A critical analysis of Jeffries vs Ruhlin

Exactly we keep rehashing the same stuff because every new defender has the same beliefs from the same sources the cult of Jeffries is strong the indoctrination was powerful. Forget he was a modern sized heavyweight the size of Liston fighting modern day sized rehydrated jrmiddleweights and Ltheavyweights he still stacks up with the modern .....forget that he is compared to Foreman and Liston in strength and power and Chuvalo in toughness.....forget the fact that Corbett was washed up and had been retired he was a worthy challenger....forget that Fitz was a middleweight and he too had been retired....forget that Ruhlin though near modern sized could not handle a middleweights power but was a worthy challenger to Jeffries.....God bless Sharkey a small man the size of a small Ltheavyweight rehydrated and could not handle the power of the same middleweight but fought Jeff chasing him around the ring for 45rds.

The story in which Jeffries told Johnson they would not draw flies is exactly that a story you cannot convince me in a million years that the white community especially in 1895-1905 would not have paid handsomely to watch the great white champion defeat the best black fighters around enforcing white supremacy.....just believing something that stupid tells me everything about how protective they are of him. I wonder why they chose to rematch two guys he had already beaten and had retired instead of Johnson hmmmmmm? The stories of the time about such crap are exactly that crap excuses to protect the great white champion and prop him up after all slavery had only been abolished 30-40yrs before and took a new form in share cropping.

 

Cherry picking is compulsory when evaluating Jeffries his fans will believe anything positive and discount anything negative. The story that he challenged Johnson to fight him in a cellar is supposed to show he wasn't frightened to fight him.Well if he wasn't ,why didnt he defend his title against him? On the train going home after his humiliation by JohnsonJuly 8th 1910 a reporter for," The Telegraph," asked him he could have beaten Johnson if he had been younger,he replied." I could never have beaten him in a thousand years,I could never have reached him".

Here is the quote.
https://news.google.com/newspapers?...,2444977&dq=jack+johnson+james+jeffries&hl=en

 

The is more hyperbolic balderdash written and posted about Jim Jeffries than just about any other early fighter.I once read a blood and thunder account of his fight with Henry Baker in which Jeffries overwhelms and routs the big and powerful Baker with thunderous blows. Baker was a fat 5'9" middleweight who scaled 175lbs to Jeffries 201lbs and they did weigh in! Baker is described as having rolls of fat hanging over his trunks , looking like he trained on beer, and being short winded almost as soon as the fight started.Despite this the fight went into the 9th rd and Baker got his licks in early,he was the more experienced man with 20 fights to Jeffries 4 but 3 of his last 4 had been defeats and the other a ND. Here is a ringside report of the fight supplied by Senya who has excellent info!
http://senya13.blogspot.co.uk/search/label/Jim Jeffries#uds-search-results.

Fan Boys like Mendoza will state with a straight face that 37 years old Peter Jackson,alcoholic,consumptive and not having fought for 3 years,[his previous fight was3 years prior to that!] had somehow regained his old form,[how could that be determined since he had fought no one ?] and was a suitable opponent for Jeffries ,despite Tom Sharkey, who drew the colour line and disliked blacks on principle saying,"I would be ashamed to fight him ,he is a physical wreck ",and Jeffries himself saying afterwards , "he was just a shell".
The same Mendoza will say Corbett and Fitz were prime for their fights with Jeffries ,despite the fact that they were aging and coming out of retirement.
He will then say Jeffries was just a hollow shell when he challenged Johnson,despite Jeffries being 36 ,just a couple of pounds over his prime weight, having been down to that weight for 9 months, and in training for over a year!
Fitzsimmons, in an effort to force Jeffries into a fight took on and ko'd both Ruhlin and Sharkey in the space of two weeks!
After the Sharkey fight, whilst still in the ring,Bob leaned over the top rope and pointed to Jeffries sitting ringside shouting to him ,"you'll give me a fight now won't you Jim?" " Get up and shake hands on it". Jeffries remained seated until the clamour from the crowd became such that he was forced to rise and shake Fitz's hand on a title defence.
Q.So Jeffries now defended against his number on challenger Fitz who had ko'd both the other leading challengers inside 2 weeks?

A.No ,his next defence was against moderate Joe Kennedy on 24th Sep 1901.

Q.So now , after that gimmee defence he defended against Fitz right?

A.Wrong! He now fought Ruhlin whom Fitz had already knocked out!Knocked out so badly he had to be dragged to his corner and put to bed in MSG with a doctor in attendance in case he died!
This was15th Nov 1901.

Q.But Jeffries did defend against Fitzsimmons?

A.Yes he did,on July 25th 1902,2 years after Fitz had ko'd Ruhlin and Sharkey and Fitz was nearly 40 years old!

Jeffries worshippers like Mendoza would be laughable if they weren't so blatantly dishonest!

 

That is the boxrec record. The cyberboxing is 27-10-3. Boxrec seems to think he began his career with a draw against Joe Choynski, who was one of the top fighters of the era. Rather good show for a first fight novice. But cyberboxing and also the old Ring Record Book list a number of extra fights before fighting Choynski as well as a great deal of experience in battle royals. I judge that more accurate. Off the Cyberboxing zone Armstrong was 20-4-2 going into the ring with Jeffries.

Armstrong beat several top men of the time like Frank Slavin and Denver Ed Martin over his career. He also was unable to handle little Frank Childs and lost to him several time. Matt Donnellen's after the fact ratings have him in the top ten four times. I'll go with his opinion. Armstrong was a decent contender who was a physically imposing fighter for the era.

"sparring partner"

As Jeffries was for Corbett. Martin for Ruhlin. Griffin for Fitz. Etc. Etc. Serving as a sparring partner was a way for a young guy, or black fighters, who were fighting for small purses, to make money. Go ahead and make a lot out of it. It doesn't mean a thing to me.

 

You are having a discussion with me, and all the crap about fighting modern heavyweights means nothing to me. My take is that a fighter should be judged by what he did in his own time against the men who were there in his own time.

As for the "slavery" stuff, let's stick to boxing. Yes, Jeff got stuck with the "great white hope" label and in fairness he earned his racist condemnation. He is certainly not among my favorite fighters. Like most, I much more admire smaller fighters who compete with and defeat larger ones. But, heavyweight boxing is not about morality or "fairness" and being a big man is just a fact of life.

 

I believe Armstrong was popularly supposed to be an excellent "gym fighter",who often failed to fight to his true ability in real conditions.
Denver Ed Martin was a sparring partner for both Fitz and Ruhlin, so impressive did he look against Gus that several reporters pondered how he might do in a real match.

 

Adam Pollack says they didn't actually have official weigh-ins for fights. Just because scales existed doesn't
mean they used them.

You keep mixing up two things. Being a great p4p fighter, which Jeff definitely wasn't. And being a great heavyweight in your own time, which he was.

"You like so many fans use quotes to bolster your arguments."

Myself probably less than anyone on this board. Frankly, I think quotes are hearsay and don't consider them good evidence generally. The Johnson quote came from a signed article so I have to assume it reflects his thinking at the time the article was published.

"Tunney was a lightheavy when he fought Greb"

That is one of the main points. Jeff would have been huge compared to Tunney. Say what you want, Tunney never beat anyone close to as big as Jeff but Jeff beat guys Tunney's size or bigger.

"We have beaten the above to death"

And you have never had a good answer to other ATG claimants having trouble with men basically as small (or even smaller) than Fitz, and I might add, who didn't have his record.

 

Tunney beat Tom Heeney 203.5lbs,that's probably his heaviest opponent. Who did Jeffries beat over 200lbs?

 

Just a couple of points which have been made but impress me as using any stick to beat this dog.

Jeff ducked Fitz in 1900 and 1901. Well, Adam Pollack writes that Jeff was not training and had an injured arm. The law legalizing boxing was due to expire in a couple of weeks. This was just a grandstand ploy by Fitz. Later, according to Adam, Jeff offered Fitz a title fight but Fitz said he was retired.

"Bill Brady, still hopeful that Fitzsimmons would agree to fight Jeff after all, and that he would give Bob until December 1 to accept Jeff's challenge. Brady declared that Jeff's arm was back in shape and well enough again to stand vigorous training. Fitzsimmons responded by saying that Jeff and his manager could not use him for advertising purposes. Bob still claimed to be retired."

In the Ring with James J Jeffries by Adam Pollack, page 450.

And Griffin drew with Jeff in 1901.

No it was an exhibition. Here is Pollack on this fight,

"Technically, it was not a bout to be fought on the merits, with an official decision rendered. Rather, it was essentially an exhibition in which Griffin would endeavor to last 4 rounds, and if he did so, he would be paid a bonus."

Pollack above, Page 467. Griffin got $100 for lasting 4 rounds, which he did, going down several times in each round. I don't agree with Mendoza or any other supporter of Jeff seeing this as a title defense. I also don't see this fight as anything to criticize Jeff for. Other old champions fought these kinds of exhibitions.

 

Who mentioned Griffin? Read Odd's book on Fitzsimmons then get back .Fitz said he would be ready to fight Jeffries a few weeks after the Sharkey fight! Knocking out the number one and number 2 contenders was a grandstand ploy?
Why would Fitz fight them both then refuse a title shot?
Fitz ko'd them both !Jeffries didnt stop Ruhlin he was retired by his manager and he never stopped Sharkey in either of their 2 fights whereas Fitz ko'd him both times! You don't put much stock in quotes? Is that unless they jive with your opinion?

 

Munroe at 215 according to boxrec. Ruhlin is listed at 200 lbs. Interestingly neither Heeney nor Munroe was 6' tall. Jeffries only beat one man who was 6' or taller and 200 lbs--Ruhlin (and possibly Kennedy who was 6' 2" and whose weight is not listed but who apparently did fight over 200 lbs. at times.) Tunney beat no one who was at least 6' tall and 200 lbs. I think Schmeling only fought three men or so over 200 lbs. with Foord at 208 the heaviest. The heavyweight division was much smaller in the old days.

 

Perhaps he looked better in the gym, but Armstrong's record isn't that bad, with KO's of Slavin, Martin, and Butler and a draw with Choynski. He was a decent contender.

I don't judge the sparring partner thing as proving anything. It was a way to make money.

 

Take it up with Adam Pollack. He has done a lot of research.

"Why would Fitz fight them both then refuse a title shot."

According to Pollack, these fighters could make more from a theatrical tour than they could from fights. Fitz might have had some doubts if he could beat Jeff (not unreasonable given the result in their first fight) and a loss may have hurt his drawing power on the circuit.

I have The Fighting Blacksmith and have read it.

"You don't put much stock in quotes? Is that unless they jive with your opinion."

Still don't. I admit I'm not above using the quotes that support me, just like everyone else seems to. For example, you just mentioned Gilbert Odd's biography of Fitz, but I don't think you have used this quote from Fitz on Jeffries--

"He's a cracker-jack and don't make any mistake. He'll be champion for a long time. And he's so tough and strong. . . As soon as I saw that big fellow sitting there facing me, I said to Martin, 'This looks like what we've heard about. We're up against it tonight. But just watch me go right in and win.' What a shock I got. The first time he really hit me in the body, I thought his fist had gone right through me. His crouching stance and the way he tossed that long left. Every time I hit him, he punched back even harder. His gloves were like lead. I was well beaten tonight by a man too big and strong for me and I have no complaints to make."

Gilbert Odd, The Fighting Blacksmith, page 163

"Who mentioned Griffin?"

Richdanhuff--said Griffin drew with Jeff in 1901. I am debating two different guys here, and also are being lumped with others whose views I don't share. Part of the board, but it does produce confusion.

"Knocking out two top contenders was a grandstand ploy?"

No, but challenging an injured fighter not in training to an immediate match in front of a crowd might be.

 

Oh Munroe, I thought we were talking about fighters of some ability! I'm sure Tunney beat some bigger guys when he was in the AEF .I was assuming we were looking for people of a little quality, not plump, hyped up nobody's.
Ruhlin was 199.5lbs for the Jeffries fight I believe, and he is the heaviest fighter of any quality Jeff beat. Not that it's important,Kennedy was overweight for the Jeffries fight as you know, having read Pollack's book on Jeffries.I'm not harping on Jeffries opponents it wasn't his fault they were older and smaller,I'm just responding to you naming Tunney as never fighting anyone near his weight,well Heeney was within 10lbs of it.Johnson,who many accuse of fighting small men had a weight average among his opponents clearly in excess of Jeffries foes.Johnson was often conceding weight too,Jeffries never did.The thing about Tunney and Schmeling was they were 10lbs under 200lbs themselves.

 

I have both books.

I'm not lumping you with anyone, I name the people I disagree with,and I certainly would not insult you by bracketing you with Mendoza.
Adam gives varying accounts if he can find them to provide balance and so as to cover all the bases.
I'm happy to have Fitz's quote on Jeffries mentioned, though I don't see how it relates to this immediate argument,Fitz came to have a high regard for Jeffries abilities that is well known.
If I was on an agenda trip I would have mentioned Fitz's conviction that he was drugged prior to the first Jeffries fight, that according to reports he was out drinking the night before and had to be carried home by William Muldoon.
I give the drinking story some credence since Muldoon corroborated it but throw out the talk of him being drugged ,I think he just grossly underestimated Jeffries,and paid the price or it.

ps Slavin was pretty well used up when Armstrong beat him, but I would agree Armstrong had ability,he just didn't always employ it.