James J. Jeffries vs. Jersey Joe Walcott

I think Walcott was more mobile and versatile in his skills. Jeffries had power and long distance stamina and toughness however. Might be a very tough fight. Jeffries would probably need a KO to win though

 

I think that we should be seeing a lot more support for Jeffries here than we are.

He was a far more successful fighter, and a far more dominant champion.

 

Jeffries was called the GOAT or pretty close to it by his contemporaries.....................Walcott was called a Journeyman by his contemporaries.......Walcott was stopped left and right vs the ghost of Jeffries was stopped after he came back all washed up.

Walcott lost his legs vs crude Marciano over 15, he would loose his legs vs Jeffrries who was bigger/stronger than the Rock with roughly equal skill set over 15 rounds too...............last but not least Walcott aint got the chin to rely on.

Over 25 rounds , Jeffries main territory , Walcott will not make it under any circumstances.

 

Walcott lost 20 out of 70 fights, mostly to non-extraordinary boxers. He had excellent skill and good power, but had a vulnerable jaw: 6 kos. This is a bad limit against a hitter like Jeffries. Walcott can win on points, Jeffries by knockout. Jeffries is favorite, he's had a better career.

 

This is the elephant in the room that so many are simply looking past.

The argument for Walcott winning superficially sounds plausible, but it depends on some very big assumptions.

 

I think those picking JJW are doing so on the basis they believe boxing had evolved in the c.45 years between the 2. As you say, there's no question that Jeffries was the better and greater of the 2 relative to their own respective eras.

 

Janitor nails it again. I cannot think of a thing to add to those posts, other than I hesitate to write a boxer off based strictly on old, grainy, jerky films and the year he was born...

 

Fair call. So, in other words, a mid rounds KO win for Jeff who clearly wants to get back home early.

 

It’s best Joisey Joe, and I think that version can moot the question of the scheduled limit and stop Big Jeff inside of 15 rounds.

While the films are scant and grainy, the literature uniformly describes Jeff as soaking up a ton of punishment before stepping it up - I think absolute best Walcott will dish more than Jeff can soak within the mod. 15 round limit.

 

Walcott beat better opposition imo, not light heavies and coming out of retirement past prime old guys.
Walcott's record against punchers is also pretty good.I think Jersey Joe was a better boxer than Corbett, and bigger,with more power.A past prime Corbett took Jeffries 23rds and was leading when caught and ko'd . Jeffries relied on atttrition to win , for the most part absorbing punishment from older, smaller men to finally wear them down. Jersey Joe would do what Fitz ,did turn Jeff's face into raw hamburger , out boxing and bewildering him .Fitz's nearly 40lost to Jeffries because his hands gave out and he was conceding so much weight and 12 years in age,that would not be the case here.Jeffries lasts the distance but takes a real hiding.

 

Walcott was 38 when he "lost his legs against Marciano".

 

Q . How many heavyweight champions had there been when Jeffries was being called the greatest?
A.Three.
Walcott was 38 years old when his legs gave out against Marciano.
Marciano applied non stop pressure in his fights,Jeffries fought at a much more leisurely pace.
A past prime non hitter Corbett went 23 rds with Jeffries and was in front when caught.
Walcott was better than Corbett ,as a boxer and as a hitter ,imo
Walcott met many punchers,
Baksi was a good hitter.
Ten Hoff was too.
Sheppard
Ray
Gomez
Were exceptional hitters ,
Why ,if Walcotts chin was so bad,didn't they stop him?
Walcott went 13 rds with Marciano when he was 38 years old,I consider Marciano a bigger puncher than Jeffries who largely feasted on older ,smaller men.

 

People make exactly teh same sort of criticisms of Walcott, when he is held up as one of Rocky Marciano's best wins.

They were old, they were small, they were leading on teh scorecards etc. etc.

Jeffries is the dominant champion here, and that should translate into some hesitance to favor Walcott.

 

Where can we see these criticisms of Walcott? Walcott beat big men of decent class like,
Ten Hoff 6 '3" 219lbs
Shkor 6 '41/2" 219lbs
Tandberg 6'3" 208lbs
Ray 6'2" 194 3/4"lbs
Murray 6'3" 2071/2lbs.

With the exception of Ruhlin 199 1/2lbs 6'2" who ,according to his manager had a panic attack after taking a big body shot .Jeffries never proved himself against good men of that size.
Hs record is based on two wins over 5 '8" !83lbs Sharkey who gave him life and death,a past prime coming out of retirement Corbett whose best weight was below 190lbs,and wins over a 37and39 years old Fitz12 years his senior and 2 years retired.
I see no similarity between the records of Jeffries and Walcott.
Perhaps you can point out what I am missing?

 

If Marciano could get to Walcott I wouldn't rule out Jeffries getting to him though Walcott's boxing ability should shine. Jeffries would have to grind down Walcott in my opinion. Could he? Don't know.