Max Baer vs Jim Corbett

Mcvey,

If you only credit corbett with 11 wins, poor old Harry Wills must be said to have won well under half of and probably a quarter of his fights.

You also have to give Corbett a bit of credit for his draw with Jackson, which were arguably two of the best fighters ever going at it.

And his old age performances, really are impressive despite him getting kod by Jeffries. Also, I think it inescapable that Corbett, lost something after winning the title. Clearly the money, and fame of the title (particularly in those days where touring was worth more than title defences) had take plenty away from him. I dont think you could even say that Fitzsimmons necessarilly beat the best Corbett.

 

Someone has to be the worst h2h of the greats. Which one time number 1 heavyweight would you favour corbett over?

 

Tommy Burns?

 

For a start, it was prety much taken for granted that Corbett sat near the top of the pile, until the post Louis era. That should set alarm bells ringing in terms of what you are saying.

Even taking the adjacent champions who we can compare Corbett to, your thesis dosn't hold up.

Fitzsimmons beat Corbett, but it was a near run thing, and anything could have happened in a rematch.

A young Jeffries narrowly got past a faded Corbett, so can we assume that he would beat a prime version at that stage of his career?

Hart and Burns were assumed to represent a significant drop in the bar from the champions who had gone before. I know that people always preffer the older genaration, but why is there not a single dissenting voice on this point?

I think that he could have beaten some of the champions of the 30s. Some people question this today, but nobody did at the time, or for some time after. Hell, there has to be some weak point in that decade he could have exploited.

Beyond that we have the argument about relative strength between eras, but there were some prety weak lineal champions in the second half of the 20th century. Wy would Leon Spinks be an automatic favourite over him?

 

Well 2 points of contention

1. Baer didn't really do well against pure boxer movers, his feet were too slow and his punches a tad wide.

2. Boxing probably progressed as a sport and Corbet hence may have not been the best boxer mover and may have made mistake which would see him succumb to Baer. Baer did catch up to counter punching Schmelling who was probably a better boxer than Corbett

 

Is it possible that Corbett's performances against Jeffries reflect negatively against Jeffries ,rather than positively towards Corbett?

Jackson was possibly already slighly past his best when he fought Corbett.

What we know positively is that Jackson was carrying an ankle in jury into that fight,and that Corbett wanted no part of him after it.

I also censure Fitz for not being prepared to rematch Corbett.

I credit Corbett with what he deserves.

 

If corbett was as faded as you claim, then I don't see how you can not weigh it in his favour that he put up a good fight against the best heavyweight in the world.

 

Baer by KO early

 

I didn't say lineal-schmineal I said number 1.

I think it's quite clear that during the era of hart and burns johnson was the best hw out there.

Leon spinks has never ever been anywhere near a number 1 spot.

So i'm dismissing those 3. You mention the 30's sharkey, schmelling, baer, braddock, louis. Which of those do you favour gentleman james over?

 

Well who would you consider number 1 at any given time?

Ali got a gift against young then further gifts against shavers and norton he was far removed from being a number 1 by the time he fought spinks.

I'm staggered you rate him so highly as a h2h force. The sharkey who kicked ten bells of **** out of wills, the Schmelling who kicked ten bells of **** out of Louis? The Baer who kicked ten bells of **** out of Schmelling? How could Corbett ever be favoured over them?

Braddock I could understand although he has the best victory of the two by a long way.

 

I do think he put up a fine performance in those fights.I also think a clever ,fast boxer, even a faded one ,would look good against a counter punching, cautious ,reactive Jeffries.

Brady ,Jeffries manager , screamed at Tommy Ryan after the 20th round against Corbettt,"for heavens sake send him in,he is losing this fight!".
Forget about fairytales by a certain individual that Jeffries was holding him even ,Corbett was boxing his ears off in their first fight, and that is coming direct from his manager.

 

I think that he was on the smae sort of level as these men, as opposed to a level or two above them as people assumed at the time.

The thing about Corbett is that he could be caught and stopped by a good finisher, and he could be nulified by a good pressure fighter, but he was seemingly almost impossible to out point.

Had he fought in the 30s where he only had to keep it up for 15 rounds, he would have been a very tough proposition indeed.

 

As I said, i'm staggered.

How anyone can believe him impossible to outpoint is beyond me.

 

I didn't say it was impossible.

The fact is that nobody realy out boxed him anywhere close to his peak, and he was prety damn elusive to boot.

That is the technical problem that he presents, and over 15 rounds or less it would only get worse.