Is James J. Jeffries the most underrated HW champ?

I've always refrained from picking Jeffries against fighters above 200 lbs, mainly due to the fact that he's unproven against genuinely talented heavyweights outside of the relatively small Rulin who was like 205. Still, Gus Ruhlin isn't exactly a great example to use about how Jeffries would fight someone like Louis, Ali, Lewis, Holmes, etc.

Jeffries does have all the tools to be a great modern day heavyweight though. He had fast hands and feet, toughness, durability, stamina, and apparently accuracy if we go by what Gans said. Even in the footage we have of him training and against Ruhlin I'd say Jeffries looks solid. Good left hook, really digs those body shots. Also noticeably patient, if anything too patient. Also plods quite a bit, you can see why Fitz had so much success at moving around and feinting him.

This content is protected

While this is apparently a green version of Jeffries, since most believed he peaked around 1903-04, this is still the same version of Jeffries that Gans called a very accurate puncher. And you can see that, he doesn't waste his energy in throwing haymakers or anything like that, even when Ruhlin is literally running away from him. The moment Ruhlin even tries jabbing, he's instantly met with a quick counter left hook.

Still though, we have no evidence on how he would do against big men who were actually competent. Has Jeffries ever even been at a size disadvantage before? He would trim to like 218 for those 25 rounders, in modern day 12 rounders he would probably weigh like 230-240 lbs. Considering how much Jeffries liked to balloon between fights, who knows how much he would even try to lose while maintaining his strength, cardio and speed.

 

I wish we had that full 25 round version that used to exist, any idea on what happened to that footage @klompton2?

 

He’s probably underrated yes.

 

We can look at fighters at least in two ways 1) how they performed materially OR 2) how much better they “might” have performed.

In terms of 2) as above, far more speculation is required (ifs buts and maybes) and the exercise perhaps shortfalls other fighters who did provide material proofs of themselves rather than it being projected for and imagined on their behalf.

Even the truly elite ATGs could benefit from
imagined improvements - but it is more often the lesser fighters who are accommodated with and benefit from such musings.

When discussing well proven ATGs, any perceived weaknesses they had are most frequently viewed as fixed flaws. They are judged purely on material performances, no leg ups.

I could see Jeffries performing better than he did with the right training and mindset. How much better is the real question.

A significant factor missing for Jeff imo was that he had no love for the game - and his confidence in the ring wasn’t ideal.

Such attributes, or lack thereof, aren’t necessarily easy fixes - the type of features that actually often separate the top end ATGs from the lesser field of fighters below them.

 

So you have decided Sharkey was the real champ instead of Fitz? Most would not agree.

 

Jeffries retired in 1905 as a strong claimant as the best heavyweight champion so far. He cleaned out the white division by 1902, and unlike other white ATG claimants, Sullivan, Dempsey, and Tunney, had beaten top black contenders like Jackson, Armstrong, and Griffin.

The cloud over an otherwise sterling record was drawing the color line against Johnson in 1904. Had he taken on and beaten Johnson then, no matter what would happen in the future, I think he would make a great many modern top ten lists based on resume.

Jeffries had a very strong case for a top five rating up to 1960. Louis and Johnson simply were good much longer. Marciano had a similar career, but rates a bit higher as his record was flawless and there was no ducking of a Johnson. Tunney has a reasonable claim to rating higher even if he spent most of his career at light-heavy. Men he beat were certainly in the ballpark size wise with those Jeff defeated, and Tunney supporters can reasonably point to the Dempsey of 1926 and 1927 as being better than anyone Jeff defeated. Dempsey was aging and coming off a layoff, but he was still younger than Fitz, Corbett, or Jackson, and they had laid off also.

So I think Jeff would have rated #4 or #5 in 1960.

Since 1960 we have had Liston, Ali, Frazier, Foreman, Holmes, Tyson, Holyfield, Lewis, Bowe, the Klitschkos, and Fury. I can't see Jeff breaking into the top ten against that list, plus Louis, Johnson, and Marciano.

Somewhere around #15 seems the highest one could reasonably rate him today.

 

Pretty short career and ducked his best challenger, Johnson. Top 10 is probably not inconceivable, though. If you compare him to Marciano, the difference is really the duck of Johnson, but Marciano had no Johnson to duck.

That Jeffries lost badly to Johnson at 35 and after being out for five years is neither here nor there.

 

A nonsense claim.

 

Jesus. You're going to go there as well?

You had a few weeks without being an idiot, but I guess the vacation is over.

 

I’m going to call it what it is - nonsense.

 

That's why I call you what you are - an idiot.

 

During most of Jeffries’ reign, Johnson was not a clear number one contender. During all of it, there was no money in a fight with Johnson. While Jeffries was Champion, Johnson suffered defeats to Choynski, Haynes (albeit debatably) & Griffin. The Hart loss is the nail in the coffin. He did not become the clear top contender for the title until very late in Jeffries’ reign. It’s no more a duck than something like Lennox Lewis failing to fight Chris Byrd who was at or near the top of the contender tree, but only right near the end of Lewis’ career.

 

He was the outstanding contender at the end of Jeffries's reign and Jeffries retired rather than face him.

https://www.espn.com/sportscentury/features/00014275.html

https://www.npr.org/2010/07/02/128245468/a-true-champion-vs-the-great-white-hope

https://www.pbs.org/kenburns/unforgivable-blackness/about-the-film

And, yes, I think it's fair to say that Lewis ducked Byrd, even though Byrd wasn't as clear a top contender. But that belongs in a discussion about Lewis and is a weak attempt at changing the subject.

 

He was the top contender only by the very end of Jeffries’ reign. I’m using the Byrd analogy to point out nobody holds other fighters to task over such timing, so why Jeffries? Johnson plainly wasn’t ready & hadn’t done enough throughout almost all of Jeffries’ reign. But if you’re going to cry in every post over the fact someone noticed you’re a dilettante I will leave you be.

 

Johnson was the coloured champion, top contender and challenged him. That's pretty ready. Jeffries drew the colour line and retired rather than facing his best contender. Those are the facts however you try to spin it. He ducked him. Then we can discuss how that effects his standing, but the duck is a simple fact.

That Lewis's duck of Byrd, and arguably Ruiz, doesn't get as much attention is because of 1 neither of them was considered the outstanding challenger and 2 it wasn't done with reference to their skin colour. Nr 1 definitely should factor in on rating. If you retire in order to not defend against the best challenger of your era, of course it matters.

All you have to do is to stop claiming idiotic things in an arrogant manner. You've managed to accumulate an astonishing amount of garbage in a short time, so good riddance if you stay away.