Jack Johnson Interviewed About The Jeffries Fight.

And you've expose your bias once again

 

Do you have the film? Did you read what Johnson said? What I said is correct.

Jeffries beat Fitz pretty easily in the first fight and would have take the decision if it was 10 rounds. Maybe Jeffries Ko's Fitz if it was only 10 as he was pretty much done for in the 10th, in a 20 round match.

The second Jeff vs Fitz fight was over before 10 rounds, so how they heck would have Jeffries been soundly beaten? You really do not know what you're talking about Webbiano. Don't let your rooting interest format your opinion over facts.

Corbett was losing badly in the 2nd fight. In the first fight, if it was 10 rounds, Jeffries fights it s a different pace. You just can't cut more than 50% of the fight out and predict a result.

You do not know what you are talking about. I corrected you several times without even trying.

Go back to school, 1 year on the general forum with research on boxing pre 1980 No worries, I won't be on the look out to correct you often...unless you'r asking for it.

As for your bias, that's very easy to see. Being biased and mistaken, that is a pretty bad combination. I suggest you work on both.

 

Then please extend the same courtesy to Joe Louis, when his first fight with Billy Conn is discusesed!

 

A 1 round difference? I call it like it happened, Conn in the lead, rocks Louis in the 12th, foolishly moves in for a finish in the 13th and losses. Conn under 170 pounds for this fight, and he wasn't close to a puncher either.

 

Would Conn have won if it had been a twelve round fight?

Yes, no, or I honestly don't know?

 

List the rounds you have filmed, please. We can watch them and score them. My guess is you back out of this!

Initially, you denied Delaney was in the corner until I corrected you, remember? Strike one...

I showed you other newspapers gave Jeffries the 9th. As usually, you doubted this too, remember? Strike two... Johnson backs that up if you read what he says about round 9.

Johnson own words say he was cautious with reasons, and the film shows he's right. Old Jeff had no gas left, Johnson is correct. What Fitz thinks does not matter, Johnson was always a safety first type until his man was weakened, or much smaller on film.

Your problem is you take quotes and use the best one to suit your case without watching the films, doing research or even understanding what you are watching. Buffoonery at its best, noone does a better job here of acting like he knows what he's talking about. In reality, you're the Dunning-Krueger of this board.

Also stop lying, I never said that about Nelso Mandela and you know it.

 

Yes, Louis was trying his best and behind. If it was 12 rounds Conn wins it. I think the majority would see it that way here, including the biggest Louis fans. And the press would correctly say he not only out boxed Louis, but Rocked him and took the title in style in the 12th.

But was we know this was 15 rounds, and Conn fought stupidly. He even says so.

 

OK so Jeffries would have adjusted his game plan to a shorter distance, but Louis would not have done!

That is the argument that you are going with?

 

I feel like a tool for even getting involved, but here I am wasting my time and energy, greater posters with better knowledge have tried over the years. I suppose a couple more quotes wouldn't hurt though.

• "I could never have whipped Johnson at my best. I couldn't have hit him. No, I couldn't have reached him in 1,000 years." - Jim Jeffries after the fight

• Gunboat Smith said Johnson "could have knocked him out in the first round if he wanted to."

 

Your input is welcome, and you are asking all the right questions here.

Could Jeffries ever have beaten Johnson?

Hard to say really!

Could Johnson have finished Jeffries earlier?

Perhaps, but he was wary of him, even when Jeff was going into shutdown mode.

This was a man who he had been preparing to fight, for the better part of a decade!

 

That was actually quite disrespectful, I've barely shown my face on the general for the last 4 years, in the time between I posted frequently and infrequently for sustained periods on the Classic and I'm greatful for the knowledge I've been able to piggy back of some fantastic people, interpreting it in my own way. I even get a little bit emotional about it sometimes, because I'm forever grateful to have had the opportunity to share my views and have open discussions about 100s of past fighters, whether they be champions, contenders, journeyman or side notes in the history of this great sport. I feel honoured not to put that knowledge to waste and I'll continue to develop my own opinions for that very reason. If someone other than you wants to tell me I'm doing them a disservice and point out where I'm going wrong then I'm all ears and will take it on board