Greater Heavyweight? -- JEFFRIES vs JOHNSON

Baseball used for a comparison to boxing.

ABSOLUTE BOLLOCKS

 

Baseball and boxing have like so little in common it's really silly to try and make that comparison. Even if we accept that Corbett was just fine.. Fitz was just fine.. Even if we accept that and come to the conclusion that Jeffries was even above a prime Fitz or corbett since we're seemingly throwing out their age and other factors... then Johnson beat a Prime Jeffries who was already better than those guys.. So even if we follow your logical line of thinking to its conclusion.. Johnson comes on CLEARLY better than Jeffries since he dominated him in a fashion Jeffries never did to Corbett or Fitz... and I guess Jeffries was prime going by what I'm hearing from The Jeffreis side.

 

"baseball and boxing have so little in common"

I don't think I'm comparing them, only pointing out, as did guilalah, that prime has no meaning about how good you are. Baseball does share with boxing the bottom line that because there is so much skill involved the down effects of aging can be counterbalanced with smarts.

Fitz, Corbett, Jeffries, and "prime"

Jeff hadn't beaten anyone at all in six years and showed very little in the Johnson fight as the film shows. Prime isn't at issue. He was totally gone.

McVey has made valid points about Corbett. He certainly wasn't doing much, but his good showing against Jeff might at least point to him having more left than his record shows. Still, the Corbett had quite a bit left against Jeff argument is circular, based on Jeff having so much trouble with him. I concede skepticism is in order.

Fitz is an entirely different kettle of fish. He wasn't losing and he bounced back from both Jeff bouts with impressive wins. He would go six more years after his first loss to Jeff without losing to anyone else. Like Ruth and Williams in baseball, there just is no solid evidence that he had gone back so much he couldn't still function at the highest level.

And Williams and Ruth share with Fitz one other factor. Rules of aging for average players don't apply in the same way to exceptional ones. And Fitz was as exceptional in his sport as Ruth and Williams were in theirs.

 

**Just a comment about the Johnson-Jeffries fight.

A few years ago I called the National Film Registry (the film of this fight had been voted onto it) to inquire how many rounds existed on film. They thought four rounds (one, four, thirteen, fifteen)

There is a film on you tube from England that also includes rounds twelve and fourteen.

What do they show?

Well, they are clones of round thirteen. By this time Jeffries is not even throwing punches. He merely clinches and wrestles with Johnson who eventually pulls free to land punches.

It is a very clear film, though.

 

You're leaving out an obvious fact. For the most part Williams remained a full time player, having to face the same level of pitchers as any other hitter. An aging boxer can cherry pick opponents and not have to go it against the best, can steal,a title if well matched, ect. Boxing is a sport of selective match ups while baseball is all about a level playing field.

 

I think I did make that point in Post #89 above.

I used the American NFL football quarterbacks Peyton Manning (37) and Tom Brady (36) as examples and pointed out that they will probably be retired in five years or so playing against pro competition. If they could pick their spots and play most games against college competition, they could probably play into their fifties.

Lasting a long time because you are fighting second-raters is relevant to some modern fighters. It was not true of Fitz.

 

Trouble with your calculation is that two years prior to the second Jeffries fight Fitz fought no one, he was in retirement.
Five of his seven fights after the second Jeffries one were against no bodies.

 

He did go on a tour with Jeffries and fought some set-ups, but in 1903 he beat George Gardner, the light-heavyweight champion, who was coming off wins over Marvin Hart and Jack Root, who in turn would fight for the heavyweight championship in 1905. And Hart of course defeated Johnson.

In 1904 Fitz ko'd Philadelphia Jack O'Brien with one punch according to boxrec. O'Brien later went 20 rounds twice with Burns while Burns was champion without being stopped, once to a draw.

To me, these are impressive wins.

 

The print used in the documentary," Unforgiveable Blackness," is a good one ,it clearly shows the punishment Jeffries received ,and the blood all over his face, chest , torso, and running down his legs. You can watch it on You Tube , via your TV for good effect.
Jeffries displayed remarkable fortitude in not only absorbing such a hiding , but constantly going forwards into the "mouth of the cannon".
How much worse must it have been to be sarcastically taunted whilst it was being administered,and by a man you despised?

 

To me they indicate how good he was in his prime , much like Archie Moore giving Marciano a good fight when he was anywhere from 39 to 40 something , [depending on whether you believed him ,or his mother. ]They do not suggest he was prime when he achieved them.

 

Never mind Boxrec, the Fitz-O'Brien fight can't be summed up that way.

 

168lbs Fitz started well against Gardner 170lbs.

He took the first three rounds and in the 4th dropped Gardner with a right to the jaw and two straight lefts.

Gardner was up at 7 ,but was floored again for a short count.
Gardner abandoned offence and concentrated on survival,scoring occasionally to Fitz's body.
Fitz dropped Gardner for a 9 count in the 5th.

In the 6th Gardner was cut under the right eye.
Fitz took a breather for the next few rounds, and Gardner cut Fitz's mouth in the 10th and the blood flowed.

Fitz got a second wind and had Gardner down for short counts in both the 13th and 14 th rds .

Into the last quarter of the fight Fitz faded and Gardner began to come on . Gardner was now bossing the fight.

In the 17th he had Fitz hanging on desperately from a right hand. Fitz managed to run the clock down and take the clear and just verdict .
It would be 35 years before another man of that age won a world title.

In 1903 O Brien had challenged Fitz for the middle weight title. Fitz accepted but stipulated it had to be at 158lbs and accompanied by a $5,000 side stake the fight to be in San Francisco . O Brien wanted 160lbs, and fight in his home town,this was a non-starter and the fight went cold.
Sixteen months later with over 30 more fights under his belt O Brien and Fitz met in a no dec 6 rounder.
There are varying accounts of the bout .Fitz later said he had O Brien on the floor, O Brien said he tried to ko Fitz in the first 4 rds then settled for getting the experience of fighting the old man. It is a matter of opinion as to who deserved the win ,some say Fitz kod Jack inside the time, some say the bell saved O Brien
In 1905 O Brien fresh off a stoppage of heavyweight Al Kaufman in 17rds,challenged Fitz again.
Fitz had not fought since their 6 rounder 17 months previously whereas O Brien had packed in another 18fights.
The 1st rd saw Fitz making the fight but not landing anything significant. O Brien was more aggressive in the 2nd and landed several jabs. Fitz missed with wide swings. Fitz began to up the pace and crowd the elusive Irishman in the 3rd , then O Brien landed a straight left to the face that dropped the incoming Fitz flat on his back. Fitz rolled over got to his knees and was erect as the bell rang. O Brien had a big 4th rd dropping Fitz to his knees with straight punches.
Fitz got up and charged his man but was unable to land with any effect.
In the 5th Fitz swung a left totally missed, and went down from the momentum.

Fitz just could not seem to find find his timing ,or establish his range as the younger man back pedalled unashamedly.Fitz managed to fleetingly corner O Brien at the end of the 5th, but his punches lacked the steam of old.
Fitz rallied in the 6th and 7th rds , but in the 8th he was down from a right to the jaw. Fitz staggered when he arose but O Brien did not take a chance on finishing him and stayed at long range.
Fitz came out strong for the 9th, and a body shot hurt O Brien but after that O Brien punished him with impunity.
At the end of the round Fitz was winded.

The 11th was the same Fitz taking the intiative ,O Brien giving ground to wear out the older man

By the 12th Fitz was spent and O Brien turned from Lamb to Lion.
He targeted Fitz's body doubling him up , then got home repeatedly with punches to Fitz's face . Fitz was groggy and going when the bell rang to save him. Fitz zig -zagged back to his corner , no strength left in his legs.
Briefly upright on his stool, Fitz now slid to his knees exhausted, his head lolling, he slipped to the floor in a faint..
Ed Graney the referee came to monitor his condition,as his corner once more hoisted him up onto his stool.
Fitz looked at Graney through glazed eyes, and muttered through bloody lips".Eddie I'm all done up.I can't go on ", Fitz then sank into unconsciousness.

O Brien was announced the new champ, and Fitz was restored to the land of the living with whiskey. He spoke to the crowd magnaminously,"the better man won",and they cheered him to the echo
A great old fighter was defeated.

 

As McVey says, their were conflicting views of the fight. Here is one I place alot of credence on as it is packed with detail. It had O'Brien landing more and Bob the heavier blows. O'Brien had the first three rounds but Fitz was coming on and looked the likely winner, it surmised.

"Round Six
Fitzsimmons led with a left, but missed. He landed a second later and then drove a left to the wind which took some of the steam out of O'Brien. Fitzsimmons opened a cut over Jack's left eye and then drove his right to the wind O'Brien landed right and left to the face but his blows lacked power. Fitzsimmons landed a right to the jaw and O'Brien countered with a left to Fitzsimmons' damaged mouth. Both men were bleeding profusely. O'Brien slipped to the floor in attempting to get away from Fitzsimmons' right. Fitzsimmons landed a light left to the wind and Jack countered with a left to the mouth. The men were clinched as the gong sounded. As the men walked to their corers O'Brien's
left eye had a nasty gash over it and Fitzsimmons' left eye was almost closed."

 

Okay on the Fitz-O'Brien 1904 match. I have no idea what really happened. Boxrec accepts one version, but there seems to be all kinds of other ones.

The Gardner fight, however, was an impressive win.

More to the point, the 1905 loss to O'Brien was six and one-half years after the first fight with Jeff (longer than the time from Jeff's fight with Munroe to the Johnson fight, or Ali's fight with Foreman to the Holmes fight). Fitz bounced back from his first loss to Jeffries with sensational ko's of the top two contenders, Ruhlin and Sharkey. He bounced back from the second Jeff loss with a 20 round win over Gardner. And he certainly looked good against Jeffries in 1902.

I just don't accept that Fitz is not an impressive scalp for Jeffries.

 

We just look at things differently. Moore in 1955 was coming off a great run and had just ko'd Harold Johnson, beaten Nino Valdes, and ko'd Bobo Olson.

Fitz in 1899 was coming off his ko of Corbett. Ahead were the ko's of Ruhlin and Sharkey.

Both old fighters were clever and skilled, and this, as much or more than physical prowess, is what kept them on top.

What is the evidence they had lost it?

Moore and Marciano actually raise an interesting question--one that is just as difficult to answer as what "prime" means in the real world. Swarmers historically age much more rapidly than old smarties like Moore. If you could take a few years off of both men's ages, would that have actually worked more to Marciano's advantage than Moore's? Smarts doesn't age nearly as much as strength and stamina.