Do you think Corbett could have regained the title against Fitz, in a rematch perhaps a year or two later? Or does Bob get a win over him again?
In a short distance fight it’s possible, he had plenty of success against Bob early on and even Fitzbadmitted that Corbett’s speed was overwhelming. However, Fitz took Corbett’s best in that sixth round and still kept on coming. I think Fitz always catches up to Corbett in a finish fight.
Great question Ferg. Corbett was woefully inactive and somewhat complacent going in to his fight with Bob. Allowing for same, he still outboxed Fitz and gave him a good going over through 6 rounds. By then, Fitz was well bloodied and marked up. He had also been dropped hard for a 9 count. Not to discredit Fitz’s work thereafter, but it did seem that Corbett did gradually tire after shooting his wad trying for the KO in round 6. I think that suggests that there was a fair amount of wiggle room for a more match fit Corbett to do that much better in a rematch. In fact, though I think Fitz was more broadly applied in so far as the styles he overcame otherwise, Corbett might’ve had a pronounced stylistic advantage over Bob specifically. However, if Corbett had to tune himself up and apply himself more broadly via several fights against different opponents to earn a rematch against Bob, I think there would’ve been a good chance that Jim would’ve come to grief sufficiently enough to kill his right to a rematch. He basically did come to grief in his next fight when his cornerman climbed into the ring to force a DQ and save Jim from an imminent KO/stoppage loss to Tom Sharkey. The same Tom Sharkey that Fitz had already flattened and who Fitz would flatten again a few years later during his terrific post title tear in 1900.
Cheers Pug. Nice one mate, as usual great answer. Im torn myself about a result in a rematch. Could Bob strike again, would he have gotten in Corbett s head? Or does Jim get by this time and become the first to regain the title? I actually think there's more chance of the latter, but Bob s always dangerous!
Yeah Ferg, since Corbett did relatively well the first time around, a better conditioned and focused Corbett might do that much better - Though, as you say, Bob would always be dangerous and tenacity was also one of Fitz’s strong suits. Bob wasn’t unaccustomed to copping some decent punishment before lowering the definitive boom himself. Those two weren’t too friendly - were they? Lol. Random thought. It’s always the fight films you don’t have that you want most - but I’d kill for decent footage to exist of Fitz’s 1902 rematch with Jeffries. I can’t recall if the rematch was actually successfully filmed and distributed in the first place. I don’t think there are even any photographs of the event.
Not sure at all mate tbh. But yes it's a shame there's not more of those early century fights on film or at least more footage.
Corbett was an excellent fighter, so he did have a chance, but I’d still favor Fitzsimmons to win again, since Corbett after winning the title was pretty much a part time fighter. Even after he lost to Fitzsimmons Corbett still treated fighting as something he did on the side and it showed in his results in the ring.
