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 02-20-2008, 07:41 AM   #16
Mendoza
Dominating a decade
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 14,238
vCash: 1000
Default Re: For which performance do you think Jim Jeffries was at his absolute physical peak

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisPontius
I would say the quality of opposition clearly puts him below the likes of Marciano and Lewis.
The fight fans and historians who lived from 1900-1960 disagree with you. In fact Nat Fleischer said Jeffries beat the best competition of all the champions. ( Before Ali ). Even you think Nat was a bit off, to say something like this speaks volumes of Jeffries competition.
Mendoza is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old 02-20-2008, 08:32 AM   #17
Dempsey1238
Champion
East Side Guru
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 5,015
vCash: 1000
Default Re: For which performance do you think Jim Jeffries was at his absolute physical peak?

Well, There were better guys to defend than against a past it Corbett though. Now most of them were black. But still.
Dempsey1238 is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 02-20-2008, 08:39 AM   #18
mcvey
P4P King
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: The Garden Of England
Posts: 22,018
vCash: 1000
Default Re: For which performance do you think Jim Jeffries was at his absolute physical peak

Two of Jeffries challengers.

Jack Munroe
21 fights 13 w 4 l 3 d. of those wins 9 were over men having their first contest,he also managed a draw against another.Munroe has a nws dec over Tom Sharkey in Sharkeys last fight ,Sharkey hadn t won a fight in 3 years,and in his last had been kod by Gus Ruhlin,he was finished .Munroe has a win over Peter Maher ,but Maher was 34,had won 1 of his last 7 fights,that one a dsq over the mighty Joe Grim,he had been kod inone round by George Gardner a LH ,who was not noted for his punch,having been floored 3 times in the round,kod by Choynsky in 2 and again in 2 by Kid Carter ,the previous year,he would go on to be kod a further 12 times before finally retiring.

Jack Finnegan
6 fights 1 w,3 l,2 d
The 1 win on Finnegans resume was over Jack Mcormick ,whose record at that time was 1 w 5l 1d,
Jeffries 40 lbs heavier than Finnegan dropped him twice,he got up crying,and Finnegans seconds rushed into the ring to rescue him.
Question,do you really think these men were credible ,worthy challengers for the Heavyweight Title?You often say that Jeffries was a "work in progress,and was learning on the job,what could he learn from two such disgraceful defenses? In one of which the referee pulled him off his stricken "challenger" saying "no you don,t Jim ,I don,t want to see someone killed"
mcvey is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 02-20-2008, 08:57 AM   #19
janitor
P4P King
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 21,255
vCash: 1000
Default Re: For which performance do you think Jim Jeffries was at his absolute physical peak

[quote]
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcvey
Two of Jeffries challengers.

Jack Munroe
21 fights 13 w 4 l 3 d. of those wins 9 were over men having their first contest,he also managed a draw against another.
How exactly have you established that these men were fighting in their first contest?

Might have been their 100th for all you know.


Quote:
Jack Finnegan
6 fights 1 w,3 l,2 d
The 1 win on Finnegans resume was over Jack Mcormick ,whose record at that time was 1 w 5l 1d,

Jeffries 40 lbs heavier than Finnegan dropped him twice,he got up crying,and Finnegans seconds rushed into the ring to rescue him.
Question,do you really think these men were credible ,worthy challengers for the Heavyweight Title?
Finegan was obviously a weak challenger but Munroe was OK. He was a fringe conteder at the time as far as I can gather.

Quote:
You often say that Jeffries was a "work in progress,and was learning on the job,what could he learn from two such disgraceful defenses? In one of which the referee pulled him off his stricken "challenger" saying "no you don,t Jim ,I don,t want to see someone killed"
What dose any modern title challenger learn from fighting the calibre of oponents they fight on the way up to a shot at an alphabet title?

You learn somtimes by picking off weaker fighters.
janitor is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 02-20-2008, 09:10 AM   #20
ChrisPontius
March 8th, 1971
East Side Guru
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Holland
Posts: 9,645
vCash: 238
Default Re: For which performance do you think Jim Jeffries was at his absolute physical peak

Quote:
Originally Posted by janitor

They were the best available at the time small/old/ginger or whatever. Like Marciano's oponents these old/small men got to fight for the title because they beat the younger/bigger guys.
Ginger.


Yes, but the difference here is that Marciano's opponents were all active. Moore's recent record was 45-1. Walcott looked great in a one punch KO win over Charles as well as holding his own against Louis. Charles had beaten nearly every contender around and was fighting every few months, as was Walcott. That doesn't compare to a man who hadn't won a fight in 5 years. They weren't supermiddleweights either.


Quote:
Originally Posted by janitor
All you can do is fight the best around at the time.
Yes, and Jeffries didn't do that. Jack Johnson, Denver ed Martin and Frank Childs all weren't fought.

How would you look at Marciano had he drawn the color line against Walcott, Charles and Moore?
ChrisPontius is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 02-20-2008, 09:57 AM   #21
mcvey
P4P King
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: The Garden Of England
Posts: 22,018
vCash: 1000
Default Re: For which performance do you think Jim Jeffries was at his absolute physical peak

[quote=janitor]
Quote:


How exactly have you established that these men were fighting in their first contest?

Might have been their 100th for all you know.




Finegan was obviously a weak challenger but Munroe was OK. He was a fringe conteder at the time as far as I can gather.



What dose any modern title challenger learn from fighting the calibre of oponents they fight on the way up to a shot at an alphabet title?

You learn somtimes by picking off weaker fighters.
Itook my info from boxrec as to the records of Munroes challengers ,have you info to the contrary?Both were abysmal challengers IMO. Bottom line whatever way you slice it,Jeffries though a fine Champion had a reputatation based on smaller older often comebacking fighters who were past their prime by some considerable years,or stiffs like Munroe and Finnegan,two one round blowouts that should never have been allowed,they male Louis,s "Bum Of The Month" and Fraziers two defences against Stander and Daniels look like TFOTC.
mcvey is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 02-20-2008, 09:58 AM   #22
Mendoza
Dominating a decade
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 14,238
vCash: 1000
Default Re: For which performance do you think Jim Jeffries was at his absolute physical peak

Quote:
ChrisPontius

Yes, but the difference here is that Marciano's opponents were all active. Moore's recent record was 45-1. Walcott looked great in a one punch KO win over Charles as well as holding his own against Louis. Charles had beaten nearly every contender around and was fighting every few months, as was Walcott. That doesn't compare to a man who hadn't won a fight in 5 years. They weren't supermiddleweights either.
I agree Moore was active, and though older, he is Marciano's best win with legs as Moore who did not have a good chin kept winning. Walcott and Charles was awful post Marciano. Walcott did not win another fight, and Journeyman began to defeat Charles.

Quote:
Yes, and Jeffries didn't do that. Jack Johnson, Denver ed Martin and Frank Childs all weren't fought.
The color line was an obstacle for sure, however Jeffries did beat three notable black fighters on the way up ( Griffin, Jackson, and Armstrong ) He also shared the ring as champion with Griffin in a four round match, where had Griffin won by knockout, he would have been the champion. Much of Jeffires career is un-documented, but he does have reported KO's over black contenders such as Frank Childs, Denver Ed Martin, and Kid Cotton. Perhaps Apollack's new book can find hidden fights, but I tend to doubt it unless he researches small town papers in the Southwestern portion of the USA in California, Mexico, and Arizona, and French and Brittish papers. Buying the first editions of the Ring Record book might help too.

I contend that as champion, the only guy who deserved a shot beyond a doubt that Jeffries did not fight was Johnson toward the tail end of his career post Corbett II in 1903 to Pre Johnson vs Hart in 1905. That's it. a 1.5 year window for Johnson. Jeffries later returned to fight Johnson, so in a sense he did not duck anyone. As the sun set on Corbett and Fitzsimmons, the money and laws made it harder to get a big fight going in boxing. Jeffries claims he lost money in the Munroe fight. I still contend there was never a money offer for Johnson vs Jeffries from 1903-1905, and had their been a big money offer, and Johnson defeated Hart, perhaps we see that fight.

Quote:
How would you look at Marciano had he drawn the color line against Walcott, Charles and Moore?
Since these three were likely Marciano's best opponents, I would rank him lower. However, Fitz, Corbett and Sharkey were Jeffries best opponents out there from 1899-1903. Not all champions meet the best out there and stay active. I prefer to focus on who the best fighters were when so and so was champion, not what their ethnicity. Rocky could have hung around to fight Patterson, Liston, Williams, Valdes, and others, but had back troubles and opted to retire young, and stay retired. I tend to beleive that Vlades who defeated Chalres just before Maricano fought Charles and was rated #1 was shafted of a title shot.
Mendoza is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 02-20-2008, 10:17 AM   #23
janitor
P4P King
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 21,255
vCash: 1000
Default Re: For which performance do you think Jim Jeffries was at his absolute physical peak

[quote]
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisPontius
Ginger.

Yes, but the difference here is that Marciano's opponents were all active. Moore's recent record was 45-1. Walcott looked great in a one punch KO win over Charles as well as holding his own against Louis. Charles had beaten nearly every contender around and was fighting every few months, as was Walcott. That doesn't compare to a man who hadn't won a fight in 5 years. They weren't supermiddleweights either.
Lets not be too quick to generalise here.

Bob Fitzsimmons may have been an inactive champion but he beat some top contenders between the two Jeffries fights as did Tom Sharkey and Rus Ruhlin.

Fitzsimmons might have been a supermiddleweight but his credentials as a heavyweight puncher are prety solid. Corbett and Sharkey were no smaller than Charles or Moore and Ruhlin was bigger than anybody Marciano defended his title against.

I would also caution you against making blanket statments that a fighter was inactive over a given period because they might well have had unrecorded fights in the blank spaces. Some sources indicate for example that Jeffries fought Sam Burger between the Munroe fight and the Johnson fight.

Quote:
Yes, and Jeffries didn't do that. Jack Johnson, Denver ed Martin and Frank Childs all weren't fought.

How would you look at Marciano had he drawn the color line against Walcott, Charles and Moore?
The colour line is a black mark against Jeffries record but how much diference dose it make in practice?

He beat most of the top black fighters before he became champion.

Even if Jack Johnson had relieved him of the title (a big if) it would not have made much diference to his title reign as it would have been around the time of the Munroe fight.
janitor is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 02-20-2008, 10:17 AM   #24
Mendoza
Dominating a decade
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 14,238
vCash: 1000
Default Re: For which performance do you think Jim Jeffries was at his absolute physical peak

Quote:
Originally Posted by mcvey
Two of Jeffries challengers.

Jack Munroe
21 fights 13 w 4 l 3 d. of those wins 9 were over men having their first contest,he also managed a draw against another.Munroe has a nws dec over Tom Sharkey in Sharkeys last fight ,Sharkey hadn t won a fight in 3 years,and in his last had been kod by Gus Ruhlin,he was finished .Munroe has a win over Peter Maher ,but Maher was 34,had won 1 of his last 7 fights,that one a dsq over the mighty Joe Grim,he had been kod inone round by George Gardner a LH ,who was not noted for his punch,having been floored 3 times in the round,kod by Choynsky in 2 and again in 2 by Kid Carter ,the previous year,he would go on to be kod a further 12 times before finally retiring.
I think McVey is using Box Rec too much, and the trouble is the records of those nine fighters you are referring to are very much incomplete. How do we know they all were making their debuts? This is highly unlikely! The truth is box rec has many 5-10% of all the fights out there. That is it. In many cases, the names that appear are only there because they are on a more famous opponentís record. The further back we go, the less fights that are recorded.

Some of the fighters Munroe beat such as Montana Jack Sullivan were good enough to draw with Stanley Ketchel, and defeat Fireman Flynn.

Munroe was not a world-beater, but he did draw with Griffin in a 20 round match in 1901 ( the same person who beat Jack Johnson in 1901 ) KO'd an older name in Maher, and got the better of Sharkey. This, along with the top names being older, and a distortion of the truth about what happened when he sparred with Jeffries is why Munore got the title fight. Jeffries destroyed Munroe. The fight should have been stopped in round one, but it went on a while longer to give the fans their monies worth. It was Munroe's lone stoppage in 21 recorded fights. While Jeffries opponent wasnít ideal, the result was.

Munroe in his prime was 6' 210 pounds according to news reads, not 186 as box rec records.

Here is is a photo of him in his prime:



[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]
Mendoza is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 02-20-2008, 10:27 AM   #25
janitor
P4P King
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 21,255
vCash: 1000
Default Re: For which performance do you think Jim Jeffries was at his absolute physical peak

[quote]
[quote=mcvey]
Quote:
Originally Posted by janitor
Itook my info from boxrec as to the records of Munroes challengers ,have you info to the contrary?
All I know is that Boxrec is almost invariably incomplet when it comes to fighters of this period, even the champions. Most of Corbetts profesional record is missing for example. A fighter could easily get to the level of say British Champion before his boxrec debut.

No I dont have any information to the contrary but it is not sound practice to take boxrec profiles as being complete during this period.

Quote:
Both were abysmal challengers IMO. Bottom line whatever way you slice it,
Finegan was an abysmal challenger yes.

Munroe was the kind of challenger who would frankly not raise any eyebrows today.

Quote:
Jeffries though a fine Champion had a reputatation based on smaller older often comebacking fighters who were past their prime by some considerable years,or stiffs like Munroe and Finnegan,
OK we can acept that Munroe was lucky to get a title shot. Perhaps we coould compare it to Danny Williams fighting for the Ring Magazine title of the strength of a win over a shell of Mike Tyson.

Fitzsimmons, Corbett, Sharkey and even Ruhlin to a certain extent were the best challengers available small and inactive or otherwise. It is not like there is a body of bigger more active fighters who deserved to fight for the title more.
janitor is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 02-20-2008, 10:51 AM   #26
Mendoza
Dominating a decade
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 14,238
vCash: 1000
Default Re: For which performance do you think Jim Jeffries was at his absolute physical peak

Quote:
janitor says:

All I know is that Boxrec is almost invariably incomplet when it comes to fighters of this period, even the champions. Most of Corbetts profesional record is missing for example. A fighter could easily get to the level of say British Champion before his boxrec debut.

No I dont have any information to the contrary but it is not sound practice to take boxrec profiles as being complete during this period.
This is 100% correct. By the way, I have Corbett's record at 59-0-3 before facing Fitzsimmons! If anone wants to see it, I can re-post it. Some were fights were news type of decsions, but still this is a lot more than Box Rec records.
Mendoza is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 02-20-2008, 11:31 AM   #27
McGrain
Diamond Dog
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 37,249
vCash: 1000
Default Re: For which performance do you think Jim Jeffries was at his absolute physical peak

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mendoza
This is 100% correct. By the way, I have Corbett's record at 59-0-3 before facing Fitzsimmons! If anone wants to see it, I can re-post it.
Probably worth opening a new thread!

I would like to see it.
McGrain is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 02-20-2008, 12:17 PM   #28
mcvey
P4P King
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: The Garden Of England
Posts: 22,018
vCash: 1000
Default Re: For which performance do you think Jim Jeffries was at his absolute physical peak

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mendoza
I think McVey is using Box Rec too much, and the trouble is the records of those nine fighters you are referring to are very much incomplete. How do we know they all were making their debuts? This is highly unlikely! The truth is box rec has many 5-10% of all the fights out there. That is it. In many cases, the names that appear are only there because they are on a more famous opponentís record. The further back we go, the less fights that are recorded.

Some of the fighters Munroe beat such as Montana Jack Sullivan were good enough to draw with Stanley Ketchel, and defeat Fireman Flynn.

Munroe was not a world-beater, but he did draw with Griffin in a 20 round match in 1901 ( the same person who beat Jack Johnson in 1901 ) KO'd an older name in Maher, and got the better of Sharkey. This, along with the top names being older, and a distortion of the truth about what happened when he sparred with Jeffries is why Munore got the title fight. Jeffries destroyed Munroe. The fight should have been stopped in round one, but it went on a while longer to give the fans their monies worth. It was Munroe's lone stoppage in 21 recorded fights. While Jeffries opponent wasnít ideal, the result was.

Munroe in his prime was 6' 210 pounds according to news reads, not 186 as box rec records.

Here is is a photo of him in his prime:



[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]
Montana Jack Sullivan wasnt beaten by Munroe it was a 4 round draw and again is listed as Sullivans first contest,unless you have info to the contraryI will accept that it the truth.,bottom line Jeffries was the best of his time he didnt duck anyone really,perhaps Johnson at the end,but dont build up two stiffs into worthy challengers they weren,t,as any one who analyses their records can see.Jeffries wins over Ruhlin ,Corbett ,Fitz and Sharkey ensure him a place as a great Champ imo,I used to have him in my top 10,but let,s not pretend that those two fights were meritorious,imo they were actually rather shameful.
mcvey is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 02-20-2008, 12:21 PM   #29
mcvey
P4P King
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: The Garden Of England
Posts: 22,018
vCash: 1000
Default Re: For which performance do you think Jim Jeffries was at his absolute physical peak

Quote:
Originally Posted by mcvey
Montana Jack Sullivan wasnt beaten by Munroe it was a 4 round draw and again is listed as Sullivans first contest,unless you have info to the contraryI will accept that it the truth.,bottom line Jeffries was the best of his time he didnt duck anyone really,perhaps Johnson at the end,but dont build up two stiffs into worthy challengers they weren,t,as any one who analyses their records can see.Jeffries wins over Ruhlin ,Corbett ,Fitz and Sharkey ensure him a place as a great Champ imo,I used to have him in my top 10,but let,s not pretend that those two fights were meritorious,imo they were actually rather shameful.
By the way Sullivan was a middleweight.
mcvey is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 02-20-2008, 01:00 PM   #30
janitor
P4P King
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 21,255
vCash: 1000
Default Re: For which performance do you think Jim Jeffries was at his absolute physical peak

Quote:
Originally Posted by mcvey
Montana Jack Sullivan wasnt beaten by Munroe it was a 4 round draw and again is listed as Sullivans first contest,unless you have info to the contraryI will accept that it the truth.
I sincerely doubt that there are a dozen fighters from that era whose pro debut is recorded on boxrec.

It would probably have taken place behind a cow shed somwhere and even the local papers would not pick up on it unless it was part of a major event.
janitor 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 11:01 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Boxing News 24 Forum 2013