squeamish referees...just as it would be to say Sullivan wouldn't been able to have defeated Ali in a 12 or 15 rounder with the gloves and no wrestling allowed, etc.
You can't compare what Jeffries, Sullivan, Fitzsimmons, Corbett, etc had done in their time, to what the more modern guys are doing. What Klitschko, Lewis, Maskaev, etc are doing today would be considered a glorified sparring session back in Jeffries time. Get what I mean?
That's not to say that the younger guys couldn't beat Jeffries, Corbett, etc in a 12-15 rounder...but who's to say that the young guys could beat them had it been 20-45 rounds or more with the little 6 ounce gloves they used back then?
Now to put it into a more modern perspective, as far as the young Sullivan, and guys like Cribb and Mace and Molineaux are concerned...I dont think none of those men would be boxers today, but rather in the MMA field of sports. The old boxing rules were alot like a MMA battle, except there was no time limit but always a fight to the finish.
As far as how athletic they all were, that's under speculation. You have to realize the further back in boxing you go the less volume of punches there were in a fight, as it was a HUGE worry and problem to have a broken hand suffered in a fight. Also throw in how it was common knowledge that these fights could have ended at the first punch/throw or could have went on into the next day. That's alot of wrestling and punching and shoving and clinching to do. These guys had to be prepared to go for hours, even if a fight only went a few seconds. Cus you never knew how long it really would last.
It is the general opinion, that the older guys were more well conditioned and had the greater stamina and endurance, while the more modern fighters had the greater technique, speed and skill...while this can be up to debate, I can't really imagine many of the guys today going 20 rounds or more. Maybe 15, but that's about it.
How athletic were they? =shrugs= I imagine had those men trained the same as they would for a bare knuckle fight, and were given gloves like today and the three minute round system, they probably could have punched non-stop from bell to bell, averaging 80-100 punches a round.
I bring up Marciano, only in this regard, that though he is considered the greatest conditioned Heavyweight of all time, it's actually more accurate to say that Marciano trained alot like the bare knuckle fighters, getting conditioned to the point where he couldn't get tired after doing 15 rounds; so he would get himself trained as if he was boxing a 20-45 round bout.
Not to say that makes someone invincible or better than the next man, but it does give someone a very good edge in the 'championship rounds'.
I am just saying, you can't really compare apples to oranges with this sport, or in any sport. It would be like saying who would win in a London Prize Ring Rules bout between Ali and Sullivan...the general idea is that Ali more than likely wouldn't have been successful in a sport that allowed wrestling tactics, bare fists, no amount of rounds scheduled, with not so squeamish referees...just as it would be to say Sullivan wouldn't been able to have defeated Ali in a 12 or 15 rounder with the gloves and no wrestling allowed, etc.
You can't compare what Jeffries, Sullivan, Fitzsimmons, Corbett, etc had done in their time, to what the more modern guys are doing. What Klitschko, Lewis, Maskaev, etc are doing today would be considered a glorified sparring session back in Jeffries time. Get what I mean?
That's not to say that the younger guys couldn't beat Jeffries, Corbett, etc in a 12-15 rounder...but who's to say that the young guys could beat them had it been 20-45 rounds or more with the little 6 ounce gloves they used back then?
Now to put it into a more modern perspective, as far as the young Sullivan, and guys like Cribb and Mace and Molineaux are concerned...I dont think none of those men would be boxers today, but rather in the MMA field of sports. The old boxing rules were alot like a MMA battle, except there was no time limit but always a fight to the finish.
As far as how athletic they all were, that's under speculation. You have to realize the further back in boxing you go the less volume of punches there were in a fight, as it was a HUGE worry and problem to have a broken hand suffered in a fight. Also throw in how it was common knowledge that these fights could have ended at the first punch/throw or could have went on into the next day. That's alot of wrestling and punching and shoving and clinching to do. These guys had to be prepared to go for hours, even if a fight only went a few seconds. Cus you never knew how long it really would last.
It is the general opinion, that the older guys were more well conditioned and had the greater stamina and endurance, while the more modern fighters had the greater technique, speed and skill...while this can be up to debate, I can't really imagine many of the guys today going 20 rounds or more. Maybe 15, but that's about it.
How athletic were they? =shrugs= I imagine had those men trained the same as they would for a bare knuckle fight, and were given gloves like today and the three minute round system, they probably could have punched non-stop from bell to bell, averaging 80-100 punches a round.
I bring up Marciano, only in this regard, that though he is considered the greatest conditioned Heavyweight of all time, it's actually more accurate to say that Marciano trained alot like the bare knuckle fighters, getting conditioned to the point where he couldn't get tired after doing 15 rounds; so he would get himself trained as if he was boxing a 20-45 round bout.
Not to say that makes someone invincible or better than the next man, but it does give someone a very good edge in the 'championship rounds'.
-
elmersalsa
- Heavyweight
- Posts: 15648
- Joined: 02 Feb 2003, 03:50
-
Goodnight, Irene
- Heavyweight
- Posts: 9463
- Joined: 24 Sep 2007, 04:43
Tyson better do it in 91 seconds, because if he doesn't & can't adequately hurt Jeffries, he's in deep & sure won't win a real fight with a man like that.
So you think Johnson beats Tyson but Jeffries gets blown to bits in 91 seconds? C'mon, really? The speed of Tyson's assault is supersonic next to both Jeffries & Johnson. Thing is, one of these men loves pain, the other hates to get hit.
So you think Johnson beats Tyson but Jeffries gets blown to bits in 91 seconds? C'mon, really? The speed of Tyson's assault is supersonic next to both Jeffries & Johnson. Thing is, one of these men loves pain, the other hates to get hit.