BoxRec

While I was reading the recent threads on the board ranking the all-time heavyweights, one of the things I found interesting was the placement of James Jefferies. One of the two ongoing threads on the board has him listed at #12 all-time at heavyweight; the other list has him at #15.

In the past, I have seen Jeffries frequently just inside the top 10 on such lists.

I realize such lists are just one person's opinion and are subjective. But how much did Jeffries' decision to come out of retirement to face Jack Johnson hurt his legacy? Jefferies had to drop nearly 100 pounds to face Johnson, had not fought in six years and was thoroughly outclassed in the fight. Would the result have been the same had Jefferies fought Johnson while in peak condition rather than retire?

If Jefferies had stayed retired (and unbeaten), his legacy would, of course, have been right there with Rocky Marciano as an undefeated champion.

CarneraKOsSharkey wrote:While I was reading the recent threads on the board ranking the all-time heavyweights, one of the things I found interesting was the placement of James Jefferies. One of the two ongoing threads on the board has him listed at #12 all-time at heavyweight; the other list has him at #15.

In the past, I have seen Jeffries frequently just inside the top 10 on such lists.

I realize such lists are just one person's opinion and are subjective. But how much did Jeffries' decision to come out of retirement to face Jack Johnson hurt his legacy? Jefferies had to drop nearly 100 pounds to face Johnson, had not fought in six years and was thoroughly outclassed in the fight. Would the result have been the same had Jefferies fought Johnson while in peak condition rather than retire?

If Jefferies had stayed retired (and unbeaten), his legacy would, of course, have been right there with Rocky Marciano as an undefeated champion.

I now rate him 9th, up from around 15 from a couple months ago, but I can't see him any higher. He was a great fighter, and yes, probably the Johnson fight took the "invincibility" off of Jeffries, though he did show his legendary toughness in taking an absolute beating and kept on his feet, and he did have a solid resume. Victories over Corbett, Chonyski, Fitzsimmons, and Sharkey are impressive.

I personally think despite the layoff and weight loss that he was in great shape, but had just never met anyone as great as Johnson, though he would have fared better in his prime. Interestingly, Jeffries said that he could never have beaten Johnson, even in his prime, so the result would pretty much have been the same.

That is one problem with fighters, they end making an ill advised comeback or not retiring when they sould have. There are to many of them to name.

this fight didnt hurt his legacy.. he was a great fighter. he was simply to old and past his prime to compete. doesnt hurt his legacy of beign a great fighter

kick asner wrote:That is one problem with fighters, they end making an ill advised comeback or not retiring when they sould have. There are to many of them to name.

i think jeffries almost got forced into this fight. all of white america was pressuring him to take the crown back from the black fighter. i think he had to do it just because the people were demanding it so forcefully

This fight impacted Jeffries legacy. It did not gravely impact Jeffries legacy until about 60’s. During this time line, most of the men who saw and rated Jeffries highly began to die out. Pre 1960 Jeffries was a consensus top ten heavyweight. Some said #1,#2, or #3. One survey of no less than a dozen historians in the late 50's polled Jeffries as #1 overall. Jeffries must have been something else in his prime.

Today the only film 99% of the boxing fans see on Jeffries is him coming back as a 35 year old who was out of the game for several years. Jeffries lived the high life. He was walking around at 300 pounds, and simply had too much pressure on him to win to perform well despite shedding nearly 80 pounds of fat. The story of the fight in a boxing sense was Jeffries was goaded out of retirement. Jeffries only came back in name. He was but a shell of his former self.

To illustrate my point, suppose the only film you saw on Ali was him being pasted by Larry Holmes, and all the people who saw Ali were long gone. What would this do to Ali's legacy? Would you beleive all the people who said Ali was great, or would you simply judge him as an old man in the ring?

pound per pound wrote:This fight impacted Jeffries legacy. It did not gravely impact Jeffries legacy until about 60’s. During this time line, most of the men who saw and rated Jeffries highly began to die out. Pre 1960 Jeffries was a consensus top ten heavyweight. Some said #1,#2, or #3. One survey of no less than a dozen historians in the late 50's polled Jeffries as #1 overall. Jeffries must have been something else in his prime.

Today the only film 99% of the boxing fans see on Jeffries is him coming back as a 35 year old who was out of the game for several years. Jeffries lived the high life. He was walking around at 300 pounds, and simply had too much pressure on him to win to perform well despite shedding nearly 80 pounds of fat. The story of the fight in a boxing sense was Jeffries was goaded out of retirement. Jeffries only came back in name. He was but a shell of his former self.

To illustrate my point, suppose the only film you saw on Ali was him being pasted by Larry Holmes, and all the people who saw Ali were long gone. What would this do to Ali's legacy? Would you beleive all the people who said Ali was great, or would you simply judge him as an old man in the ring?

I pretty much completely agree with you.

Jeffries' loss to Johnson never affected his legacy in my eyes and I still put him in the top 20 every time I make a top heavyweight list...even in the top 15 occasionally.

However, I think that a lot of people take his loss to Johnson into account without looking at the facts surrounding the fight.

In my mind, had Jeffries somehow managed to defeated Johnson, then he would be considered a top 5 all-time heavyweight even today. But to me, he was easily a top 20 fighter before the Johnson fight and his loss to Johnson doesn't make me think any less of him.

I agree with your points pound per pound. I have always had Jefferies in my top 10. But what I have always wondered is how many pro fights he actually had. Is he one of those fighters who has many early unrecorded fights or did he really only have the 22 bouts he is normally credited with?

If this is the case I'm not trying to take anything away from him his opposition was excellent Jackson, Chonsky, Sharkey, Corbett twice, Fitz twice. It's just strange when you consider how many fights fighters tended to have in those days especially when you consider that when he met Johnson who was 3 years younger Johnson had had 71 fights up to that point to Jefferies 22.

Pre-1960, Jeffries was a top-5 heavyweight, but that's not because people's opinions of him changed. That's because Muhammad Ali, Sonny Liston, Joe Frazier, George Foreman, Larry Holmes, Evander Holyfield, Mike Tyson and Lennox Lewis hadn't made their mark on boxing yet.

Exactley what I was gonna write, you beat me to it Decagon.

Does anyone besides me think that if Jeffries had beat Johnson, he'd still be a top 5, maybe even a top 3 heaavyweight of all-time?

Decagon wrote:Sure, and if Scott LeDoux came out of retirement and knocked out Vitali Klitschko, Lamon Brewster, John Ruiz, Chris Byrd and a returning Lennox Lewis in consecutive fights, he'd be ranked one of the best ever, too.

Thank you for a being a prick. That's usually my job but you seem to be handling it pretty well right now

Decagon wrote:You made a dumb post and then said that you're a prick. Nice way to impress.

Well I am a prick. I only speak the truth. I obviously didn't think my post was dumb I was just wondering what other people thought. Sorry if I offended you in any way but you really felt my post was dumb you didn't have to make a smart ass comment about it.

I have never really sat down and analyzed where I wouild rate Jefferies on my list, but I know that for many years he was rated, by people that had seen 'enm all to that point in the ring, very highly. I think that even among boxing fans, even fairly serious fans, that the Johnson fight ruins what ever legacy Jefferies was allowed, given how long ago he fought etc..

Decagon wrote:Sure, and if Scott LeDoux came out of retirement and knocked out Vitali Klitschko, Lamon Brewster, John Ruiz, Chris Byrd and a returning Lennox Lewis in consecutive fights, he'd be ranked one of the best ever, too.

decagon, iceman is talking about 1 fight. thats not very rare here. ur talking about some bum beating some of the greats in an era. if jeffries would have beaten jack johnson the IMO he would be a top 5 fighter. mainly because i have johnson at top 5.

Your pretty much wrong on that. Corbett did before Johnson and so Did Peter Jackson.

Though out time. there have always been boxers and Sluggers. Johnson was not the first or the last to do it. And no Corbett was not the first either lol.

James J. Jeffries had not fought in six years and was 35 years old (which was considered ancient at the time) going into the Johnson fight. While he got in tremendous condition, coming down from the mid-300's, he still was the heaviest of his entire career. Although no other tape of Jeffries' career exists (to my knowledge), he appeared to be a boxer well past his prime, with overly slow movements and a total lack of offense.

Meanwhile, Jack Johnson was on the best run of his entire 127 bout career, reeling off 13 wins against two draws and 9 no decisions and capturing the Heavyweight title in the process. He was the younger, quicker, more active fighter who had time on his side and a vengeance to carry out.

The reality is we cannot judge this fight agaisnt Jeffries for the above reasons. Can we use it to factor whether or not Johnson would have defeated him during their primes? Not really. Like I said, no tape exists of Jeffries except this one, so we have no clue of how good he really was other than by first hand accounts. This is a shame, given no one who witnessed his prime career first hand is likely still living. Unfortunately, that means we are stuck using what has already been said in the history books to gauge the ability of Jeffries.

The fight in history I think is most similar is the Larry Holmes-Muhammad Ali fight. Ali got in magnificent shape, weighing 217.5 lbs, the lowest since he won "The Rumble in the Jungle" six years prior. He looked absolutely fit and sharp in training and actually made a lot of experts think he would turn back the clock against Holmes. After all, Holmes was a former sparring partner of Ali's who Ali used to control day in and day out in training. Then comes the fight. Ali was flat, slow, and threw almost no punches. The only reason he wasn't taken out quicker was because Holmes carried him.

Was Ali's legacy tainted because he lost horrifically to Holmes, who was a top ten Heavyweight himself? Not at all. When a fighter is that far past his prime, you can't measure anything by it. Same goes for James J. Jeffries, who cemented his legacy over seven historic title defenses, even registering a 0:55 second first round KO, which is still the fastest in heavyweight title history (unless you count the WBO, which if you do, you might as well count the IBO and IBA and every other second rate organization).

A LOT of fighters in Johnson's Era did what he did.

Les Darcy comes to mind
Joe Gans
Dixion.
Tommy Burns
Jack O'Brien,
Tommy Ryan
Joe Walcott
Freddie Welsh

And other boxers did what Johnson did in the ring. And this is just off the top of my head.

You giving Johnson the wrong impressive, Sure he was the First Black Heavyweight, But he was not one of the "Few" to box like he did. It was a LARGE number.

Dempsey1238 wrote:A LOT of fighters in Johnson's Era did what he did.

Les Darcy comes to mind
Joe Gans
Dixion.
Tommy Burns
Jack O'Brien,
Tommy Ryan
Joe Walcott
Freddie Welsh

And other boxers did what Johnson did in the ring. And this is just off the top of my head.

You giving Johnson the wrong impressive, Sure he was the First Black Heavyweight, But he was not one of the "Few" to box like he did. It was a LARGE number.

I think Decagon is referring strictly to the heavyweights.

think your overrated Johnson in a pound for pound sense though.

He was one of the best skill heavyweights ever, But he is not the best "Skill" in a top 20 or so on Boxers.

Most of the lighterweights have tons more skill than Johnson, like Gans and Darcy.

As a heavyweight, sure, to ten, top 5. But as a pound for pound thing, if we go on Skill alone, (And forget what one did in the ring)

Willy Pep and Benny Lenard are classes above Johnson.

I was browsing a video archive site the other day and came across what seems to show a short clip from the first Jeffries vs Fitzsimmons fight.

Go here: http://www.efootage.com/search.php and search for "championship fight".

iceman21287 wrote:Does anyone besides me think that if Jeffries had beat Johnson, he'd still be a top 5, maybe even a top 3 heaavyweight of all-time?

That's one of the biggest "ifs" I've ever heard. I do think the Johnson fight took a serious toll on Jeffries' reputation twice. The first time was back at the time of the fight when he let the white supremicists down. Jack London, one of the truly monstrous racists who ever lived, was writing articles about how this fight was a war to protect all of civilization from the half human species and Jeffries was going to reestablish the "the english speaking race" as superior. Instead, Jeffries looked ridiculous. That hurt his rep. Then in the 60s when civil rights, Muhammad Ali, the play "The Great White Hope" and a revival of interest in Jack Johnson all hit at once, Jeffries' association with the white supremicists and his pathetic showing hurt him big time. Having said all that, I do think he's underrated. My favorite 19th century fighter is Tom Sharkey (hence my handle) and Jeffries fought two wars with him, getting decisions in both. He knocked out Corbett and Fitzsimmons. His victory over Jackson shouldn't impress us since Jackson was to Jeffries what Jeffries was to Johnson, old, sick and finished. But if we're to take the turn of century heavyweights seriously at all, Jeffries was clearly the class of the bunch and I think he should always make a top ten heavyweight list.