Jeffries should gave Denver Ed Martin a title shot in 1903

I dunno, Munore was on a winning streak and had never been stopped until he meet Jeffries. Johnson lost severals time, and was Ko'd a few times by 1904. Johnson blew his big chance in the Hart fight, and make no mistake about it, Hart was viewed nothing special. Had Johnson beaten Hart, maybe there would have been enough money for a fight with Jeffries. But as it was Johnson blew his chances.

How can a man who ran from Hart for the last half of the fight beat a prime Jeffries?

By the way, Everett was most certainly shop worn when Johnson face him. Jeffries blew out a 21-3 Everett in three rounds, and was the first man to stop him. By the time Johnson fought Everett, Everett was 28-12 . The Everett Johnson beat lost five of his last six fights, 4 of them via KO.

Johnson took a listless Everett 20 rounds. A few months later Gus Ruhlin Ko'd Everett in two rounds. Notice a difference here, Mcvey?

If you think Everett was in his prime when he met Johnson, I really cannot add much to change your mind. When you say things like this, it kills whatever credible points you might make.

Use your reason, please. Here is the link to Everett's career. You tell me if he ( Everett ) was, " in his prime when he meet Johnson "


http://www.boxrec.com/list_bouts.php?human_id=11541&cat=boxer

 

Everett had 44 fights he met Johnson in his 40th? how was he ring worn?
M ,you keep missing the point about Johnson, he wa satisfied to outpoint his man , and make a fool out of him if possible,he rarely went for the kill.Fighting Al Kaufman he waltzed around doing as he pleased ,until a vociferous section of the crowd started to heckle him, he promptly drew Kaufman in smashed an uppercut to his nose breaking it ,then turned to the crowd which had fallen silent ,then he resumed his steady boxing ,same thing with Tony Ross.How one fighter does against another is very bad logic in boxing ,especially with Jeffries and Johnson ,they were two very different animals
Jeffries was undoubtedly the more dynamic performer.Johnson was a loafer in the ring, and seldom went for the ko.I asked you who was more desrving of a title shot in1904 when Jeffries met Munroe, not 1905, why did you bring Hart into it ? Jeffrries should have fought Johnson in 1904 instead of Munroe

 

I think people who hard on Munroe's title shot are probably unaware of Munroe's performance against Jeffries in a non-title "challenge match" in 1903. That's the sole reason this match was made, and the only reason anybody paid to see it.

 

What performance? Munroe was down 12 times in 4 rounds with an out-of-shape Jeffries. There was a long thread on this a few months back. There was a report from the AP that Jeffries was down in this fight and in trouble. The truth of that is certainly in dispute.

 

The truth isn't as important as the perception and the ballyhoo. Munroe survived 4 rounds against the champion, a rare feat that Munroe loudly boasted about to anyone who would listen. Anyone who thinks Munroe didn't get his title shot as a direct result of his performance in the exhibition is deluding themselves.

 

Munroe never floored Jeffries in the exhibition. Jeffries floored Munroe several times; however, Munroe lasted the four rounds and collected $500.


A few posters here ordered the primary reports from the Bute Miner, and confirmed there was no knock down. Its in the archives here.

The alleged knockdown was made up by Munroe's camp.

 

He certainly got his shot because of this performance, in which he was down 12 times in four rounds. And the ballyhoo was led by a man who had been (still was?) on Jeffries' payroll. I used to think Jeff was knocked down, or at least slipped, and there was real controversy. As it is, it appears Munroe's "performance" was largely manufactured.

Actually, though, Hank Griffin lasted four rounds with Jeffries in 1901. Even though Griffin had victories over Munroe and Johnson, there was no big push to give him a title shot.

 

"The alleged knockdown was made up by Munroe's camp."

We can't be certain of that. The report of the knockdown was in the AP report of the story.

The New York Times in 1910 while previewing the Johnson-Jeffries fight claimed that Jeff had certainly not been knocked down, but that he had in fact slipped.

Who knows? except it was certainly much ado about nothing and served to somehow get Munroe a title shot rather than the clearly more deserving Johnson.

 

"The show was in Butte, Montana, on the evening of December 19, 1903, and Jack Munroe was the man put forward to box four rounds with Jeffries. What is more, Munroe lasted the full four rounds, whether through Jeffries' desire to give his patrons a run for their money or not was not made clear. But in any case, Munroe made capital out of the fact that he had stayed four rounds with Jeffries. He accepted theatrical engagements and made a tour of the East. And those who managed him were smart enough to bill Munroe as Jeffries' biggest and most serious rival."
- WW Naughton, 1910

Talk about going the extra mile for a conspiracy!

 

I don't know jack spit about Eddie Martin....... Christ, it has been over 100 yrs for cryin' out loud....... BUT! I am skeptical about this guy...... Again, considering the times, big dudes who were well over 6' tall and way above 200 pounds generally don't get stifled or dicked around, they get a title shot and go places.... You know lotsa' greedy promoters would love to sink their claws into a package like Eddie Martin...... Something had to be missing there.....:huh

I really like and admire Jimmy J. Jeffries.... And to me, he was the first REAL awesome heavyweight champion of note..... When Jeffries KO'd Bobby Fitz is 1899, Jeffries was thought to be the greatest thing since fried chicken was invented.... I can't believe nor do I want to buy into the notion that Team Jeffries ducked big Eddie Martin........:-(

MR.BILL:bbb

 

What I meant was that Clark Ball was the agent for the Jeffries-Fitz tour, according to Gilbert Odd in his biog of Fitz, THE FIGHTING BLACKSMITH.

"Clark Ball was appointed agent for the enterprise. His job was to go in advance to the cities and towns it was planned to visit, and there find a theatre manager prepared to lease his premises and provide the necessary publicity. Wherever possible, it was Ball's job to stir up interest among all the available young men and tempt them to come forward and meet either Bob or Jim in contests of four rounds, those who managed to stay the distance being promised $250 dollars." Page 204

After the Jeffries-Munroe exhibition, Jeff and Bob continued their tour in Bozeman. When they returned to Butte they found that

"Munroe was being hailed as the conqueror of the heavyweight champion and newpapers were urging that he should be given a chance at the title.
They also found that Clark Ball had stayed on in Butte instead of doing his job and preceeding them. It was he who was engineering the press stories, since he regarded Munroe as a 'find', even taking him under his management with the promise that he would be brought along as a championship contender." Page 205

I find this all rather interesting as an employee or ex-employee of Jeffries engineers the stories puffing up Munroe who ends up a title challenger.
I can't help being a trifle suspicious.

 

I think most on Classic are pretty familiar with the Exhibition 4 rounder.
Jeffries fat and untrained chased a Munroe whose sole intent was to last the 4 rounds and collect the prize money ,which he did. Then the ballyhoo started, hyperbole blew the scrap out of all proportion ,and some accounts had Jeffries hanging on for dear life,what was really a foot race got inflated with the retelling into an epic battle. I tend to think Jeffries was put in the invidious position of being damned if he did give Munroe a shot ,and damned if he didnt. He opted to give him a chance and rolled over his pitiful challenger.All this does not change the fact that Johnson should have had a title shot in 1904.He may not have been successful, I think he was one of the slowest maturing fighters ever ,and was not at his peak till the end of 1905 ,but he was good enough to challenge Jeffries in 1904 ,certainly better than Munroe.

 

I think the problem here is that too many people are using hindsight to judge things. The goal of any fight is not to defend against the best challenger, but to create the biggest draw. There was not any standout contender when Jeffries fought Monroe. No one gave an angle to create a challenge. This is very important, particularly in those days.

Johnson probably was the better fighter than Monroe, but it isnt as clear as it is now. Firstly, rightly or wrongly the public perception is that the white fighters were better than the coloured fighters, so Johnson had to be build a stronger case than the others. At the time, he was just a good contender (maybe the best) who was not really given any chance to beat Jeffries. Monroe was probably the same. The difference is that he found himself an angle and hyped it enought to warrant some ticket sales. This is not too different a scenario as to what seems to have happened with David Haye, who is suddenly challenging for Vlad's crown, despite having never really beat any heavyweight contenders. Kirk Johnson would have done it with the Canadian Angle and Lennox Lewis but he was subbed by Vitali Klitchsko. It also not to different to what Johnson eventually did to get a shot at burns, or even what Jeffries did to Johnson. Lets be honest, there were more deserving challengers than Jeffries, when Johnson fought him, but he shouldnt be criticised for this for defending against the former champion (neither should Jeffries have). If he had given Jeffries a rematch, again he couldnt be criticised for this, either because Jeffries had the angle to sell a fight.

Criticising Jeffries for fighting Monroe would be like criticising Lennox Lewis for fighting Vitali. Being honest, there is no justification at the time for choosing Vitali over Vlad. And, in fact, at that point in time of Lewis' last fight, his best challenger was Vlad (i am fairly certain from memory that Sanders hadnt knocked out vlad yet). By rights, Lewis should have signed to fight Vlad, but he didnt. Does this mean that he ducked Vlad? or that his legacy can in any way be criticised? of course it doesnt.

INterestingly, as a bit of a challenge (and i havent done this yet) for all those crticising the Monroe fight, how about picking who the best challenger at the time was. For the point of the exercise consider that all coloured fighters are not to be considered as good as the white fighters (whether you agree with this or not) and are not to be considered contenders (whetehr a fighter has wins over them or not). Who would the top white contender be? Was it Monroe or someone else?