Do you consider James J Jeffries an ATG?

Munro was the only white contender with any kind of momentum behind him, as far as I can tell.

It was basically Munro or Johnson, and he chose Munro.

As for the Jackson fight, it was by no means certain who was being thrown to the wolves, given Jeffries inexperience at the time.

 

How many fighters than Denver Ed Martin or Sam McVea did Jeffries beat in title defenses?

 

If these old white dudes were motivated by racism, then there were a myriad of other white champions that they could have backed.

Jack Dempsey being the most obvious choice, and probably easier to sell to the public at the time.

 

Jeffries really was a progressive in terms of fighting black fighters. Twenty so percent of his total bouts were against black men. Jeffries had no issue fighting any man regardless of color. It was only for the worlds hwt championship where AMERICA CULTURE drew the color line where Jeffries could not cross.

 

Better?

Quite a few I would say.

Martin was very highly regarded at the time, and some even picked him to beat Jeffries, but it is hard to overlook the fact that he kept losing to Jeffries sparring partner.

McVea was a highly touted contender, but he was still very inexperienced.

Johnson is the only unpardonable omission in my eyes, and even he lost to Marvin Hart before Jeffries retired!

 

Last time I checked Jack Johnson was black.

 

This content is protected

 

Last time I checked Johnson held the title and Jeffries, spurred on by fellow racist pieces of sh*t like Jack London, was out to redeem the white race.

 

Issues are that cultural racism had nothing to do with Jim Jeffries. You stated that only whitey were calling Jeffries great however Jack Johnson was certainly black and called Jeffries the best of the best. Langford also black also rated Jeffries highly.

 

He only consistently lost to McVea and Johnson in his prime.

The bout was a set-up in which Johnson could not get a title shot. I agree that Johnson should have put the pedal to the metal in this one and did not do so. But by any other measure it appears he defeated Hart. Regardless, it could be argued that with multiple victories over McVea, Ferguson, Martin, Childs and Griffin that he had the best resume around.

 

Rich he did not fight them primarily because racist white America did not want any black man given the chance to win the worlds hwt championship. If it would have happened that black man could then claim physical superiority over all white men. Huge CULTURAL phycological issues surround this potential occurrence.

 

Then the obvious question is how much did those fights potentially matter?

Martin would have been a Gus Ruhlin level win. I would have used it as an argument in Jeffries favour, but it is the kind of contender that an ATG can afford to slip.

McVey was highly regarded, but inexperienced. After Johnson beat him three times, there wasn’t any very compelling reason for Jeffries to fight him.

Johnson was a standout contender, and this is a damaging omission, in my humble opinion.

Langford was nobody at the time, so no case to answer.

 

If you are consistently losing to two people, then you are not a standout contender.

Where is your outrage on behalf of Hart?

He beat this extremely dominant contender, and he never got his title shot, until after Jeffries retired!

 

This content is protected

 

But it doesn't make you worse than collection of old men and nobodies that Jeffiries defended against. That is the question.

Hart made a middling success as a lightheavy getting beaten by Gardner (who Johnson handled emphatically) and others. He was in the line of a Sharkey, and would have made an entertaining fight against Jim but did not possess the attributes or style to make a winning fight. Still, you are right. He was up there with McVea as a guy who should have been in consideration. But the cult of Jeffries wass something rather astonishing at that time.