Schmeling Vs Jeffries? - My Moneys On Max.

Seriously? Do you hold a nut punch against Schmeling...?

You mean like he wasn't against Joe Louis the first time?

 

Yes, if you had asked the question, at any point during Schmeling's career, Jeffries would have been the favorite.

He and Louis, were struggling to pull ahead of Corbett and Fitzsimmons.

In hindsight, a man who smashes Louis, has to be in the fight against Jeffries.

 

Fair play.

The premise has to allow Jeff at least 1 year to assimilate - get off those damn PEDs, deflate, learn not to run and try and defend himself with those fancy moves of his - basically fight mano a mano - take 10 to get in 1 - a big ask and perhaps entailing a whole reinvention of the man - can he do it, who knows?

 

Depends on whether or not Schmeling "sees something" in watching Jeffries fight other guys. In that case, he
slap the daylights out of the stumbling, bumbling oaf and wins a UD. If not, Jeffries overwhelms Max and wins
by KO around the 18th round.

 

If there its anything to Jeffries you have to think he;'d do better than Max Baer ...

 

Joe was no more than a rising contender at the time, but not an all time great

 

Let's not forget that it was Johnson who spotted the flaw in Louis' fighting style and pointed it out to Max.

i just dont have much faith in 1930s heavyweights. clearly inferior to the heavyweights of the glory days

 

Yes. How would Schmeling adapt to that? And the 20 round distance.

 

Every now and then, when an old timer is NOT afforded advantage in a fantasy match, I’m reading that we “don’t know enough “ about the old timer’s style to make such an analysis - the reason always being due to limited film and info otherwise.

It seems perhaps a dual application of standards - limited film apparently NOT being a significant caveat when older timers themselves ARE afforded advantage in fantasy match ups.

We have tons of literature describing how Jeffries fought - and we have some early vision - separate pieces of footage which, along with the literature, seem to corroborate one another in conveying a reasonable idea as to how Jeffries generally fought.

Not perfectly ideal but we have more than ZERO idea re some of the old timers, Jeffries included.

Even the footage from Reno I think at least conveys Jeffries fundamental approach and form somewhat, notwithstanding obvious loss of speed and reflex etc.

So as much as I can interpret Jeffries, it’s not impossible that Max could outbox the slowly advancing, patient Jeff over 20 rounds, Schmeling being tough enough to absorb any Jeffries offence that might get through whilst also possessing sufficient skill and power to mete out a significant amount of punishment himself over the 20 round limit.

 

Schmeling spotted it after watching Louis on film.Johnson had seen it earlier and bet accordingly.

 

No more than a rising contender who knocked out lineal champions left and right...

That's a myth, Johnson never talked to Schmeling about it.

At least you admited your bias.

 

First off, thanks for posting the Footage of Max vs Steve. I have some uncommon footage of Schmeling. Him sparring with Dempsey! And his fight with Uzcudun, but this one which was on you tube is new stuff to me.

On Jeffries first fight with Ruhlin which was a drew, I wonder about it as the crowd didn't agree with the devison to according to the press. As I said Ruhlin was out on this back and did could not be the count if the was one.

Secondly Rhulin had more experience as records show the was boxing since 6-1893. Jeffires earliest recorded fight is 10-1895. That 2 + more years of experience. Ruhlin was 25, Jeffries was newer and younger at 22. Okay they pulled it a draw.

As lastly and this is important Ruhlin was a contender and proved it later. It not like Jeffries lost via KO ( once to Danlies KO1 ) , and to to numerous people who never became even contenders as mature fighters. Schmeling wasn't that durable. He was good, Jeffries was considered great and his ring record it pretty much spotless.

His better ring record and others historians ALL ranking him above Schmeling are facts you should acknowledge. My personal opinion is Jeffries KO's him just as the other punchers did as in Louis and Bear. And to a lesser extent Hamas and Daniles could hit. Daniels Ko'd him in one and he lost one to Hamas. Point being, he didn't do well vs punchers. Larry Gaines who could punch some as his 63 KO in 117 fights ended his with Schmeling in two rounds! That chin, and early Ko losses happened with Schmeling. 3 times in under 2 round or less

On weight, yes it matters is clinching Jeffries was also much stronger. Schmeling is giving up about 20+ pounds. I agree with the theory that when you outweigh your opponent by 20 + pounds you won't find the smaller man pulling off too many upsets. Check history. Exceptions can be found if the champion is older and shot. My opinion is 20 pounds or more means something when both guys are in shape.

 

Based on film, and yes we can see plenty in what is available, Jeffries looks absolutely horrible by 1930's standards, utterly beatable, vulnerable and deficient in practically every facet of ring prowess.

Outside of historic oddity, he is largely forgettable.

 

Jeffries would actually be a very bad style matchup for Schmeling with his crouch, wrestling tactics, and brute strength.

Also, with everything set to Jeffries advantage such as the time, rules, and equipment I don’t see how Schmeling keeps Jeffries from manhandling him and eventually knocking him out. In the 20’s and 30’s Jeffries might get penalized for excessive clinching and wrestling, but not in 1900-1910.

 

People are unable to make right picks after watching dozens of fights, but you say total of 3 minutes of action is "plenty"...