Do you consider James J Jeffries an ATG?

"Dempsey beat the best competition of his time except Wills and Greb."

and Tunney.

 

ATG for his time, and as a champion maybe (Color being drawn makes it murky) but H2H ATG, not a chance.

 

"Fitz was past prime"

So. That isn't the issue. The issue is does he raise the bar in his era to becoming champion.

Let's take Robinson. In 1950 he stopped Bobo Olson in 12. In 1952 he beat Olson in a close 15 round decision. Robinson then retired and Olson won out as the champion and defended several times. When Robinson returned in 1955, he stopped Olson in 2, and then in 4 in 1956. Robinson was 29 in 1950, and 31 in 1952, prime or close to prime. 34 & 35 in 1955 and 1956, but he defeated Olson more decisively. For me the real issue here is that the division was improved and the champion improved with Robinson however much you consider him past prime.

And Norton and Frazier had been knocked out by Foreman.

What was controversial about Jeffries KO'ing Fitz. It was a one-sided fight. So by that logic Jeff didn't need a second fight with Fitz at all.

I don't see what when Foreman began his career has to do with whether he was a contender who should have gotten a title shot in 1975 or 1976.

And if Foreman didn't deserve a shot because he lost badly to Ali, then Fitz didn't deserve a shot after losing badly to Jeff.

 

Ok head-to-head I wouldn't put Jeffries high on a list.
But then maybe if he was put in another era he'd have the stuff to raise his game to compete at a top level.

Either way, his accomplishments and standing in his era and beyond elevate him to all-time great.

 

Low guard DOES NOT mean said fighter was easy to hit. The greatest defensive fighters ever fought with low guard. Loughran, Tunney, B Leonard. The list is endless.

 

Odd you listed guys who generally AREN'T listed as the top 3, or even in the top 10 of defensive fighters of all time, yet you use the phrase "The Greatest defensive fighters ever fought with a low guard". Some fighters who are generally considered on that "list" don't fight with a low guard.

Perry, please don't try and convince us that Jeffries was anything other than poor on the defensive side of things. I've given him credit where credit is due. I'm labeled his strength, power, stamina and chin to be very good. Defense, not a chance in hell, people had no issue finding Jeffries, his chin was just great.

 

I think Benny Leonard would probably be listed in the top 10 defensive boxers of all time. Wouldn't he ?

 

I don't think that we can blame Jeffries entirely for the Fitzsimmons rematch being delayed.

Fitzsimmons seems to have been quite obstructive in some ways, possibly hoping to get more favourable terms.

 

The difference is that Wills and Greb were top contenders for all of Jack Dempsey's title reign, while Johnson was only a top contender for a narrow timeframe during Jeffries title reign.

 

He certainly could be, but I'd venture to say he'd be near the bottom of any top 10 if there. The other two, I certainly wouldn't put there.

 

Great post.

My take on it is those who wrote in 1906 that Jeffries was a great had very little precedent upon which to base the opinion insofar as MdQ boxing. It is almost certain that, as generations go by, that he would fall some pegs in the ranking.

Still, he was something of a vile racist, even for his time... and I am not one to cast that term lightly or across eras.

 

But, honestly, who cares? H2h is fun to discuss but in the end it's all hypothetical, it's all speculation. We'll never know if Ali would outbox Marciano or if Rocky will do what Smokin' Joe did. Fun to talk about and a good way to learn something new but judging the greatness of fighters on hypothetical matchups and speculative records against fighters from other eras to me is just silly and makes no sense.

Guess that's just different perspective on things.