Who would you rate higher : Tim Witherspoon or Jim Jeffries ?

That being said it's been a while since I watched spoon v Holmes so I'd have to rescore it to have a better evaluation of spoons worth but even best case scenario, he's the top hw for a matter of months before losing to Thomas. Jeffries ruled an era.

I don't have much of a problem with people putting him above Holmes after the fight if they scored it for him, especially when he then fought page whilst Larry fought Frazier.

 

Corbett vs Childs

Corbett was 6' 1" (at least) and about 190 lbs.

Childs was 5' 9" and about 165 lbs

Yes, I think Corbett had a better chance against the 220 lb Jeffries.

 

at the time of the Corbett-Jeffries fight, Martin was 18 and his only major fight had been a ko loss to Armstrong.

Klondike? Hardly a top man.

Childs--ko losses to Choynski and the middleweight Dan Creedan, and a loss to Byers. And he was basically a super-middleweight. If Jeff had fought him, Jeff would probably be criticized for ducking a former champion who was a real heavy to fight a "little man"

 

i dont buy that..training footage looks good....other prime footage...you cant even see...his fight with Johnson..he doesnt look bad...

 

Childs apparently weighed about 165 for Byers, but okay he weighed 173 for Dunkhorst.

So let's call him a lightheavy (but a heavy by the standards of the day)--but how good was he?

He fought four top middle to heavies in his career--Dan Creedan, Joe Choynski, Denver Ed Martin, and Jack Johnson. He went 0-7. Creedan stopped him. Choynski stopped him. And Johnson stopped him. Martin outpointed him twice.

He seems to have been in the same ballpark as Fitz and Choynski for weight, but not in class. If Jeff is to be criticized for not fighting someone, I wonder why it isn't Choynski who ko'd both Childs and Johnson, and later beat Childs again, and fought a draw with Jeffries.

Childs' best win was over the welter Joe Walcott, but plenty of big men beat him. Walcott did beat Choynski, though.

Other than that--Armstrong, Butler, Byers, Everett, Russell

All trial horses. Yes, Jeff went 10 rounds with Armstrong, and the criticism of him not being able to stop Armstrong was so intense that he almost lost a shot at Fitz's title.

Still, I think it is hard to figure out who the best of these fighters are.

Childs--beat Armstrong 3 times, but lost twice to Martin, and was ko'd by Choynski and Johnson. Drew with Griffin.

Griffin--actually the most consistent. Was ko'd by Martin, but drew with Childs, and defeated Johnson. In three 20 round fights with Johnson, Griffin never lost, while Childs lost both his fights to Johnson.

Martin--defeated Childs twice and stopped Griffin, but won only one of three from Armstrong and was stopped twice.

Armstrong--lost three times to Childs, but ko'd Martin twice-including in 1903-also drew with Choynski and ko'd Paddy Slavin twice.

I think it is anyone's guess who is the best of these four, but there is no reason to consider any of them as good as Choynski.

It does seem inconsistent to criticize Jeff for fighting Choynski and Fitz, but then argue he should have fought Childs.

 

My argument is that Childs current resume in 1900 was better than Corbett's who had not fought at all for 2 years, nor won a contest for 6 years.

That Child's record at the time is superior is incontrovertible.


Armstrong was confident he would beat Jeffries, Jeffries was panned not for failing to stop Armstrong but for not going ahead with his other fight that day against Steve O Donnell ,Jeffries had signed to fight both men consecutively over 10rds as a way of publicising himself.
N B Armstrong had been kod in 5 rds ,4 weeks before fighting Jeffries, by Mexican Pete Everett.
Jeffries injured his hand on Armstrong's head and was unable to fulfill his contract to fight O Donnell. He was the target of a lot of undeserved ridicule afterwards , and so he packed his bags and left N Y for home. Jeffries did not challenge Fitz until over a year later.

I don't criticize Jeffries for fighting Fitz and Choynski, I merely point out that given Childs was appreciably more muscular and heavier than either ,arguments that Childs was to small to make a credible match with Jeffries are patently ridiculous.


Byers beat Childs at 165lbs, 2 years later they drew for the coloured heavyweight title and, a year later Childs kod him.
Childs was an 8 fight middle when he fought Creedon.

It's hard to figure who the best of the coloured fighters were simply because,[ apart from Choynski,] none of the leading white fighters would face them.

 

"none of the white fighters would face them"

I'm wonder if this is fair. I think the top black heavies of the 1890's were Jackson, Armstrong, Griffin, and Childs. Jeffries beat the first three (Jeff handed Griffin his only recorded loss in the '90's)--I will add to this in a separate post.

*The SF Chronicle ran an article in 1896 which claimed Jeffries had ko'd Childs in two rounds. This is in dispute, but who knows? There might have been such a fight in a small club somewhere.

"Childs was appreciably heavier and more muscular than either"

This is a sweeping statement to make of men with so few photos, and only a few weights given and those generally w/o being weighed in. Even if true, it doesn't prove much as Choynski ko'd Childs and Fitz was a much better fighter than either of them, losing legitimately only to the huge Jeffries over a 15 year period while winning three championships.

"Childs was an 8 fight middle when he fought Creedan"

Childs was 27. He probably had had many more than 8 fights. The records are just incomplete. His first recorded fight has him ko'ing the world class George LaBlanche when he was 25. Just doesn't seem as likely that this was his first fight as that earlier ones where not recorded in the newspapers.

 

How did the black heavies do against white opponents in the 1890's? I will list the men I know or think were white

Frank Childs

George LaBlanche--ko 3, dq 8
Australian Billy Smith--ko 12
Dan Creedan--ko by 3
Joe Choynski--ko by 3, L 6
Ed Dunkhorst--w 8
Fred Russell--w 6, w 6, w 10
Mexican Pete Everett--w 10
Wild Bill Hanrahan--ko 4

9-3 with 3 ko wins and 2 ko'd by losses

Bob Armstrong

Joe Choynski--d 6
Paddy Slavin--ko 10, ko 4
Ed Dunkhorst--d 10, d 10, L 10
Mexican Pete Everett--ko 14, ko by 5
Jim Jeffries--L 10
Joe Goddard--d 6
Sandy Ferguson--ko by 1

3-4-4 with 3 ko's and 2 ko'd by

Hank Griffin

Jim Jeffries--ko by 14
Jack Munroe--d 20
Joe Kennedy--d 20, d 20
Fred Russell--ko by 14

0-2-3 with 2 ko losses.

**totols--28 fights 12 wins, 9 losses, 7 draws, 6 ko wins, 6 ko losses.

***nothing here to indicate these are any more than journeymen.

****While Griffin has the poorest record against whites, he has perhaps the most impressive win over Johnson and has the best overall won/lost record

*****Armstrong lost all three fights to Childs, but his ko's of Slavin in 1896 and Martin in 1903 are more impressive showings than Childs ever had against a heavy (unless you count Armstrong himself as more impressive than Slavin or Martin)

I didn't look up Jackson, but I know he fought Corbett, Slavin, and Jeffries, at the least, in the 1890's.

 

Dunkhorst... man was he a beast!!!

 

Jim Jeffries has the legacy. Spoon is better head to head. That's about as complicated as it needs to get.

 

Tony Tubbs