James J Jeffries?

There I have to disagree.

If Jeffries fought the wrong challengers, then you need to articulate who he should have fought and why.

Actually it matters a lot.

Once the contract has been signed, the fight has to go ahead, regardless of what else is happening in the division.

You can argue that Corbett was not the best available challenger, but Johnson is not a realistic alternative.

If you want somebody other than Corbett, then Denver Ed Martin would be a much more realistic option.

 

You are doing a far more articulate and logical job refuting all these excuses than I could manage Pug, my hat is off to you.
Debating with some of these posters is like debating with the Marciano Rockista's,its basically futile.
It's just one excuse after another;
Jeffries didn't have a porous defence he just had cut prone skin like Henry Cooper ,as if that explains why his nose was broken 3 times and he had a cauliflower ear!
Childs was too light to be a credible opponent,but Fitz wasn't!.
Jeffries would have stopped Sharkey ,but he had an injured arm.Jeffries stated his arm was fully healed before the fight,but we must believe the excuse,and what about their first fight , why didn't Jeffries stop him in that one? I guess he was injured then too?
Corbett put up a good fight in his2nd challenge to Jeffries despite the ringside press saying Jeffries toyed with him for 9 1/2 rds,this goes beyond clutching at straws !
Jeffries improved out of all recognition and the 2nd Corbett fight proves it.
SoJeffries performance against a near 37 years old man who had not fought for 3 years,and had won 1 fight in the last 9,[ and that one is viewed with suspicion ] is the bench mark to assess Jeffries abilities.Logical?

What's really amusing is the sense of righteous indignation you get back from these people,its as though you have committed a cardinal sin, pointing out the holes in their desperate apologies.
Jeffries looks agile training with his useless brother so that means he employed that in fights,despite the fact there is no footage of him actually doing so in one.
Against Ruhlin and Johnson he plods stolidly after his opponent left hand at waist level relying on his shoulder to cover his chin,no sidestepping or head movement is on display at all.
The Marciano Syndrome again.
I'm the mean old curmudgeon on this forum,and as popular as a fart in a space suit,like I give a ****.lol
I hope your success in refuting these frenzied denials does not cause you any loss of your well deserved popularity.
Keep Punching Mate!



Its just one excuse after another

 

You are assuming that a long count is an actual thing.

 

No it doesn't.

Even if he fights Johnson at the earliest realistic opportunity and looses, not much actually changes.

 

Finnegan fought Jeffries for the title in1900.
Corbett fought Jeffries for the title in 1903.
In 1900 Martin had 5 fights without loss.
In 1901 Martin beat among others Russell ,and Griffin.
In1902 Martin beat Childs by ko, Ferguson by Ko,Armstrong,Craig by ko, and also by dec and had a further No Dec with Armstrong.
I say during that period he was a more credible opponent for Jeffries than either Finnegan or Corbett were.
In1900 Childs had 9 fights without a loss he beat and drew with Bonner,drew with Byers,beat Dixon and Russell x3,beat Butler,and beat Everett.
In March 1901 Childs ko'd Byers for the Coloured Heavyweight Championship.
I say he was a more credible opponent for Jeffries that year than Finnegan,you will excuse Finnegan getting a title shot by saying he was a "tuneup" ,and Jeffries didn't have a full training camp neither excuses are valid,a champion makes his own schedule.
In 1900 the Year Jeffries fought Finnegan,Jack Johnson had 12 fights ,11 wins and 1 draw,I say he was a more deserving challenger than Finnegan.
In November 1901Jeffries defended against Gus Ruhlin, Ruhlin had been beaten unmercifully by Fitzsimmons in August of the previous year.
I say Jeffries should have defended against Fitz instead of Ruhlin.

 

And you are assuming,because it does not suit your narrative ,that it isn't.

 

Due respect, you can disagree but then that makes you wrong.

I DID in fact articulate again as to who, who not and when in my post that you have curiously chosen to only quote in part in your reply.

Hypothetically, Jeffries could’ve had an endless stream of well in advance contracts in place against one undeserving challenger after another - thereby leaving no window to accomodate far more eligible challengers as and when.

So no, it doesn’t matter in the way you’re trying to suggest it does. What actually matters is that Corbett didn’t earn the right to a rematch at all and Johnson most certainly was more eligible.

The consensus of opinion was that Jeffries would comfortably defeat Corbett - which is exactly what Jeffries did - likely even more easily than the pundits had forecast.

You’re enquiring about contracts but do yourself know when the Jeffries - Corbett rematch was signed and properly confirmed?

Jeffries wasn’t actually interested in rematching Corbett, he said he preferred touring with Fitz as at the time (= Feb03).

Jeffries said he’d prefer to face Corbett some
time later since he was happy to make “easy” coin. Repeat, “easy” coin. Nothing about Corbett deserving a rematch.

Corbett was the prime mover in securing his rematch - nothing to do with eligibility or nobility on Jeffries’ part.

Ultimately, Corbett was a bust, as expected, as forecast - even given the undue “assistance” afforded to him by his friend and referee Ed Graney - and that’s straight from the horse’s (Corbett’s) mouth.

So, it seems the Corbett fight was only properly confirmed, with no pre-mediation on Jeffries’ part some time after Johnson had already beaten one Denver Ed Martin for the Coloured HW Title b Feb03.

Johnson also went on to defeat that same Denver Ed Martin by KO in October of the following year, 1904 - marking his 19th consecutive fight without a loss over the previous 3 years.

In the general mean time, some 2 months earlier, in Aug04, Jeffries granted another undeserving challenger, Munro, an arbitrary shot at the title - 1 year after the arbitrary shot he gave to Corbett, those 2 matches covering Big Jeff off for all of 03/04. Wow.

 

Cheers. I like a good civil debate but this one is now becoming tiresome. The never ending reaches being made on Jeffries’ behalf speak for themselves.

 

It does. Due respect again, but that doesn’t make sense.

 

Sorry, but this also makes no sense at all.

I’m not assuming anything.

Corbett himself said he was afforded long, slow counts so as to keep him in the fight.

Obviously Corbett viewed it as a “thing” because it was/is actually a thing.

 

Jeffries tried to agree terms to fight Fitzsimmons in 1901, and only approached Ruhlin after negotiations with Fitzsimmons fell through.

This seems logical enough to me.

You make a good case that Denver Ed Martin would have made an alternative challenger than Corbett, but I think that his case would have been stronger in 1901 after he won teh Colored Title.

By this time Jeffries is injured, so it isn't happening.

I don't think that it is reasonable to ask him to take on a fighter like Childs without a training camp.

 

It is perfectly legal in boxing to deliver a long slow count.

 

Yes it's getting silly and gratuitous remarks like,"but keep it reasonable,"from the poster who had spent reams of PC time indulging in willful fantasy is rather rich!

 

All counts vary slightly depending on the third man's mental idea of when a second has elapsed .
That is a totally different kettle of fish to a "friendly referee ,"intentionally giving a fighter as much time as he can between the numbers one to ten.You are not stupid and are well aware of this ,so you are being very disingenuous with your reply.Pretty poor form imo.

 

Fitz stated publicly that he would be ready to fight Jeffries a month after having ko'd Sharkey in August1900.Jeffries actually fought him 2 years after the Sharkey fight,when I raised this point with you before, you put them blame for the delay on Fitzsimmons.
Fitz was so indifferent to a title shot that he took on the two top contenders inside two weeks and ko'd them ambushing Jeffries immediately after the Sharkey fight and forcing a commitment to a fight out of him.
I call BS on your excuse and BS on the idea that Fitz made a fortune out of vaudeville exhibitions,he didn't,in fact he later had to become part of Jeffries tour to get decent cash returns.