Do you consider James J Jeffries an ATG?

Mendoza I am the one who stays on topic pointing that those you listed fought against men there own size for the most part...... Try to keep up and quit dancing around it.

I take pride in thinking for myself especially when the evidence does not support the claim. I can watch for myself and apparently unlike you and Perry can look at data and no Fleischer's opinion is not data,.... objectively enough and have courage to question the credibility of information that cannot be examined. I will not accept something as subjective as a boxers greatness by simply allowing someone who makes claims of fighters that have not been replicated since tell me to believe them. It doesn't pass the common sense test.

 

You do realize that even "if" Nat saw Jeffries in 1899, he would've been 12. Hardly what I'd call his peak intellectual period to digest what he was watching. Even being in his teens for the rest of Jeffries fights... Not the best evidence.

 

Issue is you would have had to be very progressive to not have prejudice viewpoints concerning the black race in 1900-1905. Were their progressives at that time? Of course. It was however a very minority mindset. The overriding thought was to never give a black man the chance to win the worlds hwt championship. Why? Being worlds hwt champion indicates you are the physical master of all men. The white culture was deathly afraid of this occurrence. They would do anything they could to prevent this from occurring....thus the color line. An American cultural phenomenon.

 

Fleischer had first hand knowledge of these fighters. This first hand knowledge trumps anything you can find, looking at records, in a vacuum completely ignorant of the vast history that surrounded these fighters at the time they fought.

 

No it doesn't the data does not fit and funny enough evidence of his greatness seems to have dissappeared so no one can look and challenge it. What we do have is a big man who could not dominate retired middleweights and ltheavvyweights. It's OK to be afraid but use your OWN brain and tell me happened to these ultra super little men who beat up on poor simple Jeffries until caught where has this super race of men gone?

 

Why has there been only one comparable example...... Is it the Irish DNA what happened are they aliens. Sorry Perry it's idiots like you and Mendoza that should worry posters and thank god people who think like you dingleberries don't match fighters for entertainment.

A modern day heavyweight who best up middleweights and ltheavvyweights an ATG lo lo lol today that may be considered unsportsmanlike considering the results everytime a match like this happens and the fact that no fighter moves in weight unless they put on size to do so. I would say matchmaker so and trainers know more than you two.

 

Rich....you are the idiot.

Huge rings and fast canvas are two huge reasons smaller fighters did so well in those days. Also add that Corbett and Fitzsimmons were ATG elite fighters. Get into a big ring with a smaller quick opponent one day and you will see how difficult it is to catch them.

 

He fought Johnson in1910,6 years later and he only fought him to attemprt to bring the title back to the White Race.
He wouldn't go near him whilst he was champion.
Jeffries beat Fitz for his title in1899 and gave him a rematch 3 years later whenFitz was nearly 40 years old, meanwhile defending against no hopers like Finnegan and men that Fitz had already ko'd like Corbett,Sharkey, and Ruhlin.

 

Fitz was 37 and 39,Corbett 33 and 36, I'd imagine some of their quickness had eroded wouldn't you?
How elite is a fighter coming out of 3 years retirement,a fighter who has not won a fight in 6 years!

 

The latest Ring Magazine list compiled in May of this year had 30 panellists.
Trainers.
Teddy Atlas
Pat Burns
Virgil Hunter
DonTurner

Matchmakers.
Eric Bottjer
Don Chargin
Bobby Goodman
Ron Katz
Mike Marchionte
Russell Peltz
Bruce Trampler
Media.
Al Bernstein
Ron Borges
Gareth Davies
Norm Frauenheim
Jerry Izenberg
Harold Lederman
Paulie Malinaggi
Dan Rafael
Michael Rosenthal
Historians.
Craig Hamilton
Steve Lott
Don McRae
Bob Mee
Clay Moyle
Adam Pollack
Randy Roberts

Fighters Lennox Lewis and Mike Tyson also participated

They were asked to pick their top 20 champion heavyweights of all time.

Jim Jeffries ended up at number 15 ,none placed him in their top ten,the highest he was placed, by one individual was number 11,the only other votes he received placed him at 14,1vote ,and 19 ,2 votes.

 

If Golovkin and Ward had beaten the three best cruiserweights in the world in the space of a month, I would say without hesitation that they were the contenders that his legacy depended upon him beating.

 

Again you have already shown everyone you apparently never boxed because as a fighter it is routine to spare with a smaller fighter for speed work. Fighters have done this for quite awhile you learn to cut off the ring lo lo lol get into a real ring so you can quit making an ass out of yourself. You don't even know what a fast ring is or a punchers ring or a punchers glove..... Lol idiot

 

I think that the same criticism can be levelled at most all-time greats to be honest.

Why did it take so long for Joe Louis to rematch Max Schmeling?

Why did it take so long for Mayweather and Pacquiao to come to terms?

You get this kind of horse trading around big fights in every era.

 

I have never been sold on the Bob Foster argument.

Foster is a classic example of a great light heavyweight, who did not translate into a top heavyweight.

He didn’t just lose to the great heavyweights, he also lost to the pretty good ones.

Somebody like Ezzard Charles or Michael Spinks would almost certainly have done better in the same position, while not necessarily being a greater light heavyweight.

If a light heavyweight legitimately establishes themself as the leading contender at heavyweight, then they should absolutely be regarded as being the best heavyweight around.