Jeffries vs Schmeling who is greater

Max Schmeling beat a prime Joe Louis, and he beat guys like Risko, Uzcudun, Hamas, Stribling, and that controversial 'loss' to Sharkey.

He beat the hell out of Mickey Walker too, who was a big as some of the men who Jeffries builds his rep off of.
Mickey Walker was a middleweight and had a good record against heavyweights.

His prime losses were against young guys (Hamas, avenged. Baer.).


Jeffries beat some old guys, small guys.
Corbett was ancient, and hadn't won a fight in years. Jeffries struggled with him. He struggled with Sharkey too, he drew with Choynski on his way up. These were smaller men by far.
Peter Jackson was washed-up.
Still, Jeffries has a good record and resume, but Schmeling's is comparable.
Schmeling's resume stacks up well to Jeffries' resume, this shouldn't be in question.

 

Fitzsimmons was about that size.
Conn was a lot smaller than Joe Louis, at least 25 pounds smaller.

Well, I cannot tell from the pictures how much they weighed.
The reports seem to confirm that Fitzsimmons was a lot smaller/lighter than Jeffries.
Generally Jeffries looks like a big, full-blown heavy, a 210, 220 pounder lean.
Fitzsimmons was a lot smaller than that.

 

Here's the thing. In early 1892, before the Maher fight, it was said that Fitz was wearing the additional weight well. No one could tell where he had added it. Bob said that he never felt better or stronger. “I expect to enter the ring weighing about 170 pounds. I may be a little over, but will not go under.” Several days before the fight, even after running 4 miles, hitting the ball for 4 hard rounds in different styles, then sparring 4 rounds with Joe Choynski and 4 more with Alec Greggains, Fitz still weighed 168 pounds. And that was in 1892, not having tapered, not a fresh pre-sweating weight.

On February 11, 1897, a little more than a month before the Corbett fight, Fitz said that he was weighing about 179 pounds, but might take off a few pounds if he felt too slow at that weight.

On February 15, 1897, Fitz said, "When I step into the ring, I expect to weigh 175 pounds."

On February 20, Bob said that he expected to enter the ring weighing about 178 pounds.

The closer the fight got, the more both Corbett and Fitz started making low claims about their weight, but they wouldn't prove it. In early March, it was said, “Each believes the other to be much heavier than supposed, and both verge on the mysterious and secretive.” Fitz was thought to be exaggerating, and “shies whenever he encounters a pair of scales,” not wanting to prove his claims.

Both Jeffries and Corbett thought Fitz's weight claims for the March 1897 championship fight were total b.s., and said so. Jeffries was Corbett's sparring partner, and so he had a good look at Bob too. They both thought he was at least 170. Many reporters throughout Fitz's career said he was a fibber when it came to weights. I find it telling that Fitz never liked to prove his claims - and all it would have taken was to publicly step on the scale in front of all the reporters.

Leading up to the Corbett fight, it was said, “Fitzsimmons has kept his weight a close secret. That he is several pounds lighter than the champion is evident at a glance, but he doesn’t weigh under 170 today according to the opinion of experts who have looked him over.”

One paper quoted Fitz's own manager, Martin Julian as saying Fitz was bigger than what he claimed. "Julian said today that he will be heavier than that, ‘or between 170 and 180.’”

 

I think an important question is what would Schmeling have done if his best opponents (that he beat) were bandy-legged light heavies and sawed-off Napoleons from the docks? Jeffries gets rewarded for dominating a laughable era.

 

Fast forward two years to 1899 and then several more to 1902, and I think it more likely that Fitz was even bigger in '99 than in '97, and bigger still in '02. Fighters don't get smaller with age, particularly when they are rich and can eat well, and don't have to make weight.

Regardless, weight is an overrated factor. Sure it can bring added strength, power, and ability to absorb blows, but not necessarily so, and smaller fighters can have those attributes as well, and also being smaller can make a fighter faster, busier, and have better condition, which is especially important in lengthy bouts. Not too many huge dudes were all that effective in the late rounds in 15 or 20 round fights, or fights to the finish.

If a Fitz or Jeff were only going to have to fight 12 or 15 rounds, I guarantee they would be bigger still. Jeff walked around looking fit at 235, and trained down to 220 for 20-round bouts. Some thought he was close to 230 for the Munroe bout. Jeff himself said he felt better bigger. If he did not need to train for 20 or 25 rounds, he would not burn as many calories and would not be quite as concerned about condition, and could fight a faster pace if the bout was only 15, as it would be if you teleported him to fight Schmeling. So you'd have a guy 190 fighting a guy around 230. This does not make the Jeff-Schmeling bout have much more of a size difference than it would when Jeff was fighting a Fitz in the high 170s or a Sharkey in the 180s or a 210-pound Ruhlin or Munroe.

 

Are we perhaps making a bit too much of the size and to a leser extent age of Jeffries opponents here?

If they were the best opponents available, then surely they were the ones that Jeffries must be measured against.

There were certainly bigger opponents around with lesser credentials who he could have been matched with instead.

Many people at the time thought that Jeffries just cut bigger fighters down more quickly.

In the search to find a suitable opponent for him latterly, Sam McVea and Sandy Ferguson were suggested, but nobody realy gave either of them a chance.

I am also an admirer of Schmeling, but I am not sure that his resume compares to Jeffries.

 

If they were the best opponents available, it was a horrendous era for the division.

 

People don't seem to have seen it that way at the time.

In Schmelings era for example, this was regarded as having been one of the strongest eras.

 

You crack me up man.... As long as it's not about johnson.. I can laugh with you.. even if it's about Johnson and his foes.. I'll still laugh just not as hard :fire

 

Are you kidding? Johnson saved heavyweight boxing from the sort Jeffries fought! He's my hero. While it may be his fault he didn't give 100% all the time, it's not his fault he had such thin competition.

 

Yes, the Jeffries era was viewed very differently in the old days.

This is from the Ring Question Box from the September, 1950 issue of the Ring Magazine
-----------------------------------------------

Jackie Adams, Denver, Colorado

Q--The late Otto Fluto said that in his opinion Peter Jackson was the greatest of all heavyweights and next to him he placed Jim Jeffries and then Jack Dempsey. In The Ring Record Book we find that Jeffries, as you stated in your interesting series on his life, fought more top men than any of his successors or predecessors. Among them were such great fighters as Joe Choynski, Gus Ruhlin, Joe Goddard, Peter Jackson, Bob Armstrong, Bob Fitzsimmons, and Jim Corbett--a truly great list. What is your opinion about Jeff? Doesn't he belong on top? Would Peter Jackson have whipped John L Sullivan had they met each in their prime?

A--I have always placed Jeff in second place. He was a great fighter and his record shows it. As for your other query, I cannot say. Your guess is as good as mine. Each was a marvel.
------------------------------------------------

"more top men than any of his successors or prdecessors."

to 1950, of course.

 

"what would Schmeling have done"

Corbett--Schmeling had all the mobility of Old Mother Hubbard and his left is so weak I would score him for being a one-handed fighter. In the film I just watched of the 2nd Sharkey fight, Jack couldn't miss him with his jab.
I think the quick-moving Corbett would have no trouble out-pointing Schmeling.

Fitz--this man's size is in dispute, but he seems to have been pretty confortable at 170 or more. Schmeling went out in one to the ordinary Gipsy Daniels. That he would best the faster moving, and I think harder hitting Fitz is not likely. Max takes the count early.


"laughable era"

I wouldn't bring up risibility when defending the era of the stodgy, one-handed Schmeling, the past it but still champ Sharkey, Carnera, the "what is defense" Baer, and the tedious Braddock.

No wonder the 5' 7" 174 lb pot-bellied Walker with his booze problem was a top contender.

On Walker--as was said about the difference between the Walker who fought Sharkey and the Walker who fought Schmeling--"One year and one thousand highballs later"

 

"are we making too much of the size . . . of Jeffries opponents?"

In a word, yes. Here are the heights and weights, as far as I can see, of Jeff's major opponents

1897--Gus Ruhlin- 6' 2" 200 (draw)
1897--Joe Choynski-- 5' 11" 165 (draw)
1898--Joe Goddard-- 6' 194
1898--Peter Jackson-- 6' 1 1/2" 195
1898--Pete Everett-- 5' 11" 190
1898--Tom Sharkey-- 5' 8" 180+
1898--Bob Armstrong-- 6' 3" 187
1899--Bob Fitzsimmons-- 5' 11 3/4" 167
1899--Tom Sharkey-- 5' 8" 183
1900--Jim Corbett-- 6' 1" 188
1901--Joe Kennedy-- 6' 2" 195
1901--Gus Ruhlin-- 6' 2" 200
1902--Bob Fitzsimmons-- 5' 11 3/4" 172
1903--Jim Corbett-- 6' 1" 190
1904--Jack Munroe-- 5' 11 1/2" 186 (215 on IMDB)

1910--Jack Johnson-- 6' 1 1/2" 208 (lost)

Schmeling's major opponents

1929--Johnny Risko- 5' 11" 190
1929--Paulino Uzcudun- 5' 11" 192
1930--Jack Sharkey- 6' 197
1931--Young Stribling- 6' 1" 186
1932--Jack Sharkey- 6' 205 (lost)
1932--Mickey Walker- 5' 7" 174
1933--Max Baer- 6' 2 1/2" 203 (lost)
1934--Steve Hamas- 6' 1 1/2" 193 (lost)
1934--Paulino Uzcudun- 5' 11" 207 (draw)
1935--Steve Hamas- 6' 1 1/2" 190
1935--Paulino Uzcudun- 5' 11" 202
1936--Joe Louis- 6' 2" 198
1937--Harry Thomas- 6' 196
1938--Ben Foord- 6' 1 1/2" 207
1938--Joe Louis- 6' 2" 198 (lost)

I would see these lists as pretty close in size. The tallest man (Armstrong) and the heaviest (Johnson or Munroe) fought Jeffries. The whole case about small men rests on Choynski and Fitz vs Walker.

It should be pointed out that Schmeling lost to several lightheavies, including getting blown out in one by Gipsy Daniels, who does not seem to have been much bigger, if indeed bigger at all, than Fitz or Choynski. The difference is that Daniels was mediocre, and never a world class fighter while Fitz was a triple champion who lost only to Jeff over a fifteen year period.

 

Munroe was at least 210. Several days before the fight, Munroe said he was 210 after heavy training, but would take on some weight over the next couple days and enter the ring at around 220. Jeff claimed to be weighing 225, but most who saw him thought he was 230 or more. Again, reports of their respective weights were all over the map, but all the local reports agreed Munroe was at least 208-210 and up to 220, with some estimating in between. Jeff was at least 220, claimed 225, and many said he looked 230-240.

Bottom line is Jeff beat some big dudes, and beat some smaller guys too. Schmeling wouldn't be much bigger than several men that Jeff beat, and would actually be smaller than some that Jeff beat as well. The only guy who beat Jeff was prime, about 18 pounds bigger than Schmeling, much faster, and had an impregnable defense and ability to clinch and hold anyone. Jack Johnson sure as hell wouldn't get starched by the guys that KO'd Max. Schmeling wasn't a big clincher, and therefore Jeff would get off on him, and when he did, my money is on Schmeling going goodnight at some point. Schmeling had a nice right, sure, but he couldn't deck 197-205 pound Sharkey with it, nor 203-pound Baer, and he wasn't going to drop 225-pound Jeffries either, at least not unless we are talking about the Jeff that hadn't boxed for 6 years, and even then, I'm still not sure Schmeling stops that version either.