Prime Jim Jeffries vs prime Mike Tyson

This pretty much refutes your contention that Johnson was given little chance against Jeffries ,reporters said it would be a battle for the ages!

November 29, 1903: The Los Angeles Times calls on Jeffries to take on Jack Johnson, writing:
Jack Johnson is now the logical opponent for Champion Jeffries .... The color line gag does not go now. Johnson has met all comers in his class; has defeated each and every one. Now he stands ready to box for the world's championship .... When they meet the world will see a battle before which the gladiatorial combats of ancient Rome pale into childish insignificance. And meet they some day will. It is up to Jeffries to say when."



"Johnson kod McVey with one right hand in the last thirty seconds of the fight sending him into dream land .When McVey woke up he asked his second ,"was it a draw? "yes,"was the reply, " and they robbed us."
The Police Gazette wrote.
" By beating Sam McVey again the other night Jack Johnson ,the dusky hero of a score of fights, has placed himself in a position to legitimately claim a fight with Jim Jeffries.There does not appear to be a ringman in all the wide area where pugilism holds sway ,with sufficient inches and heft to meet the world's champion ,other than Johnson."
This view was endorsed by The Milwaukee Free Press.
Which .called for a" piebald match for the world's greatest pugilistic prize" .

Jeffries ignored their clamour.
George Siler the great referee, and Sports Editor of the Chicago Tribune said of Johnson.
"He is the finest looking heavyweight since Jeffries came into the picture.
The Boilermaker undoubtedly knows his business, when he draws the colour line. He probably has Jack Johnson in mind".

 

A lot of people were very excited about the prospect of the fight.

A lot of people were very pointed in their criticism of Jeffries for obstructing the fight.

Very few seem to have thought that Johnson could win though.

In 1904 Jeffries had two options, option A and option B.

Option A was to fight the best qualified white contender which was Munro.

Option B was to fight the best qualified contender regardless of color, which was Johnson.

When the Munro fight failed to generate significant interest, Jeffries knew in his heart that Johnson was the only viable opponent left for him.

After Johnson lost to Hart, there arguably wasn't a viable opponent including Johnson.

In that sense Jeffries was a victim of his own success.

 

In 1904 ,when Jeffries fought Munroe the best qualified white challenger was Bob Fitzsimmons there isn't a shred of doubt about that!
Jim Jeffries was the White Heavyweight Champion of the World thats it ,imo.

 

He had already beaten Fitzsimmons twice, so I don't think that there was any need for him to do it again.

So Munro emerged as the most credible white challenger, and after he had beaten Munro, it was basically Johnson or bust.

I couldn't disagree more.

I don't think that there was any black contender that Jeffries needed to meet as champion, apart from Jack Johnson.

The fact that Johnson emerged relatively late in Jeffries title reign, makes it just another case of a champion failing to meet a challenger that he should have met.

 

You said best qualified white challenger ,and that was Fitzsimmons.

 

That's all it takes to win the White Heavyweight Championship of the World.

 

I don't know Seamus? Tyson was the master of gettin' in to the inside. Then being one of the best knockout punchers of all time with so many different, extremely quick and powerful shots. Pre-Cus D'Amato , I'll take Tyson. Post Cus D'Amato, I would take Jefferies

 

However wrong it was of Jeffries to refuse to fight Johnson, it was just one contender, who was the standout challenger for the last eighteen months of his title reign.

This is not a serious enough omission to invalidate his entire title reign.

 

You should be pleased that he fought a young 200lb contender, instead of beating up a poor old inactive man again.

 

So, we should disregard the systematic use of black fighters as cannon fodder, battle royale contestants and general tools... and the fact that their opportunities were more limited than their white counterparts? Or do we just deny this altogether?

 

No, indeed I have long been a proponent of this argument.

I also think that boxing was well ahead of most sports, in terms of the opportunities that it offered to black athletes.

You had black champions like Joe Gans, and Barbados Joe Walcott, and black heavyweight contenders made enormous sums of money.

Some people are taking the argument too far the other way these days, and dismissing the accomplishments of the top white fighters.

 

I don't consider Munroe a contender.I consider him a hyped nobody.

"As the ex-miner offered no real threat to Johnson, the Galveston heavyweight merely boxed with him from the third round on, making no serious attempt to put Munroe away but beating him badly. "

"...Jack Johnson, the California colored heavyweight, made a veritable punching bag of Jack Munroe, the Butte Miner, at the National Athletic Club last night..."

 

He could have fought Sam McVey in the last 2 years of his reign, he was a credible challenger.

 

Exactly.

He was a credible challenger, but not an outstanding one.

It was within Jeffries discretion as champion to refuse.

 

Munro was a carefully managed fighter for sure, and this becomes more apparent with the benefit of hindsight.

The media seems to have latched onto him as the person who might give Jeffries a bit of a fight however.

That makes him a contender.