Prime James J. Jeffries vs Jack Johnson

When he actually gets to punching distance in Ruhlin, he uses head movement. And, as you say, his head is tucked behind his shoulder. The film's too grainy to make things out with perfect clarity, but it looks like he's using his shoulder sensibly.

Unlike a lot of "lost" techniques, there's indisputably a wrestling component to late 19th/early 20th century boxing that's lost today. (Jeffries was training -- fairly competitively -- with the Greco-Roman world champion, which tells you something about boxers' approach to inside fighting in that era). Jeffries' training film and the Ruhlin footage both show him controlling the terms when the fighters close. You can see it in the way he sticks to the other guy's arms whenever he chooses to break away. Even Johnson's once or twice, though Johnson might have let him get away with it.

Against Johnson, he couldn't pull most of his style off because he was an old man (relatively speaking) faced with another master inside fighter in his prime.

Aside from the training footage (which people don't like for some reason), look at the Ruhlin fight. Jeffries has a plod-plod-plod-pounce approach, but he's very quick when he wants to close the distance.

I never claimed that he was dancing in there. As I said above, Jeffries' footspeed came into play when he wanted to get closer to an opponent. Wait for an opportunity, lunge in with a very fast pseudo-left-hook to the head or body, and use your superior strength and wrestling technique (which is absolutely a skill by his era's rules) to prevent retaliation and maul the other guy.

I recall reading that Leonard got his ear drained at one point. He described it as an extremely painful process.

As far as the ears issue goes, two quick points. First: Jeffries had fewer fights than a lot of other fighters (albeit a record stuffed with contenders), but he had his share of exhibitions and lots of sparring. Plus, he did get hit early in his career. But as others have mentioned, he improved as he went along.

Second: Jeffries wrestled a lot. Wrestlers, to an even greater extent than boxers, get cauliflower ears.

 

Not so much wear down, as wear out. A tireless if tiresome master of clinching. Against guys he couldn't grapple with he was mediocre. But with that and a decent right hand he was a top 10 contender for a long time.

 

The problem with training footage and in this case it is Jeffries throwing around his useless brother,is that it is not representative of how boxers fight.

Jeffries did not dance around a ring he either followed his opponent around ,[in the one clip of him being proactive , rather than reactive his opponent is quicker afoot] or , more often waited for them to come in.
I don't see any shoulder rolls from the extant footage of Jeffries.

Fitzsimmons had many many more fights and exhibitions than Jeffries, no cauliflower ears, the one that does stick in my mind is Sharkey who did , and he had zero defence.
Apart from Sharkey. can you name another leading heavyweight of the time who did have cauliflower ears?

There is training footage of Jack Johnson darting rapidly forwards and backwards with weights in his hands doing double shuffles and side to side steps, he did not fight like that.

Ali spent large amounts of time laying on the ropes exhorting his sparring partners to pound on him, but he only really used this tactic in two fights.


Jeffries never had a wrestling match as far as can be ascertained he used Ernst Roeber for strength in one fight and was good friends with the retired Farmer Burns. No doubt he had impromptu" throw arounds ,"with them but to suggest they may have given him his "ear" is a very big stretch.
In fact Fitzsimmons, and Johnson engaged in more wrestling than Jeffries did , both having several matches.

 

I know the truth is often inconvenient for you.:deal

 

In the 1901 training film for Jeffries, you can clearly see his slip and duck type of defense, fast footwork to close the distance, and clean work to the head or body.

There is a short clip of Jeffries vs Sharkey 1, shown in a movie called the Night they Raided Minsky's. Sharkey charges in like a Rhino and throws a mean left hook that starts from his waist, and ends up in the rafters! Jeffries ducks it, which is not easy considering Sharkey was much shorter!

Jeffries had good defense, flexibility, and reflexes in his prime. These two examples show it. Papers say Jeffries made Corbett miss a few times in their first fight. Now an easy task.

 

1. Corbett was better than anyone Johnson gave a title shot to. His own people say his 23rd round KO loss to Jeffries this was his best ring effort.

2. If you read detailed round by round reports, you will see the fight was close to even, With Jeffries having the momentum. Stop taking the passages of poorly researched books on a conveniently selective basis, or listen to what Corbett said as he wasn't an honest guy about his own career, and a bit of a hot head / sore loser in defeat.

3. Below is the fight report of Corbett vs Jeffries 1. If you score it as they saw it, Jeffries is slightly in the lead.

This content is protected

 

Your examples of Jeffries "good defence" are a training clip, and one clip of him against Sharkey who was about the crudest heavyweight ever?

If Jeffries had good defence how come he was so badly cut up in fights ,having his nose broken several times ,sustaining cuts over ,and above both eyes and ending up with a cauliflower ear after only a handful of fights?

In his 4th to last fight reports state Fitz hit Jeffries at will, therefore where was his "good defence" , ?

He was fighting a man all but 40 years old, furthermore man who had not had a fight in 2 years!

"In the first round Fitz showed all his old-time cleverness landing some stinging lefts to the face without getting a punch in return ".

"In the second round however,Big Jeff sailed into his smaller rival seemingly with the intention of battering him down and out.But Bob caught him with several jarring lefts as he came forward , and a sharp uppercut to the nose drawing blood".

"The ex-champion seemd to be able to hit the reigning champion as and where he pleased , marking the big man's features with almost every punch".

"The first two rounds had gone in Fitzsimmons's favour and he took the third by a wider margin.
Landing a number of telling blows to the face, cutting the champion severely.

Big Jeff was finding it hard to reach his rival, who was in and out with his punches..

A left to the head jarred the champion a big left swing body made him grunt.He forced the pace and hurt Fitz with a powerful,left to the head but Bob came in clinched and the referee had to break them."
"Jeffries came out for the fourth bleeding from the nose and mouth,and with a deep gash under his right eye.He was fighting fiercely now, but his attacks were broken up by the speed of the challengers blows and Bob escaped many big punches by skipping neatly out of their way".
Good defence?

This is against a near 40years old man, who had not fought in two years ,a man he outweighed by nearry fiftypounds!!!
Stop living in cloud cuckoo land !!

Here is a report of the 2nd jeffries Fitz fight.

http://chroniclingamerica.loc.gov/l...es&y=15&x=16&dateFilterType=yearRange&index=7

 

I have William Brady's account of this fight from the Corbett corner, he managed both men , he stated that he told Jeffries at the end of the 20th round," you have got to knock him out or lose the title," and he kicked Tommy Ryan out of the corner. You are like a full up toilet .

FULL OF ****!

 

There is really no way to say who would win with both men in their prime. Films of prime Jeffries are hard to interpret but I can certainly say he had skills. He was not the slow ponderous puncher most make him out to be.

What we do know is when they both did fight Johnson won with ease by ko. Jeffries also stated after the bout that he felt even in his prime he would not be able to beat Johnson. Finally you have Fleischer who really did know both men well and am sure had many conversations with both concerning this very subject. Nat chose Johnson as the winner with both men in prime form.

For me I generally pick an all time prime boxer vs a prime puncher so my vote would go to Johnson.

 

I question how good the professional fighters were about 1900 when boxing under the Marquis of Queensberry Rules wasn't going full bore until the 1880s. Yes, I know that Nat Fleischer and many other people of his generation felt that Jack Johnson Jim Jeffries, Bob Fitzsimmons, Stanley Ketchell, Joe Gans and Terry McGovern were "Cat's Meow," but there hasn't been one fighter who was as good since World War I? That defies logic, to put it mildly. In other sports, the more recent participants were usually better their earlier counterparts, especially when the sports are in their comparative infancy.

- Chuck Johnston

 

does this have anything to do with the thread?

go check how long ago the world long jump record was set.

 

1991?

 

yup, 22 years in a sport (athletics) that has a higher worldwide participation than it did then, plus all the better training and drugs. nearly a 1/4 of a century more modern, zero improvement in ability.