Comparing Jeffries and Dempsey in accomplishment

Here is a comparison on several areas - accomplishment wise.

Title reign
​

Jeffries reigned for 6 years until he retired; never beaten as a champion.
Dempsey reigned for 7 years until he got beat.

Neither of them fought very frequently, but overall i think Jeffries' title defenses were a bit better than Dempsey's, and he didn't take that 3 year break. More on opposition later.

Edge: Jeffries

Number of fights
​

Dempsey easily wins this category. In fact, Jeffries probably scores lowest here of all ATG-candidates.

Edge: Dempsey.

Level of opposition
​

This is very subjective matter which pretty much comes down to quality vs quantity.

Dempsey's best: (in no specific order)
Miske 3x
Brennan 2x
Willard
Firpo
J. Sharkey
Fulton
Carpentier
Morris 2x
Gibbons

This is certainly a good list of wins. As for Jeffries':

T. Sharkey 2x
Fitzsimmons 2x
Corbett 2x
Griffin
Jackson
Ruhlin 2x


Outside of Ruhlin, all of Jeffries' opponent are elite boxers. However, several of them were aging or past their best. Although Corbett reportedly boxed a beautiful fight, he hadn't won in five years. Fitzsimmons was at or very close to his best during their first fight, but fact remains he was 36 years of age. Some boxers age really well however, and quality wins being scored is always a better indicator of good form than age, so i think the point of him being "old" is moot.

Jackson without question was far past his best, but it should be noted that Jeffries himself only had a handful of fights of experience, plus it was a quick knockout.


As for Dempsey's opponents, Willard was 37 years old and had only fought once in a 4-year time span. During their third bout, Miske was terminally ill and a huge 7-1 underdog, despite drawing and basically going even in another 10 rounder with Dempsey few years earlier. Most of his other opponents were at or near their best however.


Ultimately this comes down to what you like better. I'd give this category to Dempsey, by a close margin.

Edge: Dempsey

This content is protected

Work pre-title

Another category that's hard to call. Dempsey has an impressive number of wins before winning the title, but also a few losses, including a first round knockout. Jeffries had far fewer bouts, but the fact that he faced world class opposition so early in his career and never losing is very impressive. It is also worth pointing out that Jeffries drew with a very hard hitter in Choynski, who was near his peak, over 20 rounds, while having had only 5 matches himself! A young, but still more experienced than Jeffries, Jack Johnson got blasted in only 3 rounds several years later.

Some people say that what Dempsey did pre-title compares to what Tyson
​

or Louis did before they won it, but i can't imagine either of them going into the (old and inactive) Willard fight as a 6-5 underdog.

To me, the fact that Jeffries didn't lose despite having so little experience, facing world class opposition is worth more than the wins Dempsey recorded. Sudenberg knocked him down eight times and Flynn stopped him in 1 round. Both wins are avenged several times, but at the same age, Jeffries was going the distance with Choynski.


Edge: Jeffries (close)

The size argument

Some will point out that Jeffries has a significant size advantage over all of his fallen opponents. This is true. However, this is heavyweight boxing, the unlimited weight class. While it's admireable what Holyfield accomplished against his bigger compatriots, it doesn't make him a better heavyweight. The same goes here.

Of course, it goes a bit further here, since Fitzsimmons was a supermiddleweight. He did have heavyweight credentials however (particularly with his knockout of Corbett), and this is more important. Most of his opponents weighed around 180-190lbs. Dempsey does have wins over bigger fighters, most notably Willard, Firpo and Fulton. However, back then, men over 200lbs could rarely box well or had other shortcomings. Fulton has a very weak jaw and many KO losses. Firpo makes the average amateur boxer look like Muhammad Ali. Willard was slow and low on skill as well as old and inactive.

In addition to that, many of Dempsey's victims were lightheavyweights: Carpentier, Levinsky, Gibbons, Flynn and Tunney.

Edge: Dempsey (close)

Opponents not fought

Some say that Jeffries avoided Johnson during the later years of his reign. This could be true, although the fact that Johnson lost to Marvin Hart and that he fought Johnson after 5 years of inactivity say otherwise. Jim never shared the ring with the likes of Martin or Childs, but both of them recorded a good amount of losses during 1901-1905, so i'm not sure just how deserving of a shot they were.

Now, Harry Wills was at the top of the heavyweight food chain for a full 7 years, Dempsey aside. And almost exactly overlapping with Dempsey's reign. There was a lot of public demand for this fight, but it never materialized. No champion in any weight class has ever had a no.1 contender established for that long a period during his title reign and not fought him.

Harry Greb is another boxer who beat many of Dempsey's opponents, but never got to fight him.

While Jeffries' opposition near the end of his reign may have been soft, he can't be accused of the amount of avoiding that Demspey did.


Edge: Jeffries

Decisiveness of defeats

Jeffries lost in pretty one-sided fashion to Jack Johnson, another all time great at his peak. Given that Jeffries was 35 years of age, inactive for five years, i think this is forgiveable. He still went a hard 15 rounds.

Dempsey lost in one round to Flynn, though he reversed that twice, and lost to Tunney twice, in very one-sided fashion. He had been inactive for three years, but was as sharp as he could be for the rematch and recorded his career-best win months earlier, even in a controversial way, but still lost every round to "The Fighting Marine", except when he scored the knockdown.

Another thing to note is that his bouts with Gene only went 10 rounds. How a world title fight could be sanctioned for only 10 rounds is beyond me, but the if it went 12 or 15, they may well have been stoppage wins. Dempsey was busted up so bad that he had to be lead out of the ring.

Jeffries always held his own, even with barely any boxing experience.


Edge: Jeffries
​

This content is protected

Historical impact
​

Some might argue this doesn't belong since it has a lot to do with popularity, style, charisma and good looks. But just for fun and out of personal interest, i'd like to add this.

I think Dempsey takes this one, however, almost everyone that lived though the somewhat "recent" years after Jeffries hung 'em up, is pushing the daisies now. I'm wondering if anyone can give accounts of what they've heard from their (grand)fathers or relatives who were around during the 20's. While Dempsey seems to be more popular (perhaps also because of his acting career), Jeffries was highly regarded and ended high on many ATG lists.

Edge: Dempsey



Total: 4-4 for both. If anyone wants to add a category, feel free to do so.

​

 

Apart from this not being accomplishment-related, i think this would be a very hard issue to assess.

Most of the reason being that Jeffries fought in a near-bareknuckle boxing style with a large focus on wrestling, whereas Dempsey and his opponents had more of a "modern" style, developed for 15 round gloved fights.

At any rate, let's hear it though. Against the field as well as against each other.

Yes, this is an interesting subject. I considered making a thread on during roughly what year Dempsey overtook Jeffries in most all-time rankings, but i turned it into this one. Particularly on the opposition part they may have a point.

What's your evidence for this? Obviously it's hard to assess, but i've seen articles where Dempsey was being critized for being inactive and not taking on several men, where Wills is most notably mentioned.

You have a point on Johnson's flamboyant ways, but then again, Wills held the stronger hand record-wise - during the relevant period when Dempsey/Jeffries reigned, anyway.

I would tend to agree with the latter, which is why Jeffries is hard to rank. It could also be that Jeffries had a bit like the aura that Lennox Lewis now has, in that he was the first superheavyweight (for the time) with skills and ability to back it up. Johnson was close in size of course.

 

Both have a point, but i think the most important notion is that Jeffries HAD BEEN beating the likes of Fitzsimmons, whereas Johnson IS beating live contenders.

The Burns fight was 3 years after Jeffries retired, though. 3 active years of peak performances. Remember that i'm only talking about when Jeffries was actually active... and while Johnson certainly was worthy of a title shot between 1903-1905, he did not have the numbers to back it up that Wills had between 1919 and 1926.

So was Wills though, and he didn't lose to Hart at an essential point. Regardless of that was a rightful decision or not...

Thanks.

I'm actually surprised that that last statement is true, but Johnson was somewhat close to Jeffries in size, as was Louis at 6'2 207 lbs, during his peak.

 

Thanks.

A bit more information. Here are a few lists of how historians/notable boxing experts rank heavyweights throughout the years. Unfortunately, i have few lists from before the 50's.






Back in 1950, the AP asked sports experts in the United States to select the Greatest Athletes in each sport. Here's how they rated the Fighters.

Greatest Fighter - 1st Place Votes:
1. Jack Dempsey (Heavyweight) 251
2. Joe Louis (Heavyweight) 104
3. Henry Armstrong (126-147 Lbs.) 16
4. Gene Tunney (Heavyweight) 6
5. Benny Leonard (Lightweight) 5
6. Jack Johnson (Heavyweight) 4
7. Jim Jeffries (Heavyweight) 2

Greatest Male Athlete
1. Jim Thorpe
2. Babe Ruth
3. Jack Dempsey
4. Ty Cobb
5. Bob Jones
6. Joe Louis
7. Red Grange
8. Jesse Owens
9. Lou Gehrig
10. Bronko Nagurski
11. Jackie Robinson
12. Bob Mathias
13. Walter Johnson
14. Glenn Davis
15. Bill Tilden
16. Glenn Cunningham
17. Glenn Morris
18. Cornelius Warmerdam

All the rating that came out before 1960, had Dempsey as the #1 Heavyweight of all-times. After that they had Louis, now most have Ali.




Nat Fleischer, Founder of Ring Magazine, 1971.

1.
Jack Johnson
2.
Jim Jeffries
3.
Bob Fitzsimmons
4.
Jack Dempsey
5.
Jim Corbett
6.
Joe Louis
7.
Sam Langford
8.
Gene Tunney
9.
Max Schemling
10.
Rocky Marciano


Charley Rose, 1968

1.
Sam Langford
2.
Jack Johnson
3.
Jack Dempsey
4.
Joe Louis
5.
Jim Jeffries
6.
Gene Tunney
7.
Sam McVey
8.
Rocky Marciano
9.
Jim Corbett
10.
Max Baer


World Boxing 1974 Readers Poll

1.
Joe Louis
2.
Jack Dempsey
3.
Rocky Marciano
4.
Jack Johnson
5.
Muhammad Ali
6.
Joe Frazier
7.
Gene Tunney
8.
Jim Jeffries
9.
Sonny Liston
10.
Ezzard Charles


Nat Loubet, 1975

1.
Joe Louis
2.
Jack Dempsey
3.
Jim Jeffries
4.
Jack Johnson
5.
Rocky Marciano
6.
Gene Tunney
7.
Bob Fitzsimmons
8.
James J. Corbett
9.
Muhammad Ali
10.
Joe Frazier


John Durant -Author of "The Heavyweight Champions" (1976)

1.
Joe Louis
2.
Jack Johnson
3.
Jack Dempsey
4.
Muhammad Ali
5.
Gene Tunney
6.
Joe Frazier
7.
Jim Jeffries
8.
James J. Corbett
9.
Rocky Marciano
10.
Max Schemling


Bill Brennan 1978 (Former President of the WBA)

1.
Muhammad Ali
2.
Joe Louis
3.
Jack Dempsey
4.
Jack Johnson
5.
Gene Tunney
6.
Jim Jeffries
7.
Max Schemeling
8.
Rocky Marciano
9.
James J. Corebett
10.
Bob Fitzsimmons


Big Book of Boxing Reader Poll, 1978

1.
Joe Louis
2.
Muhammad Ali
3.
Rocky Marciano
4.
Jack Dempsey
5.
Jack Johnson
6.
Gene Tunney
7.
Joe Frazier
8.
Jim Jeffries
9.
Ezzard Charles
10.
Sonny Liston


Bert Sugar, 1991

1.
Jack Dempsey
2.
Joe Louis
3.
Muhammad Ali
4.
Jack Johnson
5.
Gene Tunney
6.
Rocky Marciano
7.
Joe Frazier
8.
Larry Holmes
9.
Sonny Liston
10.
Mike Tyson


Arthur Harris, 1992 (Nov 1992 Boxing Scene)

1.
Muhammad Ali
2.
Joe Louis
3.
Jack Dempsey
4.
Jack Johnson
5.
Gene Tunney
6.
Rocky Marciano
7.
Larry Holmes
8.
Jersey Joe Walcott
9.
Joe Frazier
10.
Sonny Liston


Nigel Collins, 1997

1.
Muhammad Ali
2.
Joe Louis
3.
Evander Holyfield
4.
Larry Holmes
5.
George Foreman
6.
Jack Johnson
7.
Rocky Marciano
8.
Joe Frazier
9.
Jack Dempsey
10.

Sonny Liston


Herbert Goldman, 1997

1.
Muhammad Ali
2.
Joe Louis
3.
Sonny Liston
4.
Mike Tyson
5.
Larry Holmes
6.
Jack Johnson
7.
Jack Dempsey
8.
George Foreman
9.
Rocky Marciano
10.
Joe Frazier


Steve Farhood, 1997

1.
Muhammad Ali
2.
Joe Louis
3.
Jack Johnson
4.
Larry Holmes
5.
Rocky Marciano
6.
Jack Dempsey
7.
Jim Jeffries
8.
Evander Holyfield
9.
Mike Tyson
10.
George Foreman


BBC Sports, 2004

1.
Muhammad Ali
2.
Joe Louis
3.
Jack Johnson
4.
Larry Holmes
5.
Jack Dempsey
6.
Rocky Marciano
7.
Lennox Lewis
8.
Mike Tyson
9.
George Foreman
10.
Evander Holyfield


IBRO Member Poll, 2005

1.
Joe Louis
2.
Muhammad Ali
3.
Jack Johnson
4.
Jack Dempsey
5.
Rocky Marciano
6.
Larry Holmes
7.
James Jeffries
8.
George Foreman
9.
Sonny Liston
10.
Joe Frazier


Gilbert Odd, in 1985

1 Ali
2 Louis
3 Johnson
4 Patterson ( ! )
5 Dempsey
6 Jeffries
7 Burns ( ! )
8 Tunney
9 Corbett
10 Schmeling
11 Holmes
12 Sharkey
13 Braddock
14 Charles
15 Marciano ( !! )
16 Frazier
17 Fitz
18 Sullivan
19 Walcott
20 Baer
21 Johansson
22 Carnera
23 Liston ( !!! )
24 Willard
25 Hart



The thing to note here is that Jeffries' ranking has dropped almost linear as the years passed by. Of course something like this is expected to happen with the likes of Louis, Marciano, Ali, Frazier, Holmes, etc coming along, but the interesting thing is that Dempsey and Johnson don't drop half as fast in the ratings as Jeffries does. What's even more baffling to me, is that Tunney seems to rate just as well if not better from the late 60's on.

I think the fact that he doesn't have a filmed, breath taking performance like Dempsey-Willard hurts his standing, rightful or not. Plus, the fight where Johnson looks best is where he gives Jeffries a pretty bad beating. He DID beat most of the best heavyweights of his time and it seems he's becoming a bit forgotten.