So Fitzsimmons gets destroyed 2x by Jeffries yet he has a shot vs Louis and Marciano?

I really do think that you are off target with criticising the workrate of Fitz' opponent. Fitz was a middleweight. And if nothing else, it seems pretty much accepted that at the lighter weights, the work rates were very similar in the earlier days, isnt it. And if so, it seems hard to believe that some of the middleweights wouldnt have a very high work rate, which didnt bother fitz. Althouth i do agree that Rocky is anohter level, simply because he is Rocky Marciano, but still, there is no real reason to believe that the work rate will bother Fitz any more than it bothers other all time greats.

In fact, to be honest, i Dont think that there is any evidence at all to suggest that Rocky has a higher work rate than jeffries. In fact, i think they are very, very similar fighters, with the differences being that Jeffries has a much better (and heavier) reliance on the jab, or what i would call a left lead or power jab, than Rocky. This is probably because of his superior reach and size. And i do think that Rocky probably strings combinations together a little bit better and relies on these to wear down his opponents, whereas Jeffries loads up on his punches a lot more, but doesnt seem to throw as many combinations.

The whole point of this argument is that Fitz has seen fighters like Rocky (obviously not as good, but no one has beat an opponent as good as Rocky) with the possible exception of Max Schmelling and I suppose Joe Frazier and maybe 1 or 2 others. This is a competive fight and Fitz has several advantages. Whether that is enough, no one knows.

 

Nope try again

 

Choynsky beats Johnson
Corbett beats Bivins
Maher beats Baker
Sharkey beats Valdes

Moore does have a good record though, and it is reasonable to use Moore as a guage to Fitz chances against Marciano. Both being all time great light heavys and all. Is it not telling that while Moore lost, he dropped Marciano albeit briefly and generally put up a very good fight and made things competitive. What in the world is their to suggest that Fitz at the very least cannot compete at a similar level. And what evidence in the world is there to say that Fitz will lose in the first round. It simply does not exist. In fact i will go further, there is not a fighter ever born, who is likely to beat Fitz in the first round.

 

Corbett is certainly the best name on that list on paper.

Former lineal champion and arguable top 20 all time heavyweight.

 

No Way.

Joe Choynski would be lucky to win 1 out of 15 rounds vs the far more talented Harold Johnson.

Maher is sporting Baker 50lb weight advantage. He also has a weak chin, and Baker could hit. When did Maher ever fight a 6'2 220lb fighter with skills, jab, combination punching of a baker?

Tom Sharkey would never get past 6'3 Nino Valdes jab. Valdes also had a powerful right uppercut for a short crouching fighter like Sharkey when he comes in.

Corbett beating Bivins is your best bet. I would make this a 50-50 type bet. I think Corbett was a bit faster so I could give him the edge, but bivins was every bit as scientific.

 

Film of Jeffries in actual combat does not support your thesis. The only time I have seen Jeffries take the initiative on film in an actual contest is against Ruhlin.
In that contest ,Ruhlin looks the quicker man afoot ,do you not agree?

Jeffries work rate, against Sharkey is low, he is the passive countering puncher whereas Sharkey is the aggressor.
Jeffries appears to be quick afoot when he is training,this is not a reliable guide to how he actually fought,imo.For example ,there is training footage of Johnson, looking exceedingly nimble, dancing and feinting on his toes with dumbells in his hands , moving rapidly laterally, then changing direction smoothly.Johnson did not fight this way he stood flat footed ,and waited for his opponent to come in, unlike Jeffries case, there is ample footage to illustrate this..

I cannot see how Jeffries power can be underated when he took so many rounds to wear down men not only past their best, but considerably lighter than himself.
Does a 3 years retired 183lbs Corbett go 10rds with a puncher like Foreman?
Does a 2 years retired Fitz nearly 40 years old scaling 172lbs go 8 rds with Foreman?
Does a Choynski conceding 63lbs take George to a 20rds draw?
How come they did it with Jeffries. if he had the kind of power you intimate?

I doubt Jeffries was faster than Frazier , either of hand, or foot.he was fast for his time,especially for one of his perceived great bulk[for the era], but let's not get carried away here.

 

The Moore Rocky beat was a better finisher than the Louis he beat, I'd say.

 

I just rewatched Ruhlin v Jim Jeffries. To be honest it is hard to see anything. In fact, he either has a higher workrate than can be seen or an awful lot more power. He seems to have dropped Ruhlin, without throwing a punch, just a feint! Of course this is only the youtube copy i am not sure if you have seen a better copy.

What you can tell, with jeffries is that his game is to set himself, load up and hit with a one two or three punch combo before there is usually a clinch, usually the straight left followed by a hook or right. In the Ruhlin fight, there was a little delay occassionally, due to Ruhlin running away, but not much, he does this on a very reasonable and consistent basis. I guess the only real difference between the two is that Jeffries throws from long range more, whereas Rocky tries to get in close and strike. Also, and most importantly Rocky doesnt clinch as much or for as long. Presumably this is because of the rules. and this does tend to slow the overall workrate a little, in the sense that this workrate is wrestling and leaning as opposed to throwing more punches. I would have thought that the shortening of this clinching would have stopped Fitz from being worn out as easily by a bigger fighter and would have been of major assistance to Fitz.

As for lack of power, i think it is silly to write off a fighters power, because he failed to KO a fighter on a few occasions. It happened to everyone. Johnson did it all the time. Marciano had a couple of lesser guys take him the distance like Lowry, Applegate and Charles. Liston struggled with Marshall, Whitehurst and Machan. Tyson had his troubles with Tillis, Green, Tucker and Smith. Even Joe Louis had Farr and Godoy and struggled a lot with Billy Conn. It really is silly to judge a fighters power because he had some fights where he struggled with fighters, imo. He knocked plenty of home guys out, Corbett in particular where it seems like it was almost solely his power that did the job. Others simply couldnt handle his power, and it is almost certain that his power was more important than any other asset in him winning most of his fights and having most fighters running away from him. He was patient, which meant it often took longer to score the KO, but his power was definitely there.

 

Yeah.

Probably.

 

This is an disingenuous argument because.Jack Johnson was not regarded as a big puncher.
Lowry etc were notorious survivors.
Marshall was stopped in the second fight by Liston, being on the floor 7 times in 6 rds
In the second fight with Liston ,Whitehurst was outside the ring at the count of seven when the final bell rang to end their 10 rounder. The Jeffries fights I mentioned were 20+ rounders against men who had been retired for 2/3 years, not active fighters.Men he outweighed by up to 65lbs.
Which fighters of top class did Jeffries ko early?

Men that were not coming out of retirement ,men that were not hugely outweighed.I give you one, Ruhlin he was retired by his corner after 5 rds he had been kod by Fitz year earlier in 6 rds, and in one round by Sharkey, speaking of Sharkey, Fitz wrecked him twice,two one punch stoppages .

Sharkey went a total of 45 rds with Jeffries to finish on his feet in both fights.the evidence is overwhelming imo ,Jeffries did not possess the hitting power of Fitz, Dempsey ,Louis, Liston,Baer,Foreman.
Give me ONE well regarded sports writer who puts Jeffries in the top pantheon as a puncher.

 

If he weighs 165 lbs like he did against Peter Maher, I don't think that Louis or Marciano should be the favourite.

They were great heavyweights, sure, but there's a difference between great heavyweights and great BOXERS. :deal

It's not like Marciano or Louis were good at dealing with solar-plexus punches from great middleweights.

 

Shhh, don't tell that to Sandy Sadler's fans. Sandy was tall with thin legs, yet he had an all time chin at his weight, and was tougher than shoe leather. Most puncher get their power from their shoulders, and the snap in their arms. While legs can add a little, its mostly the upper body.

 

That is because he is on the run, Jeffries is stalking him at his own pace. The Ruhlin vs. Jeffries film runs slow and is not the best to judge speed. Jeffries shows excellent footwork and speed on film in his sparring sessions.

For a guy who likes testimonials of the time ( Mostly for Jack Johnson, and some opponents who beat him or made him look bad ), you just won't embrace the facts that Corbett, Sullivan, Fitz, and pretty much everyone who fought a prime Jeffries said he had very good speed. Are you going to apply a double standard here?

To the others who might question Fitzsimmons durability he fought many punchers in Maher, Sharkey, Choynski ect...From 1891 to 1904, the only man to stop Fitz was Jeffries. Fitz was not an easy man to stop in a time when fighters fought with little protection ( no gum sheild, tin cups, ) and gloves that split open and helped to create cuts.