boxing
Forum Home Boxing Forum European British Classic Aussie MMA Training
Go Back   Boxing News 24 Forum > Boxing > Classic Boxing Forum


Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 10-11-2007, 07:26 PM   #16
Marciano Frazier
Contender
ESB Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 1,469
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Jess Willard versus Jim Jeffries

I think Jeffries' style was best-suited for handling smaller opponents with less stamina and durability than he had- in that sense, Jeffries may encounter a bit of a stylistic block against Willard, who was bigger than him and had comparable stamina and durability. However, Willard needs not to simply be an uncomfortable opponent; does he have what it takes to actually beat Jeffries?
Both were extremely durable with great stamina and good punching power. Willard has the size advantage. Neither had especially good boxing skill, but Jeffries has the edge in that department. This is the kind of match that could go on for 40 rounds provided they have an old-time ref.
I think the main deciding factor would be that Jeffries was faster and much more athletic than Willard. While Willard was somewhat slow and cumbersome in the ring and was a bit of a stiff/awkward puncher, Jeffries was an amazing athlete(could run the 100 meter dash in 11 seconds and had an NBA-type vertical jump) known for being agile on his feet and was good on the inside.

I like Jeffries by decision if the fight is 15 rounds or less. In a 25-45 round fight, I give increasingly high odds of a Jeffries knockout.
Marciano Frazier is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old 10-11-2007, 07:37 PM   #17
JohnBKelly
Journeyman
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 89
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Jess Willard versus Jim Jeffries

This could go forty five long hard rounds with lots of wrestling. Jeff probably takes the decision but after round 30 it really would be anyone's fight. Willard was absurdly brave and very durable, remember he quit on his stool in Toledo. Dempsey couldn't keep him down for a ten count. I don't think Jeff punched as hard as Jack so I can't see him putting Willard away.
JohnBKelly is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2007, 08:50 PM   #18
Langford
Gatekeeper
ESB Full Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 415
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Jess Willard versus Jim Jeffries

If Jeffries had fought Willard, years later, when Willard went to Dempsey's restaurant to see if he could get employed, Dynamite Jack would say, "sorry Jess, there's just not enough left of ya"

Interesting enough, there was not much age difference between the two, even though one fought Jim Corbett and the other fought Luis Firpo.
Langford is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2007, 09:28 PM   #19
Mendoza
Dominating a decade
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 14,893
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Jess Willard versus Jim Jeffries

Quote:
Originally Posted by OLD FOGEY
Sort of like yours. Jeffries was much the more dominant fighter in his own time and place than the erratic Willard, but the issue is more complex than that. I think boxing had progressed quite a bit by the 1910's. The country was rapidly urbanizing due to migration from the farms and also heavy immigration. Many of the prospects, such as Willard and Dempsey, came off the farms, but the growing urban public really supported boxing and there were clearly more fights and fighters, and I think it shows in heavyweight competition. Willard was much bigger than Jeff, but often still did not have the same weight advantages. He fought men very close to his own size such as Morris. Gunboat Smith at 6' 2" and 180 lbs is small in the Willard era, but he would have been a good sized heavy in Jeff's time.

So what happens. I go for an upset. Jeff won't be able to push Willard around or wear him down like he did the much smaller men of his own era, and I don't judge Jeff to have Dempsey's punch. I think Willard can punish Jeff with his left and the right cross at a distance, but what really troubles me concerning Jeffries is Jeff's vulnerability to uppercuts against Johnson. Willard was known to have a powerful uppercut. This fight goes a long way, but I think Willard's size and powerful uppercut wins it in a battle of two men without real good defenses, but great toughness and stamina.
Willard was 26-6, with 3 Ko losses. Aside from an older and tired Johnson, did Willard ever have a big KO win? Nope. He failed to stop Pelky, McCarty, Smith, Morris, or Moran. These the better of the " white hopes ". All of them went the distance, and two much smaller fighters in Smith and Morris won decisions.

This to me suggests that Willard 1 ) Could be out boxed and was by the best two white hope boxers, and 2 ) really didn't have big time knock out punch. Perhaps he did, he just lacked the skills to land the punch.

The only name Ko for Willard ( asside from Johnson who also had a suspect chin vs punchers ) was Rodel, who was frequently Ko'd and was known for "swan dive face first " falls, and Floyd Johnson, who was nothing special.

To assume Willard wins by KO here is a real reach, and he certainly did not have the speed or skills to out point Jeffries. This is an easy fight for Jeffries. Older or not, Dempsey hurt Willard in a hurry. Some thought Jeffries hit harder than Dempsey. Willard’s defense and speed was below average. Draw your own conclusion as to what happens when Jeffries lands. I don’t think this is a hard fight to call. Willard is a bottom 3rd tier lineal champion. He has a chance to beat some fighters.....the ones with weak punch resistance, who could not hit hard, and extremely small size come to mind.

The only logical conclusion here is Jeffries via KO or decision.

Last edited by Shane; 07-29-2006 at 11:18 AM.
Mendoza is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2007, 11:53 PM   #20
mr. magoo
Undisputed Champion
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Chicago, Illinois USA
Posts: 14,192
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Jess Willard versus Jim Jeffries

We also have to consider that at that point in time, boxing invovled a great deal of grabbing and muscle work on the inside. This is one area where Jeffries would clearly have the advantage, given his wrestling background. What's more, is that although Willard was the larger of the two, Jim may very well have been the stronger. In Jeffries' prime, he carried not a single ounce of fat on him. He was incredibly strong, even for a man of his great size. Frankly, I think Jeffries would have a hard time in this fight, but I don't see any reason why he couldn't knock out Willard at some poing, perhaps late.
mr. magoo is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 10-12-2007, 01:07 AM   #21
OLD FOGEY
Belt holder
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 3,835
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Jess Willard versus Jim Jeffries

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mendoza
Willard was 26-6, with 3 Ko losses. Aside from an older and tired Johnson, did Willard ever have a big KO win? Nope. He failed to stop Pelky, McCarty, Smith, Morris, or Moran. These the better of the " white hopes ". All of them went the distance, and two much smaller fighters in Smith and Morris won decisions.

This to me suggests that Willard 1 ) Could be out boxed and was by the best two white hope boxers, and 2 ) really didn't have big time knock out punch. Perhaps he did, he just lacked the skills to land the punch.

The only name Ko for Willard ( asside from Johnson who also had a suspect chin vs punchers ) was Rodel, who was frequently Ko'd and was known for "swan dive face first " falls, and Floyd Johnson, who was nothing special.

To assume Willard wins by KO here is a real reach, and he certainly did not have the speed or skills to out point Jeffries. This is an easy fight for Jeffries. Older or not, Dempsey hurt Willard in a hurry. Some thought Jeffries hit harder than Dempsey. Willard’s defense and speed was below average. Draw your own conclusion as to what happens when Jeffries lands. I don’t think this is a hard fight to call. Willard is a bottom 3rd tier lineal champion. He has a chance to beat some fighters.....the ones with weak punch resistance, who could not hit hard, and extremely small size come to mind.

The only logical conclusion here is Jeffries via KO or decision.
I think you have a good point about Willard's power, although a bit over the top. Besides Jack Johnson, Rodel (2), and Floyd Johnson, he also knocked out Soldier Kearns, Dan Daily, and George Davis, all fringe contenders of the time. But compared to most big historical punchers, this is not impressive, though it should be noted that his fights were scheduled for shorter distances than Jeffries' were.
Jeffries does much better, with ko's of Corbett (2), Fitzsimmons (2), Jackson, Goddard, Ruhlin, Griffin, Everett, and Munroe, but this did not convince everyone either. Jack London questioned Jeff's power at the time of the Johnson fight and Tad Dorgan wrote this:

"Jeffries never was a boxer, never had a fight he wasn't used up in, and as far as meeting a man like Johnson goes, he never dreamed of it.
Why, he never beat a young fellow in his life. He made his reputation off old men like Fitzsimmons, Corbett, Jackson, and the like. They were all in when he got them. Young fellows like Sharkey and Choynski, although they were half a foot shy in height and fifty pounds lighter, went the distance with him." SF Examiner 7-1-1910

Well, what is the truth? Did Dorgan and London have a point? Yes, I think so. Eight of Jeff's twenty recorded fights went more than ten rounds and despite his reputation for carrying his power into the later rounds, the record tells a different tale. The Griffin fight early in his career apparently went 14 rounds, depending on the source, but of the recorded fights we have strong info on, six went to the 15th round or longer. Of these six, Johnson stopped Jeff in 15. Jeff rallied to stop Corbett in 23. Choynski and Ruhlin each went to a twenty round draw.
Sharkey lost in 20 and then lost again in 25. So Jeff ended only one of six
fights of 15 rounds or longer by knockout. There is little reason to think he could blow out Willard early. Willard might have the advantage as the fight drags on and Jeff's power wanes.

By the way, Morris was close to Willard's size and Willard defeated him decisively.

Last edited by OLD FOGEY; 10-12-2007 at 01:23 PM.
OLD FOGEY is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 10-12-2007, 01:28 AM   #22
OLD FOGEY
Belt holder
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 3,835
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Jess Willard versus Jim Jeffries

Quote:
Originally Posted by Marciano Frazier
I think Jeffries' style was best-suited for handling smaller opponents with less stamina and durability than he had- in that sense, Jeffries may encounter a bit of a stylistic block against Willard, who was bigger than him and had comparable stamina and durability. However, Willard needs not to simply be an uncomfortable opponent; does he have what it takes to actually beat Jeffries?
Both were extremely durable with great stamina and good punching power. Willard has the size advantage. Neither had especially good boxing skill, but Jeffries has the edge in that department. This is the kind of match that could go on for 40 rounds provided they have an old-time ref.
I think the main deciding factor would be that Jeffries was faster and much more athletic than Willard. While Willard was somewhat slow and cumbersome in the ring and was a bit of a stiff/awkward puncher, Jeffries was an amazing athlete(could run the 100 meter dash in 11 seconds and had an NBA-type vertical jump) known for being agile on his feet and was good on the inside.

I like Jeffries by decision if the fight is 15 rounds or less. In a 25-45 round fight, I give increasingly high odds of a Jeffries knockout.
I don't care, myself, for the great athlete arguement. Most heavyweight champions have been great athletes. Do we really know if Jeff was more athletically gifted than, say, Johnson or Dempsey. I read once that Dempsey could run a flat 10 second 100.
What about Willard? I doubt if he ever tried high jumping or sprinting, but he did participate in rodeos, and steer wrestling certainly requires agility as well as power.
OLD FOGEY is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 10-12-2007, 07:06 AM   #23
Mendoza
Dominating a decade
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 14,893
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Jess Willard versus Jim Jeffries

Quote:
Originally Posted by OLD FOGEY
I don't care, myself, for the great athlete arguement. Most heavyweight champions have been great athletes. Do we really know if Jeff was more athletically gifted than, say, Johnson or Dempsey. I read once that Dempsey could run a flat 10 second 100.
What about Willard? I doubt if he ever tried high jumping or sprinting, but he did participate in rodeos, and steer wrestling certainly requires agility as well as power.
OLD FOGEY,

The thing to look at here is not track and field numbers but agility and reflexes in boxing shoes. Jeffries moved well, could duck punches, could dart in and out, had good hand speed, and could also counter. This video can be seen on the "you tube ". While the video on “ you tube “ is impressive, you have to see the complete video which Jeffries shows off impressive strength and flexibility working out with weights, nifty footwork while jumping rope, and impressive thowing and catching of the medicine ball. The video will surprise those who have only seen the old Jeffries who was tired and slow vs Johnson. In fact they look like two different people. You would be hard pressed to find a 215-220 pounder with that type of power and speed.

As for Jeffries never beating a young fighter, Check Sharkey, Ruhlin, Griffin, Munroe, or Everett. Each man had a good record and was in his prime.

Towards the end of his career, Jeffries became a good boxer. Don't go on what internet rumors. Corbett was in great shape and 33 years of age when Jeffries beat him the first time. I posted a detailed round by round review, and as you can see the fight was pretty much even. Those who know Corbett said it was his best ring effort, so Jeffries did beat the best version of Corbett. My research shows that Corbett was at least 59-0-3 before losing to Fitzsimons, though about half of the number is from news decisions, or short fights that were really exhibitions.

In the second Corbett fight referee Ed Graney commented, “I was not prepared to see Jeffries outbox Corbett…I doubt the equal of his present self will ever exist.” This proves that Jeff had developed into a good all around fighter, that he was not just a big lumbering oaf with a punch. He was a skilled athletic heavyweight with boxing prowess who could slip inside and bang away at the body and take his man apart over the course of a fight. Jeffries knocked out Corbett in the 10th round. It was a systematic destruction of a very fast and skillful boxer. The Jeffries of this fight would be a threat to any heavyweight who ever lived.

In closing regarding Jeffries boxing ability, who are you going to believe? News paper reviews, and testimonials of people who saw him, or “ internet rumors “ that suggest Corbett was up 22-0?

I just can’t see Willard winning this fight.

Mendoza is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 10-12-2007, 07:26 AM   #24
dmt
Hardest hitting hw ever
ESB Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 1,175
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Jess Willard versus Jim Jeffries

Jeffries was skilled all right- it can be seen on youtube. He's too good for Willard. I have to agree with Mendoza
dmt is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 10-12-2007, 09:10 AM   #25
mcvey
P4P King
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: The Garden Of England
Posts: 23,490
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Jess Willard versus Jim Jeffries

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mendoza
Jeffires KO'd a 250 pound Dunkhorst in sparring. Those who know boxing will tell you a heavier and slower fighter is more prone to being hit than a smaller and quicker fighter. Which do you want to be vs a puncher?

Willard was rather poor on film. IMO, Moran got the better of him in the film I have seen, and it was truly an awful display of boxing. Willard lost to Smith, and MCMahon on points.

Basically Willaird's entire rep was based on a few white hopes and an older Jack Johnson.

I do beleive Willard was big, could hit, was game ( although he quit once, and never liked boxing ) , but he could not box a lick. How durable was Willard?

I'd say Willard could take a punch, yet he lost via KO vs the two best punchers he faced in Fripo and Dempsey in one sided fights that did not go past 8 rounds. I don't think Willard makes it past 10 vs Jeffries.
This post is biased as to proving anything.
Dunkhorst was kod by Fitz and beaten by every decent fighter he fought,including ,Choynsky and Childs ,all three were giving him nearly a hundred pounds in weight advantage,Dunkhorst was a fat hulk of a man, a low calibre sparring partner.
Willard was kod by Dempsey and Firpo ,true,he was 37 when he met Dempsey ,fat and untrained ,plus he had been inactive.Willard was 40 when he was beaten by Firpo in1923,Jess had had one fight since being half killed by Dempsey,in 1919 an eleven round tko of Floyd Johnson.If Jeffries was a hollow shell against Johnson when he was 35 ,what was Willard at 40 against Firpo? Or Fitz against Jeffries atr 40 for that matter.Apart from Ruhlin who quit on his stool between rounds ,which top fighters did Jeffries ko inside 10 rounds?Dont say the 40 Fitz who was coming out of retirement PLEASE!
mcvey is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 10-12-2007, 12:57 PM   #26
OLD FOGEY
Belt holder
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 3,835
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Jess Willard versus Jim Jeffries

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mendoza
OLD FOGEY,

The thing to look at here is not track and field numbers but agility and reflexes in boxing shoes. Jeffries moved well, could duck punches, could dart in and out, had good hand speed, and could also counter. This video can be seen on the "you tube ". While the video on “ you tube “ is impressive, you have to see the complete video which Jeffries shows off impressive strength and flexibility working out with weights, nifty footwork while jumping rope, and impressive thowing and catching of the medicine ball. The video will surprise those who have only seen the old Jeffries who was tired and slow vs Johnson. In fact they look like two different people. You would be hard pressed to find a 215-220 pounder with that type of power and speed.

As for Jeffries never beating a young fighter, Check Sharkey, Ruhlin, Griffin, Munroe, or Everett. Each man had a good record and was in his prime.

Towards the end of his career, Jeffries became a good boxer. Don't go on what internet rumors. Corbett was in great shape and 33 years of age when Jeffries beat him the first time. I posted a detailed round by round review, and as you can see the fight was pretty much even. Those who know Corbett said it was his best ring effort, so Jeffries did beat the best version of Corbett. My research shows that Corbett was at least 59-0-3 before losing to Fitzsimons, though about half of the number is from news decisions, or short fights that were really exhibitions.

In the second Corbett fight referee Ed Graney commented, “I was not prepared to see Jeffries outbox Corbett…I doubt the equal of his present self will ever exist.” This proves that Jeff had developed into a good all around fighter, that he was not just a big lumbering oaf with a punch. He was a skilled athletic heavyweight with boxing prowess who could slip inside and bang away at the body and take his man apart over the course of a fight. Jeffries knocked out Corbett in the 10th round. It was a systematic destruction of a very fast and skillful boxer. The Jeffries of this fight would be a threat to any heavyweight who ever lived.

In closing regarding Jeffries boxing ability, who are you going to believe? News paper reviews, and testimonials of people who saw him, or “ internet rumors “ that suggest Corbett was up 22-0?

I just can’t see Willard winning this fight.

1. I have seen film for Jeff against Sharkey and Ruhlin and training in 1900. Certainly he was an athlete, but his agility on his feet might be a bit overrated. As one observer noted, Ruhlin seems to move faster.
2. of the men you mentioned, Sharkey, Ruhlin, Griffin, Munroe, and Everett--Okay, but Sharkey was never knocked out, Ruhlin went to a draw the first time, Griffin and Jeff fought as tyros, and Munroe and Everett were ordinary. Jeff's rep really rests on Fitz and Corbett, not these men.
3. Jeff was certainly the better fighter in time and place than Willard, but I don't know if he matches up quite as well as some think. I have not seen Jeff show a good jab on film, but Willard clearly does against Johnson. And the view of Jeff as a skilled boxer, at least defensively, runs up against the heavy damage he suffered in fight after fight. Certainly his performance against Johnson makes one wonder if he would prove as vulnerable to Willard's excellent uppercut as he did to Johnson's.
4. Corbett was about 37 and had been off for three years when he fought Jeff in 1903. He had been fast and skillful once, but boxing history shows us that older fighters who are not active go back pretty fast. I think this Corbett fight is a thin reed on which to hang the Jeff was a much improved boxer thesis. Jeff had taken brutal punishment from Fitzsimmons in his previous fight.
5. As I said before, nine of Jeff's twenty fights went a full ten rounds or longer, and of the six fights which hit the fifteenth round, he scored only one knockout. There were contempories who had doubts about his power. I think the very rugged Willard has a good chance of taking this fight deep and actually outlasting Jeffries.
6. I myself don't think speed afoot would have much to do with winning this fight, given the styles of the two men.
OLD FOGEY is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 10-12-2007, 03:17 PM   #27
mcvey
P4P King
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: The Garden Of England
Posts: 23,490
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Jess Willard versus Jim Jeffries

Quote:
Originally Posted by OLD FOGEY
1. I have seen film for Jeff against Sharkey and Ruhlin and training in 1900. Certainly he was an athlete, but his agility on his feet might be a bit overrated. As one observer noted, Ruhlin seems to move faster.
2. of the men you mentioned, Sharkey, Ruhlin, Griffin, Munroe, and Everett--Okay, but Sharkey was never knocked out, Ruhlin went to a draw the first time, Griffin and Jeff fought as tyros, and Munroe and Everett were ordinary. Jeff's rep really rests on Fitz and Corbett, not these men.
3. Jeff was certainly the better fighter in time and place than Willard, but I don't know if he matches up quite as well as some think. I have not seen Jeff show a good jab on film, but Willard clearly does against Johnson. And the view of Jeff as a skilled boxer, at least defensively, runs up against the heavy damage he suffered in fight after fight. Certainly his performance against Johnson makes one wonder if he would prove as vulnerable to Willard's excellent uppercut as he did to Johnson's.
4. Corbett was about 37 and had been off for three years when he fought Jeff in 1903. He had been fast and skillful once, but boxing history shows us that older fighters who are not active go back pretty fast. I think this Corbett fight is a thin reed on which to hang the Jeff was a much improved boxer thesis. Jeff had taken brutal punishment from Fitzsimmons in his previous fight.
5. As I said before, nine of Jeff's twenty fights went a full ten rounds or longer, and of the six fights which hit the fifteenth round, he scored only one knockout. There were contempories who had doubts about his power. I think the very rugged Willard has a good chance of taking this fight deep and actually outlasting Jeffries.
6. I myself don't think speed afoot would have much to do with winning this fight, given the styles of the two men.
Very evenhanded and OBJECTIVE post!
mcvey is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 10-12-2007, 03:33 PM   #28
mcvey
P4P King
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: The Garden Of England
Posts: 23,490
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Jess Willard versus Jim Jeffries

Quote:
Originally Posted by OLD FOGEY
In fairness, Willard was plenty old and inactive by the time he fought Dempsey and Firpo. I don't think these performances are relevant to how a 1915 Willard would have performed. At 35, younger by years than Willard in the two fights you are talking about, Jeffries was battered by Johnson. I don't think any of these fights tell us how either man would have done at his best.

I've seen the film of Willard-Moran also, and Willard seems to get the edge by far. I have never seen anyone credit Moran with winning this fight.
`Not anyone being OBJECTIVE,without an agenda.re the Moran Willard fight.
mcvey is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 10-12-2007, 03:42 PM   #29
mcvey
P4P King
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: The Garden Of England
Posts: 23,490
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Jess Willard versus Jim Jeffries

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mendoza
Willard was 26-6, with 3 Ko losses. Aside from an older and tired Johnson, did Willard ever have a big KO win? Nope. He failed to stop Pelky, McCarty, Smith, Morris, or Moran. These the better of the " white hopes ". All of them went the distance, and two much smaller fighters in Smith and Morris won decisions.

This to me suggests that Willard 1 ) Could be out boxed and was by the best two white hope boxers, and 2 ) really didn't have big time knock out punch. Perhaps he did, he just lacked the skills to land the punch.

The only name Ko for Willard ( asside from Johnson who also had a suspect chin vs punchers ) was Rodel, who was frequently Ko'd and was known for "swan dive face first " falls, and Floyd Johnson, who was nothing special.

To assume Willard wins by KO here is a real reach, and he certainly did not have the speed or skills to out point Jeffries. This is an easy fight for Jeffries. Older or not, Dempsey hurt Willard in a hurry. Some thought Jeffries hit harder than Dempsey. Willard’s defense and speed was below average. Draw your own conclusion as to what happens when Jeffries lands. I don’t think this is a hard fight to call. Willard is a bottom 3rd tier lineal champion. He has a chance to beat some fighters.....the ones with weak punch resistance, who could not hit hard, and extremely small size come to mind.

The only logical conclusion here is Jeffries via KO or decision.
"Johnson had a suspect chin against punchers".How so who knocked him down or out by hitting him on the chin?
Choynsky kod Johnson by hitting him with body shot and a hook to the temple.Ketchel "dropped "Johnson ,with a punch that went around the top of his ear. Willard kod Johnson with a right swing tio the top of his head ,break down the fights WATCH THEM,,instead of making confident but innacurate statements,these are easily slowed down fights RUN THEM AGAIN!
WHO KOD JOHNSON WITH A PUNCH TO HIS CHIN? Big hiitters like Mcvey and Langford couldnt floor Johnson put your stick away!
mcvey is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 10-12-2007, 06:26 PM   #30
Mendoza
Dominating a decade
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 14,893
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Jess Willard versus Jim Jeffries

Quote:
mcvey Johnson had a suspect chin against punchers".How so who knocked him down or out by hitting him on the chin?
Choynski, Willard, Klondike, and Wright for sure.

Quote:
Choynsky kod Johnson by hitting him with body shot and a hook to the temple.Ketchel "dropped "Johnson ,with a punch that went around the top of his ear.
Choysnki landed a shot to the temple region that casues the KO, though Johnson had issues with body shots in a few of his other matches. Ketchel hurt Johnson with the first hard blow he landed. You could tell Johnson was buzzed as he rolled over and had to brace himself to get up....vs a crude Middle weight. In other fights Johnson was hurt vs journeyman ( Jim Battling Johnson )

Quote:
Willard kod Johnson with a right swing tio the top of his head ,break down the fights WATCH THEM,,instead of making confident but innacurate statements,these are easily slowed down fights RUN THEM AGAIN!
WHO KOD JOHNSON WITH A PUNCH TO HIS CHIN? Big hiitters like Mcvey and Langford couldnt floor Johnson put your stick away
McVey, with all due respect you really don't know what you're talking about. I watch more film, and read more news clips than you.

As for Sam McVey, he was a teenager and very green when he meet Johnson. Chins are best tested when someone lands something on them. McVey was a bit crude in his prime...and as a novice he must have had toughmanesque type of skills. Langford was not too many years removed from fighting a as a light weight when he meet Johnson at 156 pounds. If Johnson fought prime versions of McVey and Langford, and took hard shots, then we could see if his chin was tested. Saying his chin was tested in fights vs McVey when he was harldy hit means little.
Mendoza is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Reply

Boxing News 24 Forum > Boxing > Classic Boxing Forum

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump






All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:47 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Boxing News 24 Forum 2015