James Jeffries vs Max Baer, Jack Sharkey and Max Schmeling

Did Sharkey or Schmeling ever fight 20 ?

 

Jeffries power and endurance would make him a force against all three. So yes, he could “ theoretically “ beat all of them. Would it work out that way ? Probably not. He probably ends up with a mix of wins and losses here.

 

Schmeling and Baer stop him. Sharkey, at his best, gets a decision.

 

I've never seen footage of a "best" Jeffries. The guy that got nuked by Johnson and who we saw on tape ... well that washed up fighter loses to all three.

 

There is some fleeting,grainy footage of Jeffries v Ruhlin on You Tube,he looks wide open to right hands.

 

Just watched it. Very poor quality. May as well watch shadows boxing on a wall from behind a gauze curtain. I don't want to judge from that film. If I had to, I'd say that neither fighter looked particularly impressive ... hands down, big telegraphed shots, chins high, ponderous footwork and lots of grappling.

 

I understand ,but it's the only clip we have of Jeffries being pro active in a fight.From what I can gather Ruhlin was hurt to the body early and never recovered,I thought his foot work looked better than Jeffries who basically just followed him around,imo.

 

Being in the ring with Jeffries is NO picnic, but it's hard for me to say how he'd do in these fights. Schmeling could out box him but I think Jeffires would have to knock out Baer and Sharkey . Wouldn't be able to bet on these.

 

Trying to judge anything from 1 grainy clip is laughable. Suppose any fighter has zero fear of that opponent's punch. Does he fight the same vs someone he's respects? His style might be completely different based on his opponent. It's clear Jeffries is baiting his opponent (ruhlin) to throw.. trying to assume that was his only approach is rather presumptuous. Just as Langford walking straight forward when he had no fear...I'm sure he didn't do that with everyone. Translation Langford must have horrible defense because he's not afraid of getting hit, same apply's to Jeffries. Each fighter is impacting how an attack is applied..if they aren't afraid of the punch they will always looks sloppy & wide open because the other guy is likely afraid of them & the stalker want's them to throw to counter giving them opening's the size of the grand canyon (take the bait fool) you can't infer much with such a limited volume of one fight on film or Jeffries case a couple grainy minutes of his prime. At least Langford has more film available.

Your better off not using film as any part of analysis on pre 1915 fighters. I can bet money Fitz looks far different vs Corbett than he did vs Nonpareil Jack Dempsey. Using a one fight sample of anyone & draw conclusion's is a rather dangerous tactic. Assumption's are often wrong..

 

We also have the shoebox footage of the second Sharkey fight and the Johnson fight. That stupid low left hand crouch is being used in both. Even though Jeffries was not peak against Johnson, his approach and style were as advertised earlier in his career.

Baer knocks his head clean off.

Schmeling batters him to a stoppage.

Sharkey is always a question mark but at his best he would outbox Jeffries, outbox him silly.

 

I presumed nothing, I just mentioned that footage is the only clip of Jeffries that shows him being pro active as opposed to reactive.
On the contrary it is you assuming that Jeffries was not afraid of Ruhlin's punch,as we know Langford was not wary of Flynn or Lang's power.All accounts say Ruhlin was a decent hitter, decent enough to stop Sharkey twice,Everett,and Maher. Jeffries ended his career with a 3 times broken nose a cauliflower ear and scar tissue above and below both his eyes, and that's after just 22 fights, he was no defensive wizard.

 

Good reads all round.