Look you stated Jeffries was a dominant champion,let's look at that for a moment.These are his four defences of note. Ruhlin ,retired on his stool between the 5th and 6th rds. Ruhlin had been annihilated by Fitz previously. Sharkey went 25 rds with Jeffries and was in front after 20 rds when the extra weight and size of his opponent seriously began to take its toll. Many believed Sharkey was entitled to at least a draw in this fight. Corbett, 33 years old hadn't won a fight for 6 years. After 23 rds Corbett had a handy lead,then he was caught with a big shot by his opponent and ko'd. Fitz, 39 years old 2 years retired 47 lbs lighter12 years the older man. The round by round report of this battle stated ,"Fitz hit Jeffries when and where he liked," breaking his nose, making deep gashes above and below his eyes with his accurate punching for which Jeff had no reply. Fitz smashed his already suspect hands to bits on Jeffries bony face and succumbed to the 47lbs heavier man in the 8th rd. Are these dominant performances? Jeffries other 3 defences were outright farces .Corbett 36 years old experiencing eye trouble had not fought for 3 years and that ,a controversial win over Kid McCoy which many deemed an outright fake Munro a tyro miner who claimed to have floored Jeffries is an exhibition.Munro later fought Johnson who contented himself with humiliating the burly Canadian over 6 rds, after their bout Munro was decribed by the press as not even knowing how to punch correctly.Jeffries made a pittance from this one sided mismatch and it was instrumental in his decision to retire. John Finnegan 60lbs lighter ,trembling with fear.Finnegan had qualified for a title shot by being routinely ko'd in 4 rds by Gus Ruhlin in his previous fight. Seven title defences ,3 of which were palpable mismatches.Sorry, I don't buy this Superman crap about Jeffries. Or are they in 3 of the 4 fights cases of a much bigger man outlasting his smaller and in 2 of the 4 cases much older men ,absorbing their punches and winning wars of attrition? In my view you also cannot be described as a dominant champion if, for reasons of colour your refuse to risk your title against the leading black challengers of your era. In fact a reasonable argument could be made that Jeffries was only ever the heavyweight champion of the white race.
We have been over all of this ad tedium before. Regardless of how old/heavy Jeffries challengers were, they were still the best ones available for the most part, and that ultimately counts for something. Regardless of what difficulties he might have encountered, the bottom line is that he beat them all. Walcott would also be smaller than him, and somewhat older if we are choosing a version that has any sort of chance, so it is a moot point. How much does drawing the color line hurt Jeffries legacy? Very little to be honest. There was no potential black challenger in his class until Johnson peaked, and probably none before that who would even have made a decent challenger, outside of Martin. Based on resumes you would conclude that Walcott was closer to Fitzsimmons level than he was to Jeffries, and that Jeffries was closer to Marciano's level than he was to Walcott's.
So you are saying,Johnson,Martin ,and Mcvey would not have been better opponents for Jeffries than Finnegan, Corbett2 ,and Munro ? Explain to me how these 3 challengers merited title shots?
If Usyk stated," I won't fight a black challenger,I won't risk losing my title to one," What would be the public, and the boxing organizations reaction ?
About how the establishment reacted when Ali refused to go to Vietnam. Frankly, the public expression of racism alone would probably get him stripped.
Hi Buddy. Different times, hugely different, back then properly most of the country backed that line of thought sadly, you cannot compare 1900s to now, just doesnt work I am afraid, sometimes I think civilisation has come a long way from the thinking and actions of a over century ago, then events prove they have not...... stay safe hombre.
Yes I think its a reasonable premise.I dont subscribe to it myself because in all honesty we have to start somewhere but it is not without merit imo. Let's alter history for a moment Jack Johnson is champion would ,as his top challengers Sullivan, Fitz ,Corbett ,Jeffries refuse title shots if they were offered? I highly doubt it! Godfrey was really the only credible black challenger when Sullivan was in his prime ,Sullivan pulled out of a match with him.and, when past his best turned a deaf ear to Jackson's challenges understandable reaily. Fitz didnt defend his title successfully so perhaps we can cut him some slack,though he certainly did not go looking for Jackson when he himself was a title aspirant. Corbett met a slightly past prime Jackson, who fought under the handicap of a sprained ankle,honours were even.As champ Corbett wanted no part of Jackson.Jeffries was happy to fight black men when he was an up and comer, but times beyond count stated he would never risk his crown against one. At best the heavyweight crown when held by these legendary figures was a devalued one imo.
Yeah, there's some merit to that view. Especially with Louis, since he had black title challengers, unlike Johnson. Gets trickier when you start wondering where to draw the line. (Not the color line.) If ducking a mostly-American ethnic group strips you of the lineal title, the justification is presumably that you're avoiding tough challengers. (Unless you are saying they should be stripped just for being racists, which I assume you're not.) But if we are stripping lineal champs for avoiding tough challengers, then we have a much bigger reorganization of the lineal title on our hands. Assuming we have a lineal title left at all. It would be an interesting experiment if we could retroactively strip people like that. My guess is that Ali and Louis make it through the meat grinder OK, but after that...
Martin was at best a viable title challenger. Yes he was better than some of the guys that Jeffries used as tune ups, but I don't think that he was much better than say Gus Ruhlin. Having said that Jeffries undoubtedly refused to face him due to teh color of his skin. There is actually very little overlap between Jeffries title reign, and teh period where Johnson and McVea were viable challengers. If he had decided to face one of them, it would essentially have been in place of Munro, so whether he had won or lost, that woudl have left his existing title reign intact. While Jefferies is probably the most culpable of the champions who drew the color bar, ironically he is perhaps the one whose reign was damaged the lest by his stance.
