Do you consider James J Jeffries an ATG?

Jackson was a walking derelict, consumptive and alcoholic .Jeffreis himself said after the fight ,"he was just a shell".

 

Johnson was around the same size as Choynski for their fight.

 

The answer would be yes bc for HIS time he was the best at one point...this should be really simple.Again you CANNOT detract from a fighters OWN time period if they played a significant part in boxing history.

 

Well than you might as well cancel out Spinks/Marciano and even Louis then.....your definition doesnt work and its unfair to other era fighters......might as well cancel out Frazier too bc i could list 50 guys to hand him an L.

i know your following the corso rule here but its AZZ backwards.

 

Johnson

Jeffries was cut in several fights.Hype Ioge ,Ketchel's co- manager and a top journalist was at the second Jeffries v Fitz fight he said that Jeffries took a bigger beating than Willard did against Dempsey. The descriptions of his injuries is easily found in Pollacks biography of Jeffries all taken from contemporary newspaper reports and also in Odd's bio of Fitzsimmons.About a year ago I posted the ringside reports ,they stated that Fitz hit him when and where he liked handling him like a novice.Fitz smashed his hands on Jeffries face , but he cut him above and below both eyes and broke his nose.Jeffries was a mess when Fitz, his hands useless dropped them and walked towards Jeffries,some swore they heard him say ,"hit me Jeff get it over," but the noise was so great nobody knows. Again this is easily found if anyone really wants to find the truth,of things ,which of course means you won't be looking for it!!!
.

 

Which of the two deserved the title shot the most? Fitz who had ko'd the top 2 leading contenders inside 2 weeks or Corbett who hadn't won a fight in 6 years and beat a middleweight in his comeback in what was widely considered a fake fight?

 

Adam Pollack's biography provides multiple ringside accounts of all of the fights.

I am not saying that Jeffries always comes out of this looking good, but you generally come away seeing that the fights were not exactly what you thought they were.

If he had won the fight then I would have given him some credit for the win.

I don't think that this is a very good analogy personally, because Johnson did not beat a significant contender after he lost the title.

I don't think the fact that Jeffries had fought Sharkey and Ruhlin previously is particularly relevant, because those fights were when both he and they were not yet world class.

Both Sharkey and Ruhlin were seen as the outstanding contender at some point, so Jeffries was probably always going to have to rematch them.

The obvious criticism of Jack Dempsey is that he did not fight Harry Wills or Harry Greb, who were arguably the two best contenders of his reign.

Jeffries probably did meet the best contender of his title reign, by rematching Bob Fitzsimmons after he wiped out the new generation.

Dempsey has more serious omissions on his resume, and over a longer period.

 

Adam Pollack devotes an entire chapter of his biography to the question of whether McCoy took a dive, and you come away thinking that either answer is perfectly plausible.

Jeffries obviously had to assume that the fight was legit in selecting his next opponent.

That is a debate for another day, and not particularly relevant here.

 

Fitzsimmons certainly.

 

Harry Wills began boxing in1907, 3 years before Johnson fought Jeffries, that so called quote is absolute rubbish!

 

Did Choynski,Sharkey, Fitzsimmons,Corbett, or Johnson ever have serious issues in fights because of cuts? They were using the same equipment were they not?