Jeffries v Quarry

[HOUDINI]

They also fought in much bigger rings in those days. Smaller more agile hwts were that much more difficult to catch. Tom Sharkey is considered an all time great that would have been champion if he were not fighting in an era of even greater fighters.

[mcvey]

Originally Posted by HOUDINI

Fleischer rated Jeffries as the "best left hand puncher". Being a converted Southpaw he must have carried quite a wallop with that punch. Rickard who did see Jeffries rated him the hardest puncher he ever saw including Dempsey. This as well as threads questioning Ali, Louis and Dempseys greatness ad re revisionism in it's worst form. Just pure trash.

Because we don't happen to agree with you ,our posts are pure trash? You've produced ZERO evidence to back up your position yet we are mugs? Ok ,at least we know where we stand with you.

[scartissue]

[quote=janitor;14352536]

Of course if you will insist on the comparison, then you could hardly use Quarrys performence against Chuvalo to bolster your argument.

No, I absolutely could. I already made mention of the 'lost the count' debacle, remember? Or is this selective reading? Quarry got clipped on the temple and went down. He got up and then decided to take a knee. Zack Clayton tolls 10 and Quarry gets up screaming at him. The commentator interviews Jerry and asks him where did he lose the count and Jerry says "at nine". Jerry was always a bit of a head-case, like jack Sharkey before him. But now let's talk about the the 6 1/2 rounds before getting clipped on the temple. What happened? Jerry counte-punched Chuvalo into a swollen, bloody mess and there is no doubt that fight was going to be stopped. Look, dude, I just happen to be one of these people who do not believe what I am told. I trust my baby-blues and I have never been impressed in the footage I have seen of Jeffries. Some people form their own opinions and others believe what a writer said 100 years ago and take it sight unseen. I fall into the former.

[lufcrazy]

What is the best footage of Jeffries and is it good enough to justify a Jeffries pick?

[mcvey]

Originally Posted by HOUDINI

They also fought in much bigger rings in those days. Smaller more agile hwts were that much more difficult to catch. Tom Sharkey is considered an all time great that would have been champion if he were not fighting in an era of even greater fighters.

Are you saying that Sharkey was more agile? He was certainly smaller. Sharkey was a face first brawler, whom a teenage Jack Johnson embarrassed in sparring,prompting Sharkey to say to his corner," tell him to hold his head up so I can hit it", to which they replied," you're boxing him , you make him hold his head up."

Sharkey was one of the dirtiest fighters that ever got in a ring .
After being comprehensively out boxed for nearly 3 rds by Choynski he began to blatantly foul. Sharkey beat a 158lbs Kid McCoy,who had him on the floor twice,and a Corbett who had been retired for 2 years, and not won a fight for 4 , which other great fighters did he beat ?
Please don't say Fitz

The rock of your argument is Rickard ,who was never hit by Jeffries, those that were, Corbett, Fitz ,Sharkey, Johnson ,all tabbed Choynski as the bigger puncher with Fitz a close second. Your other star witness Fleischer was not only never hit by Jeffries, I doubt he ever saw him land a punch in a fight, unless it was in his abortive comeback against Johnson.

[janitor]

Originally Posted by lufcrazy

What is the best footage of Jeffries and is it good enough to justify a Jeffries pick?

The footage would not justify such a pick, but then it would not justify picking Quarry either.

There is no default assumption in favour of the fighter who is known from better quality film.

[mcvey]

Originally Posted by janitor

The footage would not justify such a pick, but then it would not justify picking Quarry either.

There is no default assumption in favour of the fighter who is known from better quality film.

Aaah , but you're forgetting the training clips of Jeffries throwing around his oaf of a brother. They conclusively prove Jeffries was not only Superman, he was a defensive genius.

[janitor]

Originally Posted by scartissue

I just happen to be one of these people who do not believe what I am told. I trust my baby-blues and I have never been impressed in the footage I have seen of Jeffries. Some people form their own opinions and others believe what a writer said 100 years ago and take it sight unseen. I fall into the former.

Don't you see that on a certain level, you are "believing what you are told". You are unquestioningly accepting a hackneyed revisionist interpretation of Jeffries record, passed around by people who know little about the era.

That to my mind is worse than assuming that Jeffries was the second greatest heavyweight of all time, because Nat Fleischer said so. If you were really a critical thinker, you would go back to the contemporary newspaper accounts, and try to work out what actually happened.

[janitor]

Originally Posted by mcvey

Aaah , but you're forgetting the training clips of Jeffries throwing around his oaf of a brother. They conclusively prove Jeffries was not only Superman, he was a defensive genius.

They don't prove anything, but they do lend credibility to statments made by some contemporary observers about his speed and other qualities.

[lufcrazy]

Originally Posted by janitor

The footage would not justify such a pick, but then it would not justify picking Quarry either.

There is no default assumption in favour of the fighter who is known from better quality film.

I agree whole heartedly and that's why I havnt and can't make a pick.

[mcvey]

Originally Posted by janitor

They don't prove anything, but they do lend credibility to statments made by some contemporary observers about his speed and other qualities.

Which should we believe the actual fight footage of Jeffries, or clips of him skipping, and throwing a sparring partner around?

[scartissue]

Originally Posted by janitor

The footage would not justify such a pick, but then it would not justify picking Quarry either.

There is no default assumption in favour of the fighter who is known from better quality film.

With no justifiable film footage available on Jeffries, your opinion on his greatness is based on what you've been told. Is that correct?

[edward morbius]

Footage of Jeffries

I read an article covering Eddie Machen back in the early sixties. It was mentioned that Machen carefully studied film of past fighters in passing. The author asked Machen to rate the old champs and he gave this rating

1--Dempsey
2--Johnson
3--Louis
4--Tunney
6--Jeffries

Machen remarked about Jeffries that he liked "his quick hands and combinations"

I am pretty certain I am remembering that correctly.

I have wondered myself what film convinced Machen of this. But there is a point in the Johnson fight in which Jeffries flurries with both hands and for a big fellow he threw a lot of leather quickly.

[edward morbius]

"your opinion on his greatness is based on what you've been told"

There is also his record. Being champion for six years and retiring undefeated certainly makes Jeffries worth considering for high ranking.

He certainly dominated the post-Sullivan and pre-Johnson era and he was praised as the best there had yet been in his own time.


**Just curiously. Name the heavies who were champions longer and who retired undefeated?

I can't think of one other than Louis.

Any others?

[janitor]

Originally Posted by scartissue

With no justifiable film footage available on Jeffries, your opinion on his greatness is based on what you've been told. Is that correct?

Yes but crucialy, it is not what I have been told by one person.

I look at as many contemporary acounts as possible, and try to find the common themes.