Bob Fitz V James J Braddock??

Dempsey was a pound for pound talent. It's possible that a a few really good welters to would defeat Braddock on points. Braddock was a light heavyweight who moved up to heavy, taking the title at 194 pounds.

Jimmy lost 24 times and drew 4 times in 78 fights. He only won 64% of his fights and pretty much lost to everyone decent he faced. The Farr victory was a case of bad judging.

Braddock's KO% was a lowly 34.62%, possible because he didn't have any power and lousy hands. He should be celebrated as a try hard journeyman.

 

Braddock for me.

 

Could you explain why?

 

More skilled, naturally bigger, excellent speed and a better H2H heavyweight for mine.

 

I disagree with more skilled part, he's not faster either.

 

I never said he was faster.

I believe he would be however.

 

Faster than MW champion? I mean, Braddock wasn't slow but he wasn't exceptionally fast either.

I sometimes think that Braddock is a bit underrated, but compared to Fitzsimmoms? What does he have to trouble such a good fighter?

 

Jimmy Braddock was a big man, a decent boxer, and very game. On a good night he was capable of giving anybody a run for their money. He was stopped in 8 by Joe Louis but not after dropping the Bomber in the first round after a two year layoff. But I think Fitz would be too much to overcome. What he did to Sharkey and Ruhlin two weeks apart, and to Jeff in their second fight is frightful. He may not have been a fancy boxer, but he was crafty and specialized in setting traps for his vaunted wallops. I would look for a spirited battle with Fitz grinding down the game Braddock and stopping him around the 10th round.

 

I've already said why i favor Braddock.

I see Fitz is now welcomed as a middleweight but when size is discussed in his heavyweight prospects he's so much bigger than a middle.

 

He beat bigger or better HWs than Braddock though.

 

Just before the Ruhlin fight he weighed in at 164Ibs fully dressed, and the report says they think had he stripped he would have made 158Ib.

The reports of Fitz weighing 170Ib etc for his fights that I've seen are just guesses from people looking at him, whereas when he actually weighed in he was lighter.

I think people just tended to overestimate his weight because he had a bit of a weird physique, I'm not convinced he was ever much more than a middleweight in shape.

 

Neither jumps out as amazing on film, but both are underrated when it comes to their achievements on paper.

Braddock's best wins have a few astrix's, but they're still very impressive. Obviously Baer wasn't really 'trying'/prepared or whatever, and he only really got the Lewis decision due to low-blows by JHL. However he did beat Tommy Farr (albeit barely) in his final fight and genuinely trouble a prime Joe Louis. However, I don't think that's a good enough cause to be picked over Fitz, as Fitz was much more consistent and arguably beat better guys.

Braddock is about Corbett's level. Both of them look awful. And, sadly, so does Fitzsimmons.

 

Were they tho.

 

You said Braddock had excellent speed. Way off.

 

Doea it matter though? I mean, if Braddock was good enough to beat some very good fighters, then eye test can be damned. I view Braddock as limited, but good fighter who knew how to overcome his limitations.