Do you consider James J Jeffries an ATG?

Why can't Gibbons out box Jeffries?

I just think Jeff goes to the body and I don't see Gibbons having an answer. He just isn't big enough and doesn't punch hard enough to keep Jeff off. As with all fantasy fights, this is just an opinion.

Sugar Ray Robinson stopped Fullmer with one punch just before fighting Basilio. Fullmer never seemed in the same class as Robinson as a puncher, yet did stop Basilio twice. Stamina and strength in the clinches counted, I guess, and they would also count in a Jeffries-Gibbons fight, as well as sheer weight. I think wrestling with Jeff would have worn Gibbons out before fifteen rounds.

 

Just on Finnegan. An unworthy challenger, although I thought this was one of those fights which at first was supposed to be an exhibition, but Jeff was forced into making it a defense. Whatever, though, Finnegan went out in 55 seconds, which is about all Jeff could be expected to do.

 

"Fitz nearly stopped Jeffries in their second fight"

Actually, he caused a lot of facial damage. I don't think Jeff was ever off his feet or in trouble so much that he was in danger of being knocked out. Who knows about injuries like that. Charles did a lot better against Marciano in their first fight, but the severe facial damage was in the second fight which Marciano won much more easily.

Off your consideration of Fitz's prime, he KO'd Maher, Corbett, Dunkhorst, Sharkey, and Ruhlin, and beat Gardner and O'Brien, post-prime. That is the main part of his resume.

 

Agenda rubbish!

Judge for yourself.

I see an athletic man with quick feet and reflexes with tremendous strength and skills on offense and defense. His brother was a professional fighter.

There is also rare video of Jeffries hitting a heavy bag. Jeffries had on 300 pounds full of sand for him. He moves the bag like Sonny Liston. I wish I could post it here jaws would drop.

PS: Jeffries wasn't rushing after Ruhlin. He did not need to! He was patiently stalking Rhulin a 6'2" 200 pound man with a 78" reach who was on the run. Even you said he cuts off the ring well.

The round show is either 2 or 5, and Ruhlin was floored in both. I think it's round two as one frame flashes to the ending.

This content is protected

 

For 4 of those years Fitz was retired.

 

"Harry Greb . . . was known to take out bigger men."

And Fitz wasn't? Or Choynski, who knocked out Jack Johnson?

How many rounds of Corbett fighting do you have to draw this punch conclusion? And how does the great number of rounds Corbett's fights were scheduled for impact the pace of the fight or punches thrown?

Fitz beat world champions in 1897, 1903, and 1904. I think by definition they were world class. As far as world champions go, how good really were Willard, Jack Sharkey, Levinsky, and Carpentier? compared to the best champions.

On Lausse and Robinson--so is your argument that Lausse really was better than the mid-1950's Robinson who was the champion? Yes, the fights were for the most part in the 1950's.

 

Agreed. Well thought out.

 

Mr. Dago needs more information, but I think he's learning.

 

"Greb was 27 years old dude. Fitz was 39."

Which I take it you assume means Greb would beat Fitz. As I pointed out, Fitz from 1890 to 1905 only lost legitimately to Jeffries, a heavyweight champion. Can the same be said for Greb over such a long period of time?

Also, Fitz was 36 for the first Jeffries fight and was knocked out in that one also.

I think it relevant to compare Jeff's record to Dempsey's, if you consider Dempsey an atg. I mean the issue is how did Jeff do compared to other atg claimants.

On Tunney and Greb and Fitz--the comparison isn't good, because Tunney lost badly one time to Greb and seems to have fought him on even terms overall. Jeffries knocked out Fitz twice.

 

Where are the photos of these cuts? I'd like to judge for myself. Boxing History sometimes has a way of exaggerating things Mr.Dagowop

Back in the day, they used 4-6 ounce horse hair gloves, which often split and became marked with is a reason why the cuts were created. There was no vaseline to prevent cut, no softer/smoother modern gloves, not paste like stuff to stop the bleed or swell. Heck, they did not even use mouth guards which help absorb the blows.

So don't assume a fighter from 1890-1910 who had a bad cut would have issues in a modern format for the reasons I explained above.

To show you how much the game changed, Harry Wills said he'd never even considered fighting with the gloves and equipment the old timers used.

Regardless of how bad the cut was, Jeffries proved he could quickly overcome adversity and end it.

 

"Ed Dunkhorst was a bum."

Well, okay, but kind of harsh. Hard to see a claim that anyone did better against Ed than Fitz when the big guy had to be carried to his corner by about a half dozen seconds.

What I am saying about the second Fitz-Jeff fight is that facial damage doesn't automatically prove the one-sidedness of a fight. Just a few punches can break a nose and split open skin. Brutal body punches might not show this sort of obvious damage, but finish a fighter better.