Ten rounds of Jeffries vs Johnson as scored by the life and battles of Jack Johnson

Much of what you wrote it true. The surviving footage at least in the early rounds are close but some here will never consider that.

 

While Jeffries is clearly losing, it's not the slaughter some make it out it be. It's not Holmes vs Ali, or Willard vs Dempsey. It's more of a slow burn drubbing. An air of inevitability sets in as Jeffries gamely tries to make a go of it. I would say it possesses some similarities to Tyson vs Lewis. A shot fighter vs a cautious yet dominant champion.

 

I hear what your saying. I didn't give Tyson one round vs Lewis. Tyson was gassed and relegated to a punching bag that was not taking the risks he needed to win rounds before he was taken out.

Jeffries at least won 2 rounds, and had several close ones up to the 10th round. If you add in Johnson's safety first type of nature, and a lot of clinching with few blows landed, you have close match. The filmed rounds back this up, but no one here besides me is commenting on the early footage of rounds 1-10. Therefore it was competitive and after ten rounds could have been ruled a draw under the rules of the times.

Jeffries vs Johnson was more competitive than Ali vs Holmes ( Ali didn't win 1 minute in any round ), or Tyson vs Lewis. Jeffries had not fought in 6 years, and had to lose at least 70 pounds for the match.

 

Johnson was in total command of the fight. I don't see any evidence that he was ever troubled. This fight is by no means indicative of Jeffries abilities. Strictly as a sporting competition it's utterly meaningless unless Jeffries had won. It was an all risk no reward bout for Johnson. Gauging Jeffries abilities in this fight would be like measuring Sugar Ray Leonard off his Camacho bout after his own six year layoff.

 

Bob Fitzsimmons, writing for the San Francisco Call the day after the fight said, if Johnson had gone all out Jeffries would not have lasted 4 rounds.

How the fight went and the final result is not indicative of Jeffries abilities when prime, it simply shows that Johnson thrashed the Jeffries that was in front of him on July 4th 1910

Attempts to rewrite the facts by a phobic, agenda driven Johnson hater fall on stoney ground.

 

Dempsey fought much more competitvely against Tunney in both fights. Struggle as I can I see Jeffries do nothing but clinch.

 

I agree. Dempsey was dominated but at least he was trying. Jeffries looked like an ineffective mummy against Johnson. He looked tentative and unable to pull the trigger.

 

Recently discovered were the lost rounds of Johnson-Jeffries where Big Jim thrashed Jack to within an inch of his life.

You can find them in this fine film…

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=302YMeiDSrI

 

In regards to any assertion that Jim Jeffries had an edge or held his own during the first ten rounds in the bout with Jack Johnson, what is the big deal? According to the ring records of Johnson and Jeffries on the BoxRec website, the bout was scheduled for 45 rounds. After allegedly doing well during the first ten rounds, Jeffries was rendered virtually helpless and saved by his corner from further punishment during the 15th round, so he lasted only about 1/3 of the scheduled distance.

- Chuck Johnston

 

The big deal is a habitual liar is trying to spin this into an even contest which after ten rounds could reasonably have been called a draw.
That is not the case and he knows it.

Jeffries right eye began to close during the second round.

This content is protected

 

Did he? I read Dempsey won 1 of 19 rounds in both fights, and had the fight been longer than 10 would have likely knocked Dempsey out. Dempsey was also younger than Jeffries and in better non fighting shape.

Tunney had more skills than Johnson.

 

Any respected boxing writer put Tunney above Johnson?

 

Dolt,

Your the one who says Johnson would have beaten Willard had it been 20-25 rounds. If I really wanted to prop Jeffries up, I'd have a higher respect for Johnson as a fighter.

Johnson's still the same guy who got capped by a super middle, lost what was a big elimination match to Hart, won his title from a super middle, was out boxed by a super middle in a title match according to some primary sources, and drew with a journeyman before facing real competition as champion and losing.

I was just pointing out that this fight was much closer than one thinks from rounds 1-10.

If I put a quote here from Johnson that said Jeffries was tough to take out, it wouldn't budge your bigoted face one inch, yet he said it.

 

What I said was the referee Jack Welch stated that,had the fight been over 20rds he would have had no hesitation in making Johnson the winner this is well documented unlike the bull**** you continually try and foist on this forum. Johnson was a super middle himself when he lost to Choynski and Pollack agrees with this.

This is the same Choynski who conceded 52 pounds to Jeffries to earn a draw .

The match with Hart was no elimination match because Jeffries stated that in the event of Johnson winning he would retire rather than fight him ,and the quote is in at least 8 contemporary papers.
Johnson was not out boxed by O Brien the fight was a no decision and you wouldn't know a primary source if it jumped up and bit your lying tongue out.

Make the most of the next few weeks because Adam's second volume on Johnson will hit the shops and then we can have done with your ret**ded lying s**t.

NB
After the Jeffries fight Johnson spoke with Tommy Burns, he said Jeffries was a lot easier than you were.How do you feel about that?

Once a LIAR always a LIAR