Jeffries Admits Munroe Did Not Merit Title Chance

[edward morbius]

Originally Posted by mcvey

If they bought into the hype they certainly didn't buy into the fight ,Jeffries lost a $1000 on it.
Sharkey ,and Fitz both stated the fight was a foregone conclusion.

You can dress it up anyway you want but Munroe did NOT earn a title shot.

So you are saying that popular opinion should have no say as to who the contenders are?

"Jeffries lost $1000 on it"

Did he promote it?

According to the 1976 Ring Record Book, Jeffries and Munroe split $15,232, which is much less than other Jeffrie's fights,

but one would think the champion would clear $10,000 off these stats.

Also the fight was filmed.

[edward morbius]

The top boxing publication in the US in 1904 was the Police Gazette and Adam Pollack
says this about them:

"The Police Gazette said that Munroe was a legitimate contender who had earned a right to a title shot by his recent performances, particularly by defeating Sharkey."

Adam Pollack quotes the odds on this fight as 10 to 3 1/2 on page 644 of his biog of Jeffries.

If this is correct, it is interesting, as the odds are actually shorter than Corbett against Sullivan--4 to 1, or Firpo against Dempsey--3 to 1

That seems to indicate folks at the time took Munroe seriously.

I think betting odds are the best indication on how a fighter was viewed in his own time.

[mcvey]

Originally Posted by edward morbius

The top boxing publication in the US in 1904 was the Police Gazette and Adam Pollack
says this about them:

"The Police Gazette said that Munroe was a legitimate contender who had earned a right to a title shot by his recent performances, particularly by defeating Sharkey."

Adam Pollack quotes the odds on this fight as 10 to 3 1/2 on page 644 of his biog of Jeffries.

If this is correct, it is interesting, as the odds are actually shorter than Corbett against Sullivan--4 to 1, or Firpo against Dempsey--3 to 1

That seems to indicate folks at the time took Munroe seriously.

I think betting odds are the best indication on how a fighter was viewed in his own time.

Sharkey had been retired for 2 years,won 1 fight in the last 4 and been stopped in 3 of them ,and thrown out with fellow Munroe victim, Maher for not giving his best in another.

If you can make a case to yourself that beating him meant something, perhaps I can interest you in the fairies at the bottom of my garden? Jeffries said he lost money because the sporting public did not have a high regard for Munroe .

[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]



Jeffries turned down a $30,000 guarantee to defend against Sam McVey.

[mcvey]

Originally Posted by edward morbius

That doen't answer the question.

Very good fighters have served as sparring partners,

including Ali (and, by the way, Jeffries)

What makes Joe Kennedy an inferior contender? to guys like Griffin and Childs who were not able to beat him.

Name a fighter who was the current sparring partner for a champion and received a title shot whilst serving in that capacity?

[guilalah]

Originally Posted by edward morbius

The top boxing publication in the US in 1904 was the Police Gazette and Adam Pollack
says this about them:

"The Police Gazette said that Munroe was a legitimate contender who had earned a right to a title shot by his recent performances, particularly by defeating Sharkey."

Adam Pollack quotes the odds on this fight as 10 to 3 1/2 on page 644 of his biog of Jeffries.

If this is correct, it is interesting, as the odds are actually shorter than Corbett against Sullivan--4 to 1, or Firpo against Dempsey--3 to 1

That seems to indicate folks at the time took Munroe seriously.

I think betting odds are the best indication on how a fighter was viewed in his own time.

This is probably the best arguement that can be made for Munroe's challenge.

[guilalah]

Originally Posted by mcvey

Sharkey had been ..... thrown out with fellow Munroe victim, Maher for not giving his best in another.

In fairness to Sharkey and Munroe, there's reason to think the local police had told them they'd be arrested if they fought in earnest. Neither guy was a points fighter, so if this is true, they may have had trouble putting on a passable show. [I'm referencing Pollack's 'In the Ring ... Jeffries'].

[mcvey]

Originally Posted by guilalah

This is probably the best arguement that can be made for Munroe's challenge.

E M is a good debater isn't he?

[mcvey]

Originally Posted by guilalah

In fairness to Sharkey and Munroe, there's reason to think the local police had told them they'd be arrested if they fought in earnest. Neither guy was a points fighter, so if this is true, they may have had trouble putting on a passable show. [I'm referencing Pollack's 'In the Ring ... Jeffries'].

Matt Donnellon has written a well received book On Peter Maher , I think I'd like to read it.

[Mendoza]

Originally Posted by edward morbius

The top boxing publication in the US in 1904 was the Police Gazette and Adam Pollack
says this about them:

"The Police Gazette said that Munroe was a legitimate contender who had earned a right to a title shot by his recent performances, particularly by defeating Sharkey."

Adam Pollack quotes the odds on this fight as 10 to 3 1/2 on page 644 of his biog of Jeffries.

If this is correct, it is interesting, as the odds are actually shorter than Corbett against Sullivan--4 to 1, or Firpo against Dempsey--3 to 1

That seems to indicate folks at the time took Munroe seriously.

I think betting odds are the best indication on how a fighter was viewed in his own time.

This ends the debate. Those who covered boxing in 1904 felt Munore had a chance to be the next big thing. As such this was not a poor title defense. While Jeffries blew Munroe out, no one else stopped him.

IMO Jeffries was starting to peak when he retired. The ref in the 2nd Corbett match said Jeffries out boxed Corbett / beat him at his own game.

[Mendoza]

Originally Posted by mcvey

Name a fighter who was the current sparring partner for a champion and received a title shot whilst serving in that capacity?

Once a title shot is given the sparring partner has his own camp and does not train with the champion. Former and current sparring partners receive title shots. Walcott was a sparring partner of Joe Louis, and received a title shot in less than a year, correct? I think at least one of Jack Johnson’s sparring partners ( Kaufman ) received a title shot. Recently Vitali Klitschko gave a shot to Charr, and he was a former sparring partner. Ali had a few of his former sparring partners receive title shots as well

If you follow the lineal championship rules, anytime the champion is in the ring for a paid fight ( excluding gimmick fights with rules that say if so and so last 4 rounds he wins ) his lineal title is on the line. Had either Griffin or Kennedy somehow scored a KO win, they would be viewed as the next lineal champion.

[mcvey]

Originally Posted by Mendoza

Once a title shot is given the sparring partner has his own camp and does not train with the champion. Former and current sparring partners receive title shots. Walcott was a sparring partner of Joe Louis, and received a title shot in less than a year, correct? I think at least one of Jack Johnson’s sparring partners ( Kaufman ) received a title shot. Recently Vitali Klitschko gave a shot to Charr, and he was a former sparring partner. Ali had a few of his former sparring partners receive title shots as well

If you follow the lineal championship rules, anytime the champion is in the ring for a paid fight ( excluding gimmick fights with rules that say if so and so last 4 rounds he wins ) his lineal title is on the line. Had either Griffin or Kennedy somehow scored a KO win, they would be viewed as the next lineal champion.

Please tell me where Kennedy trained, and who trained him for his challenge ?

Walcott was briefly a spar mate for Louis when Louis was training to fight the return with Schmeling.This was June 1938.Walcotts pay for a day was $25, he was hired by Mushky Jackson .

Louis fought Walcott in December 1947,that is nearly 10 years after!
SO INCORRECT.
As usual you are way off base .Kaufman challenged Johnson in 1909 , he got such a drubbing, his stock was drastically reduced, and from being peceived as an up and coming challenger he became relegated to sparring partner status, and sparred with Johnson when Jack was training for Jeffries in 1910, a year AFTER he had fought Johnson.

I expressly stated CURRENT SPARRING PARTNER.
You have either not understood it, or deliberately misread it.
[difficult to tell with you]


Gimmick fight? Thats hilarious!

Thats precisely what the Griffin exhibition was .
Jeffries contracted to stop Griffin in 4 rds or pay a $100 forfeit.
He failed to do so ,and handed over the $100 .
Now, get a towel and ,WIPE THAT EGG OFF YOUR FACE . YOU MUG.

[Mendoza]

Keep grinding that ax McVey. You have been fixated on this fight for years, giving a low weight for Munroe for years, and saying he wasn't a worthy title shot. You were wrong on both counts, so now you shift to sparring partners. Classic stuff!

[mcvey]

Originally Posted by Mendoza

Keep grinding that ax McVey. You have been fixated on this fight for years, giving a low weight for Munroe for years, and saying he wasn't a worthy title shot. You were wrong on both counts, so now you shift to sparring partners. Classic stuff!

I've corrected your assertions that -----

1 . CHAMPIONS HAVE GIVEN TITLE SHOTS TO CURRENT SPARRING PARTNERS IN THE PAST.[ You changed this to sparring partners in general]


2.THAT WALCOTT WAS A SPARRING PARTNER FOR LOUIS WITHIN A YEAR OF CHALLENGING HIM,
[IT WAS 10 YEARS!]

3. THE GRIFFIN AFFAIR WAS A TITLE DEFENCE. From your own lips you excluded "gimmick fights "in which there were conditions applied.The gimmick was that Jeffries contracted to stop Griffin in 4 rds ,or forfeit $100.
Jeffries forfeited the $100 .
Thats three bullshit assertions from you, and three total , and absolute rebuttals from me.

Why don't you address that?


I give credit to Jeffries when its due, I've made two threads this week that show him in a positive light. This thread is about the following-------

JIM JEFFRIES STATING CATEGORICALLY THAT MUNROE DID NOT MERIT A TITLE SHOT.

Something which I have always said, now we have positive proof that this was Jeffries own opinion.
Accept it because its true.

RAINMAN.
MUNROE IS JUST SIX LETTERS DO YOU THINK YOU MIGHT MANAGE TO GET THEM IN THE RIGHT ORDER IN FUTURE ?

[mcvey]

Originally Posted by Mendoza

This ends the debate. Those who covered boxing in 1904 felt Munore had a chance to be the next big thing. As such this was not a poor title defense. While Jeffries blew Munroe out, no one else stopped him.

IMO Jeffries was starting to peak when he retired. The ref in the 2nd Corbett match said Jeffries out boxed Corbett / beat him at his own game.

Lets examine this statement.

When Corbett climbed through the ropes to face Jeffries in their second fight he had not engaged in a fight for two years.

That was against Kid McCoy, and is widely believed to have been a fix.

Corbettt had not won an "on the level fight" for over nine and a half years, yes, thats right, over nine and a half years!

[Corbett had been kod in his two fights prior to the dodgy McCoy one ,and his second climbed into the ring to force a dsq in the other one ,when he was in imminent danger of being kod.]

Furthermore that was against 165lbs Charlie Mitchell,who himself had won just one fight in the last four years.

Corbett was one month off thirty seven years old and had been having eye problems, when he went in with the twenty years old Jeffries.

A thirty seven years old , inactive , former fighter who when prime,lacked top end power , and relied on speed, cleverness, and reflexes, is up against it when he is facing a champion who is twenty seven years old, and twenty seven pounds heavier .

Jeffries comparatively easy win over Corbett is more a reflection on how far Corbett had slipped than on Jeffries improvement, imo.

We both know that building up Jeffries opponents is a transparent move on your part to boost Jeffries, so why don't you cut the crap?

[Mendoza]

McVey says:

When Corbett climbed through the ropes to face Jeffries in their second fight he had not engaged in a fight for two years.

That was against Kid McCoy, and is widely believed to have been a fix.

Who said it was a fix? Do you have any names? The new reports say it was an action fight with heavy punches landed. McCoy was a good fighter, with wins over name heavies.

Jeffries comparatively easy win over Corbett is more a reflection on how far Corbett had slipped than on Jeffries improvement, imo.

According to the ref, it was a bit of both. We know you are not fair minded on this and other topics is not your bag. The important Corbett match for Jeffries was the first fight. Corbett was in top shape, 33, and his own people consider it his best ring effort.