David Tua vs Jim Jeffries

[url]Sam McVey Puts Pressure on the Champ | Ken Zimmerman Jr.[/url]

 

OK, but it is not clear what position you are defending.

Nobody claimed that Langford said X, Y or Z.

 

You seem to be very quick to overlook the advantage in experience, that those men had over Jeffries.

For example Choynski, was a ridiculously tough match, for such an inexperienced fighter.

You shouldn't be criticizing Jeffries for fighting such a small man, you should probably be criticizing Choynski for fighting a virtual novice!

Yes if you are a big kid, fighting the best in the world after single digit fights, then you might struggle!

 

I'm not defending any position, I'm just posting Langford's stated opinion.

 

Ridiculous.

 

That was not a major part of my argument, but since you have forced the issue:

The man who is arguably the greatest p4p boxer in the history of the sport, issued a public declaration, that he would fight any man except Jeffries!

Now however small/green you can argue that he was, he was basically asking for anybody available at the time, with the sole exception of Jeffries!

He would have fought any human being on the planet. when that card was printed, apart from Jeffries?

 

I'm not criticizing Jeffries for fighting Choynski ,I'm pointing out the size differential.
Sharkey had more experience 34 fights to Jefff's 11. Fitz certainly had more experience against which he had been retired for 2 years and was over 40lbs lighter and 12 years older.Corbett had actually had 1 fight less than Jeffries,Armstrong 19 to Jeffries 12,Ruhlin 8 to his 5.

 

Just understand, that we have no idea how many fights anybody had, or what they weighed!

 

Not that it isn’t an issue today to some extent, but the pieces written by the old scribes were wrought with hyperbole and contradictions. They were immune to due critique due to the very lack of corroborating vision and other proof resources we yearn for today. Even when films were available, the quality wasn’t great and not everyone was privileged enough to see them I guess.

Completely aside from who I might agree with, I very much enjoy discussions between guys like Tonto and Janitor (grumpy old men? Kidding guys). They clearly know their stuff and their exchanges are catalytic, with a ton of properly resourced info coming in with the likelihood of more finely calibrated conclusions.

Rather than anyone cherry picking info, the written reports literally carry mixed messages re Jeffries. All that anyone can do is sample as broadly as possible and decide
which write ups are the truth or at least closer to the truth. No right or wrongs.

I personally lean toward Jeffries being more the type of fighter to soak up punishment before coming on to take out wilting opposition, the crème of whom were smaller and or older. The Sharkey fights make me question the true extent of Jeff’s power of punch, particularly given Fritz’s comparable results. If Jeff merely punched his weight that would be still something in his era but since one could argue that Fitz hit equal or harder, that could be viewed as greater credit to Fitz or less credit to Big Jeff.

Having said all that, the athleticism in the training footage is undeniable but it appears it wasn’t so much utilised to advantage in the ring. I believe Jeffries lacked confidence throughout his career. Boxing is always about the money but from my readings, Jeff appeared one of the least enamoured with the game.

Now Jeffries defence might’ve improved - as measured against himself but his propensity to take shots was still being criticised up to and including Ruhlin. That Jeff might’ve learned to duck a few doesn’t sling shot him into a defensive wizard, just some self improvement. His rep. was in large part undeniably built on great durability and one has to take a lot of punishment for that conclusion to be drawn.

 

You’re right













30 seconds

 

Please do not attempt to condescend to me, you are not qualified to do so!
I'm very aware for which fights there were formal weigh ins and for which ones weights were,"guestimates," I'll match my knowledge of the times against yours any time!

That card was printed in1906. Langford was far from an alltimeP4P at that stage of his career,he was a 20 years old super welterweight who was given a broken nose and beaten up by 187lbs , pre -prime Jack Johnson that year being floored twice for long nine counts in the 6th rd,and twice for long counts in the 8th .Sam was also stopped by welterweight Young Peter Jackson that year. Towards the end of 1905 light weight Jack Blackburn had run him close!

Why on earth would he consider a match with 220lbs Heavyweight champion Jeffries a sensible proposition?
Even supposing Jeffries could be dragged into defending his title against a light middleweight black man ,who would have paid to watch it?
NB I am forcing no issue whatsoever .
YOU are the one returning to this like a dog to a buried bone ,and I must say you are not doing yourself any favours whilst doing it.

 

Well both "grumpy old men ,"like your post!

 

Good stuff. Keep it coming you guys!

 

I did not use the card as an argument, but OK I will explain it's significance.

In plain English, he said that he would fight any man in the world baring only Jim Jeffries.

This means that however good or bad he was, he was willing to meet anybody who was not Jeffries.

This card was printed in the same year that he fought Jack Johnson, but he still wanted no part of Jeffries.

That is paying Jeffries quite a compliment!

 

Johnson at that time was just another leading contender weighing about 185/187lbs that's a bit different to tackling the Champion scaling around 220lbs! Which would mean Sam would be conceding about 64lbs.Given that Johnson effectively beat up 20 years old Langford flooring him 4 times for long counts,I think he was wise to avoid the heavyweight champion,that's not so much paying a compliment as recognizing size and weight ,allied with talent can be too much of an obstacle for even the most skilled of fighters.