Corbett was 33 for the fight. Hardly shot. His handlers said it was his best ring effort. Corbett was very hard to catch cleanly, bigger, stronger, more durable and almost as fast as Jones. Jeffries was washed up, and lost his stamina when he meet Johnson in 1910. In his prime he was a puncher who produced a knockdown in all of his fights, save his lame comeback effort at 35 with no warm up fights. Jeffries hit at least as hard ( I would say much harder ) than Tarver who produced a one shot KO on glass Roy, and G. Johnson who had Jones out for over a minutes. Jones was a thin boned man, who simply could not take it.
co-sign. the difference in skill based on available film is astronomical. the argument for jeffries boils down to "times were tough, so jeffries was tough and jones wasn't. jeffries wins" which is about as logical as "jones wins because of his superior blackness"
Corbett hadn't won a fight in five frigging years. The talent pool was also tiny then compared to now. The world population was 1 billion and there wasn't such a thing as either an amateur career or a professional career. Nor was there as much mobility as there is now, which is a further drain on the already tiny talent pool. Having said that, if the fight is scheduled for 25 rounds with tiny gloves and a sadistic referee, then Jeffries has a chance of out-lasting Jones. I wouldn't be too certain though; an old Fitz and Sharkey apparently beat the **** out of big Jim. On the other hand, if Jones had KO'd a fat journeyman like Ed Dunkhorst then people here would probably give him a chance.
Reading peoples responses here it quickly becomes apparent that a lot of people don't even have any idea what sort of fighter Jeffries was.
advanced slowly, behind a low low crouch. his left hand extended to block and parry any punches coming his way. his right hand attached to his face, ready to be unleashed when close enough very athletic for his time, didn't use speed but instead ridiculous endurance and physical strength. got in, ground down his opponent. terrific right hand and body punching. i pick him to beat ron lyle i don't see those skills translating to beat jones unless it's more than 15 rounds or non-modern day rules
You have about half the picture here. Jeffries became a lot more agresive later in his career, and he was prety fast on his feet himself. Impresions of his style are skewed by the Johnson fight, where he seems to have reverted to the reactive style that he used earlier in his title reign. Jeffries seems to have been reactive in the first Fitzsimmons and first Corbett fight. He became more agresive around the time of the Ruhlin fight, and polished up his game a lot after the second Fitzsimmons fight. Certainly if he was at his peak, and he knew that he had twelve rounds to catch Jones, he would not be advancing slowly behind a low crouch. Jeffries was a murderous body puncher and this would be the key to him winning the fight.
Good points. The best of Jeff wasn't seen until just before his first retirement. He was green as can be when he started and pretty quickly fed to the wolves.
Yeah Jeffries was pretty fast and even dynamic for his time and his size, but whether or not he was anything like fast enough to catch up to Jones is another matter. Fast, fast middleweights look slow with Jones. If Jeffreis won this fight it would be with his chin, not his feet.
thanks jan :good at least i was half right :smoke the clarification is helpful and paints a different picture from the standard, even if not in style than in quality and growth as a fighter. however, the added aggression and activity would be an advantage against jones. given jones own style, athleticism and skills i still think jeffries at a disadvantage in this one. over 12 or 15 i see jones playing careful, sharpshooting matador. gets trickier with more rounds and different rule sets but in modern times, modern rules i favour jones
You will never get Jones to take the fight anyway. He will get tempted down to the newly created light heavyweight division to fight Jack Root or George Gardiner.