James J Jeffries?

The main critique toward Jeffries is that he bullied manlets, which is fair because he appreciated a heavy size advantage in pretty much all of his fights.

However, to his credit, the little men Jeffries beat were pretty proven with regard to fighting heavyweights. Sharkey and Fitz beat Ruhlin, who was probably the second best heavyweight close to the size of Jeffries behind Jeffries himself at the time. Corbett also enjoyed success against Jackson who was close to 200 pounds himself.

One critique I’d have of the list is not ranking Jackson higher, I’d say he has a good argument for top 3 resume wise.

 

I would agree with your last point.

Jeffries was a ridiculously precocious young fighter.

He was fighting fringe contenders from the opening gate, and it wasn't long before he was getting ridiculously overmatched on paper.

I don't really care if he was bigger or younger than these fighters, he was an absolute physical and mental phenom.

Now Johnson came up in the school of hard knocks, and he kept losing to people who Jeffries had beaten, sometimes with much less experience.

However my opponents have a point here.

While Jeffries was negotiating his fight with Corbett, for his fight of the year, Johnson was fighting a ridiculous schedule.

After he beats Martin, he fights McVea three weeks later, and never let anybody tell you that McVea was not a contender then.

Johnsons colored title reign, is actually much more impressive than his actual title reign, and this often gets overlooked.

It is important to understand, that the way that we view the division in hindsight, does not necessarily reflect what people thought at the time.

 

I do agree that Jeffries was likely one of the great talents of the early heavyweight era alongside Sullivan, Jackson, Johnson and Corbett and not just some punching bag that was only able to get where he was due to size and durability. There’s too much appraisal for his abilities when he was on form technically and in favourable matchups stylistically. From Mike Donovan, to Corbett, to Fitzsimmons, to Ryan all had praise for his technical prowess. Gans had little praise for Jeff’s technique (makes sense, I’m pretty sure the only Jeffries fight Gans saw was the second Fitz fight which was when Jeffries didn’t bother trying to be technical and just walked Fitz down), but noted that Jeff’s accuracy was still his greatest attribute and went as far as to call him one of the most accurate punchers in the business.

Still though, there isn’t much of a reason to defend his choice of opposition after Corbett II, and even by that point there’s a lot to criticize due to Jim being inactive for years. Regardless, there was still the justification of unfinished business from their first fight so it’s not like there was zero argument to making that fight. After that, Johnson is the clear no. 1 contender and even fights with McVea and Martin made sense. There was also a solid argument to fighting Denver Ed earlier in Jeff’s reign but it’s not like he was a better contender than Fitz or Ruhlin.

 

Prior to Corbett’s orchestrations and coercions, did you ever read a single contemporary article within reasonable proximity of time saying: -

“Oh my God, Corbett hasn’t fought in 3 years, how good is that? Jeffries must face him now!
The majority of we the press and public feel that Corbett can tip Big Jeff over”?

If substituted in for the Corbett rematch, whether you think Johnson would’ve won or lost, he was clearly more qualified than Corbett, not least for the fact that he was actually active with a very good, recent win and title under his belt.

Johnson had been periodically challenging Jeffries going back to 1902 when he kicked the ass of Jeffries bro and sparring partner.

Jeff fights Munro based on a circulated mythical KD that raised his ire - but he can’t fight Johnson for revenge that would’ve been based on an actual outcome as opposed to a myth?

You have proposed multiple, sequential walls to Johnson receiving a shot - irrational walls that I have systematically knocked down.

Due respect, but you have missed a lot, or ignored my counters, which I have then been required to repeat many times thereafter - counters that have still not seen reasonable and direct address.

After actually giving you answers it’s strange to read you repeat the same questions as if they were left hanging. They haven’t been. At all.

Not at all to say that you’re prejudiced as they were in the day, but it seems you have accepted and adopted the type of prejudiced thinking (facades dressed up as rationale) that allowed for the otherwise unreasonable preclusion of Johnson during Jeffries’ reign.

Anyway, just a couple of articles for side bar reading if anyone is interested: -

Johnson defeating Martin Feb03. Note that it was believed that Johnson could’ve KO’d Martin and that Martin fouled several times to keep himself in the fight .

https://cdnc.ucr.edu/cgi-bin/cdnc?a...xt-txIN-jack+johnson+Denver+Ed+Martin-------1

Johnson defeating (KO’ing) Martin in Oct04. Note Johnson making yet another challenge to Jeffries post fight.

https://cdnc.ucr.edu/?a=d&d=SFC19041019.2.136.2&e=-------en--20--1--txt-txIN--------

Re Munro - and note particularly the “sprang into fame” preface re the mythical KD of Jeffries.

https://www.google.com.au/search?cl...5&dpr=3#vhid=PgPWGHrojKYfVM&vssid=mosaic&ip=1

 

To me, it is important what the thinking of the time was. That is after all the world in which Jeff lived.

Concerning Martin, he was definitely believed to be a comer and a potential rival for Jeff at some point. But in 1902? He had just turned 21. Adam Pollack quotes the Police Gazette that Martin needed more seasoning. Off the facts, this seems a fair evaluation. His status as a challenger collapsed in 1903 with losses to Johnson, Armstrong, and McVea.

Frank Childs--he was smaller than Choynski and Fitz. What are the quotes at the time demanding Jeff defend against Childs? I haven't seen one and also there is a report Jeff had fought Childs in the San Francisco Chronicle in May, 1896. Adam quotes the Chronicle:

"Frank Childs, the 'colored cyclone' of Los Angeles went out in two rounds' (page 21, In the Ring with James J Jeffries)

on page 22, Adam comments---'It is possible that Jeff did fight Childs' 'It is unclear as to how often or whom Jeffries boxed between 1893 and 1895. Jeff appears to have been doing some training and boxing in the Los Angeles area, and could have fought these men in exhibition bouts. This has never been confirmed.'

Adam does have some skepticism saying it was "curious that Jeffries never mentioned such a bout."

But Jeff had promised his parents not to box, and so if he got around this promise somehow, he might not have wanted to broadcast it while his folks were still around. Better good family relations than extra scalps.

The day after this report, the San Francisco Examiner touted Jeff as an "embryo world's champion" (Adam page 22) This certainly is beyond mere hype if the man hasn't even been fighting.

*If Jeff did fight quite a few times in the 1893-1995 era, which is plausible, it is not clear what this does to his rep. It knocks out the precociousness argument. He may have been much more experienced in the "gray" fights of the era than his official record states. Makes him far less unique.

Fitz--Adam mentions that there were no weigh-ins and Fitz was believed by the many in the press to shave ten to fifteen lbs. off his actual weight. Adam has photos on pages 560 and 561 of the two together, 561 sparring, and Fitz certainly doesn't look like a middle next to the then 230 lb. Jeff. He seems much closer in size. Adam quotes Jeff as claiming in his memoirs that Fitz weighed 202 the night of the Munroe exhibition. Fitz fought his own exhibition earlier, and sparred with Jeff afterwards for 4 rounds.

 

Childs may have been shorter than Choynski and Fitz but his weight varied. At five feet nine and a half he would be giving away about an inch and a half to two inches in height to them. In1899 Childs weighed 173lbs for a fight.
In1900 Choynski scaled 163 and 165lbs for 2 fights,and in1903, 165 and 169lbs.
CBZ has Childs weight between160 and185lbs so ,at the top end he would match Tom Sharkey,who gave Jeffries all sorts of problems in 2 fights,he was also an inch taller than Sharkey.

This content is protected

 

Theres 3 main critiques. That, his opponents being old and his best wins against prime opponents being competitive. With Ruhlin really being the only exception to this rule. But these criticisms main relevance isn't to say Jeffries wasn't the best HW of his era(after all the old guys were from the era before) they are most glaring when you wonder how Jeffries would have done in the future.

Jeffries v Jackson doesn't really tell us anything except foresahdow the end of Jeffries own career. Jeffries might have very well have been better but its not cause of the fight.

If we were to treat all eras equally I agree with Jacksons resume. Happy to see you at least agree he should be rated above Sullivan and Corbett.

 

Janitor is soundly following the historical process and viewing things in the context of their time. Where we have no idea what these guys would do in the future.

McVea was also 18 years old and was probably like what the 4th best black HW if you're rating him above Jack Johnson and Griffin?

Johnson had won just over half his fights. And was sub .500 against Jeffries opponents which besides Finnegan tended to be the lesser Jeffries opponents like Kennedy, Griffin and Everett. Martin had been undefeated against guys not named Bob Armstrong. Most people at the time probably expected Martin to regain his title.

No ones claimed anyone didn't deserve to fight for the title more than anyone Jeffries ever fought for the title. I haven't even said Munroe deserved it more than Johnson so much as saying he was an acceptable option. Pointing at John Finnegan and saying Johnson had a better case in 1902 then Finnegan did in 1900 okay Finnegan was a gimme fight after Jeffries had finished his main when he was actually active. Saying x deserved a shot more than insert one of the worse contenders ever really isn't an argument.

 

Johnson had won just over half of his fights?
But how many had he lost? 3.
McVey may have been18 years old but he was unbeaten and a solid 203lbs of muscle.
Match him with Munroe or Finnegan ,where is your money going?

 

I have Johnson above Jeffries and Tunney above Fitz (I excluded Sullivan from my rankings because I don't have enough knowledge about his opponents pre Corbett), otherwise that top 6 is how I have it.

 

Being over .500 in WL should be a given for contenders and champs. Martin was undefeated against everyone but Armstrong who he had a winning H2H against at that time.


6-0 with no notable opponents. If he'd KO'd Martin and Armstrong maybe you'd be on to something.

A big part of Martins case(opposed to Childs or Johnson) was being 6 ft 3 with an 80 inch reach. McVea was 5 ft 11 with the same reach as Jeffries. Ok he was 200 pounds. And? Munroe was a short 215. What you're describing is a promising prospect whose about to lose 4 of his next 6 when he steps up in competition. McVea barely won a quarter of his fights against "colored" champs half of which he won in a year over a decade after this. McVea did beat fighters Jeffries would have had no shot against but that is a long time from now.


Obviously if one makes a thread I'll say Johnson easily. In 1902 or 1904? And based on only information I knew at that time? That changes the question dramatically. Especially for Munroe. They are all guys one could justify giving an arbitrary title shot too but that no one would be demanding to get one because they clearly deserved it or they wanted to see the fight. Johnson wasn't going to get an arbitrary title shot for non sports reasons but unfairness aside people aren't going to blame champs for not fighting fighters in that first group they blame them for not fighting ones in the second.

 

McVey had at least 2 more fights as Box Rec states.You have to factor in who was beating McVey,and you haven't.
Jeffries, giving one excuse for not facing Johnson said Jack was too light and that McVey would be more of a physical match,of course when a promoter offered Jeffries a cash guarantee to defend against McVey, Jeffries went deaf.
You want to excuse Jeffries for not fighting McVey because he would lose 4 of his next 6 fights? Did Jeffries somehow know that was going to happen then?lol
By the way those 4 defeats were to Johnson x 3, and Denver Ed Martin,whom he had previously ko'd in1 round!

Perhaps you would be more impressed if he had fought 4 Bums and kept a clean sheet?

 

Hi Jason

You might like this series of articles by Jeffries aided by an accompanying writer published in 1935.

See page 61 - hopefully I’ve linked directly to that page.

In the two blocks of text at bottom right of page Jeffries makes reference to the initial engagement with Munro - the challenge to stay 4 rounds to win $100.

Notably Jeffries refers to Munro as the “sucker they fed me”.

Due to Fitz levelling his challenger inside just 1 round (taking only about 40 secs to be more exact) to give the audience their monies worth, Jeffries claims he let Munro stay 3 rounds and then went for the KO in the 4th.

He says in his pursuit of Munro he slipped and fell - adding that Munro was 10 feet away when this happened - so nowhere near Jeff.

Anyway I’ll leave the rest for you to read if interested.

You might want to go to back to very start of the series of articles to read the whole lot.

https://scvhistory.com/scvhistory/files/lw3586/lw3586.html#p=19

 

Totally correct! Fitz urged Jeffries to put Munroe away but Jeff replied.I'll give the crowd a bit of a run for their money.
It's hilarious seeing Johnson and Mcvey's credentials torn down whilst they are excusing the Munroe fight.

 

It’s mind boggling, isn’t it?

On one hand, the claim is that Johnson’s true worth wasn’t known until his later fights whilst McVey’s lack of worth is being based on fights he was yet to have - and as you already pointed out, the 4 losses were x3 to Johnson and x1 to Martin who McVey had already previously KO’d.

Makes you want to scream “Hey Abbott!” Lol.