Jim Corbett vs Billy Conn

Would be close ,but Conn would beat Erroll Flynn

 

I think Billy Conn would have done pretty well...

Corbett has no advantage in height or reach and only about 8-10 lbs in weight which I happen to think matters a lot less over 175 than say under 160.

In power speed and footwork I can't make any argument as to the definite superiority of one over the other. Both are very good in hand speed and movement and somewhat less impressive in hitting power.

Conn has by far the larger and to me more impressive body of work but Corbett has the hallmark win over Sullivan and the battering of Fitzsimmons and Jefferies before being crunched late in both those fights.
And while Corbett is in the pantheon of Heavyweight Champions he didn't have to face Joe Louis to get there :bbb

I don't think it would be a easy fight for either man. I also think both go the distance so...

Over 15 I would favor Conn by a competitive but clear UD.

 

Corbett was bigger, faster, hit harder, and had the stmaina to operate at 100% past 15 rounds. I think he takes a decision over Conn.

 

Cornett went to war with peter jackson, he would of beat conn

 

"Corbett was bigger ,faster, hit harder".
Corbett was 6 ' 1''
Conn 6' 1 1/2''
Corbett weighed 178 lbs when he beat Sullivan
Conn's best weight was about 173lbs
Faster says who?
Hit harder ?
We don't know that either
Conn stopped Pastor a durable heavyweight.
Corbett was kod by a body shot from a super middleweight.
I think Conn is the equal of Corbett for boxing ability and probably quicker.
I dont say he wins ,but it would be a toss up fight.
To arbitrarily say" faster, hit harder " is rather silly, imo.based on what ?
An exhibition with Peter Courtney.
A couple of grainy clips of him being kod by 167lbs Fitz?

 

No disrespect for Jim Corbett, but Billy Conn would have treated him the same way he did Bob Pastor...with body punches and just outgutting him in general. It would take a big punching heavyweight with greater physical advantages than Corbett had to beat Billy Conn. Conn had, in my opinion, more cojones than Corbett and will to win, and if he got a little too "Irish" like did against Louis, he would survive anything Corbett would or could hit him with.

 

"Corbett was bigger, faster and hit harder"..well it's debatable if he was faster, but he wasn't much bigger and he didn't hit anywhere near as hard a Joe Louis..and Conn nearly beat Joe until he got "Irish" on him, so I don't think Gentlleman Jim would faze Billy with his power. As for Conn, I don't think Corbett ever fought as fast a man with quality skills and as good a chin as Conn. Conn's ATTITUDE would have made a crucial difference against Corbett...Conn epitomized the fighting spirit and "in your face" confidence of the "Greatest Generation" IMO, and again, was ballsier than Corbett, and would have outgutted him to win a 15 round decision..brimming with confidence all the way.

 

Cherry picking. Corbett's best prime weight was close to 185 pounds. Conn's best weight is below that, in fact he was 168 pound for Joe Louis...and that was his best filmed fight. So why say Corbett was 178 and take him at his lowest listed weight? Corbett also has a small advantage on reach. Judging by photos Corbett might be a little bigger than reported by new papers.


First you say we don't know who was faster, then you say you think Conn was quicker?

Corbett was as fast as they come, and well versed with feints and head movements. I believe the press in the 40's refereed to Conn as a poor man's Jim Corbett.

Corbett's speed can be seen in his sparring session with Kid McCoy. Corbett was well into his 40's when it was filmed.

If Fitzsimmons hit Conn with his best, he'd KO him too.

There once was a fighter somewhat similar, though not as great as Jim Corbett. His name was Young Corbett, and he defeated Billy Conn.

 

A totally different set of problems Conn would have presented for Corbett, a case where "smaller is better" than Jackson. All the while, I acknowledge what you say about Corbett's toughness. I think Conn's greater dynamism would be a key factor, besides guts, and Billy would have gladly turned slugger at times against Corbett without nearly the risks in doing so against Louis.

 

If Corbett took the best Choynski and Jackson could offer, I can't see Conn's blows bothering him much. While many think of Corbett as out fighter, he was skilled in the clinches, combinations, and body shots.

I have never seen one historian who suggested that Conn was better.

 

Corbett's best weight was not 173. Corbett fought well into the low 190's ... easily the upper 180's at his best. He was a bigger man than Conn ... Bigger legs, bigger upper body and would have defeated him ...

 

Historians can be biased and wrong at the same time.