Do you consider James J Jeffries an ATG?

LOL.

 

We generally don't copy the sources directly from the book, because it would be too time consuming, and everybody with a more than passing interest in Jeffries career has read it.

We would normally only copy the source directly, if a minor point of detail was questioned.

 

The Griffin bout was a 4 round exhibition with Jeffries undertaking to stop Griffin or forfeit an extra $100,which because of Griffin's stalling tactics he had to do.
"Clearly though this was just a money-making tune- up exhibition bout designed to get Jeff some work and additional money which it did.Griffin got some unofficial accolades by merely surviving but there was no decision on the merits".Adam Pollack "Jim Jeffries ",page470.

 

Somewhat beside the point of whether this fight was competitive or not.

Also, a writer could write something like "Peralta made Foreman look like a lumbering amateur," which I would accept as a reasonable comment, with Foreman still in my opinion winning the fight. Peralta "sometimes" did make Foreman look amateurish, but not often enough to win.

The bottom line is no matter how "lumbering" or "amateurish" Jeffries was, off this paper's own scoring he was in a position to win the fight on points.

 

First, thanks for printing this. Always interested in more info.

But this is from the San Francisco Call, and off the comment the punch stats are from the New York Herald. I think it reasonable to assume that this writer had not even seen the fight on the other side of the continent when it would have taken several days to get across country. He drew a conclusion from the punch stats, as you are doing.

The problem is no one questions that Corbett landed a lot more punches, off this tally about 3 to 1. But many papers commented on his punches being light and often ineffective, while Jeff was landing power punches.

Do 10 fancy but pitty-pat jabs outweigh one or two brutal body blows which sap a man's strength? This is subjective. So punch stats to me don't overrule round by round scoring of a fight which unfortunately we can't watch on film to judge for ourselves.

 

There was a thread on this fight back in 2014 (which I bumped yesterday) in which Adam Pollack made this comment--from June 25, 2014--

"I think I offer something like eight different New York sources in describing this bout and the perspectives on a likely decision at various points or had it gone the distance. The fact is, there was no score to this bout because it ended on a knockout. It didn't go the distance. Even if it had, and Corbett rose in the 23rd round to continue, there is no telling how much damage Jeffries would have done the rest of the way. Jeffries was expert at pacing himself such that he could come on strong as the bout progressed. That served him well with the Sharkey decision, and likely would have done so here, given that Corbett was tired and hurt late in the fight. Back then, the damage inflicted and how one finished a fight counted more than how many rounds one had won."


*I think the clear implication is that Adam thinks Jeff would likely have kept his title if Corbett had lasted until the final bell. And he certainly has researched how scoring went in that era.

 

You have no proof of bias from any newspaper. You are just assuming that to prop up your argument. How do you know that the Herald writer who did the punch stats wasn't biased against Jeffries?

Your position rests on contending all punches are equal.

I will ask you a question. Fighter A lands 30 of 30 flicking jabs through a round. Fighter B misses every punch except one near the end of the round which drops fighter A for a nine count. Fighter A barely beats the count and seems helpless but is saved by the bell before B can unload any more punches. Whom do you score the round for? The guy who landed 30 punches? Or the guy who landed 1?

Even if there was no knockdown, but the one big punch clearly badly hurt the other guy. how do you score it? Is volume all that matters? How many light jabs outweigh a brutal punch?

*One other point. The punch stats are simply the opinion of the Herald writer. We have no idea how good he was at doing this sort of thing. For me, it can't overrule everyone else's opinion as if it is incontrovertible scientific fact.

 

Kind of like how you just made MDW look although in fairness it was to that hard..

 

In the pro game today a knockdown as described would give the fighter scoring it the round. Based upon what I have read about boxing in Jeffries time it would also hold true.

Many writers have discussed the Jeffries Corbett bout over the decades. All that I have read were in agreement that Corbett was nicely ahead at fights end. This of course is no knock against Jeffries. A bout with a great boxer like Corbett in a 24 foot ring would be tough going for any slugger like Jeffries.

 

Just a bit of an aside. The critiques of Jeffries on this thread are for the most part not something unspoken in Jeff's day.

Here is Tad Dorgan on July 1, 1910, on Johnson's supporters' opinion of Jeffries.

"Jeffries never was a boxer, never had a fight he wasn't used up in, and as far as meeting a man like Johnson goes, he never dreamed of it. Why, he never beat a young fellow in his life. He made his reputation off old men like Fitzsimmons, Corbett, Jackson, and the like. They were all in when he got them. Young fellows like Sharkey and Choynski, although they were half a foot shy in height and fifty pounds lighter, went the distance with him."

*Could be one of McVey's posts.

 

So you have 30 light jabs cancelling out a knockdown and near knockout. We disagree on how to score a fight.

On punch stats, I recommend Briggs Seekins article on the internet from June 3, 2013. Points he makes which I think are relevant--

1----"punch totals are the most overrated statistics in the sport."

2----"Any time there is a debate who is representing the fighter with the better punch total numbers will always throw out the punch stats as some sort of ultimate proof that their guy deserved the nod."

3----"The quality of punches is far more important than the overall number thrown and landed."

4----"I regard power shots landed as a slightly more valuable statistic then overall punches landed. This stat separates out jabs and focuses exclusively upon the punches that comprise the majority of significant scoring punches."

5----". . . for most fighters, the jab functions much more as a defensive weapon. It is used to judge and control distance. It's a momentary blinding device or slight sting to slow the charging bear down, while stepping farther out of range, or else circling into position to punish with the power hand."

6----"I find it important to note that all of these statistics are only useful to the degree that the technicians recording them ringside are truly accurate about recording them. It's not an easy job, and I have definitely seen fights where I think the technicians have been way off."

This is a long article, but those are the relevant points. #2 if the shoe fits. #5 seems to be an almost an exact description of what Corbett was trying to do. The "bear" reference is in a general article which has nothing to do with Jeffries. #6 points to another problem here. This Tribune fellow would only have been on one side of the ring. How well did he see punches when one man had his back to him? How well did he see in-close body punches? It is evidence of something, but w/o knowing more I think it remains clouded how accurate he was.
Point #3 is the bottom line for me.

"Controlling the fight"

If a boxer runs, the other guy generally has to chase. But is that controlling things? If when younger I met a bear in the woods, I would have run. The bear would have had to either let me go or chase me. If he chased me, would that mean I was controlling the bear?

 

Many multiple light punches vs fewer harder blows is always ripe for a debate.

HOWEVER in terms of pro boxing a hard blow that causes a knockdown is telling and would win that round for the fighter scoring the knockdown. (as compared with the opponent who only scored more light blows). In amateur boxing it's usually a different story with a punch that scores a knockdown only considered as a single scoring blow and nothing more.