David Tua vs Jim Jeffries

1. Irrelevant
2. Irrelevant
3. Wrong
4. Irrelevant
5. Irrelevant

 

The man has over 66,000 posts. That’s his game. I have nothing against the guy , just have zero interest in his games, a format w no debate.

 

Small, old Fitz that was the best fighter in the world.

In what footage he got hit often? Against Sharkey? I don't see that. Against Ruhlin? Certainly not.

You don't know how he looked, because you didn't see the fight. Corbett was tricky, he rarely engaged and moved a lot.

I also believe that, the only difference between us is that I don't believe in a quote below:

Is it fair to assume that Chuvalo would have beaten the best fighters of any era? I don't fancy his chances against Fitzsimmons, Corbett or even Ruhlin.

 

We only have Jeffries in a couple of clips against Ruhlin and Sharkey so we have to rely on ringside reports of his fights to get a line on his defensive abilities.
Agree?
Disagree?
The reports of him against Corbett in their first fight state Corbett comprehensively outboxed him and ,though his punches were not very damaging, he was able to land them with such frequency he was clearly well ahead at the time Jeffries managed to catch him with a ko blow..
The reports of the 2nd Fitz fight state Fitz hit Jeffries at will,when and where he wanted to, ,furthermore they say that Jeffries won that fight because.
1.He was so much bigger than Fitz.
2. He was 12 years the younger man.
These are verified ringside accounts from reporters.
Do you now dismiss them?
Because you blithely accept ringside reports that Corbett ,"rarely engaged and moved a lot" and the only film of him in a real fight for you to base that on is a few grainy seconds against Fitz.
So do you agree the ringside reports are accurate or will you just accept the ones that lean towards your own opinion and discount the many more that totally contradict it?
I'm afraid, despite what Bob Dylan says in his song Lay Lady Lay,"you cannot have your cake and eat it too"!

 

He states Ferguson was considered a potential contender for Jeffries.and the fact that Langford fought Ferguson proves Langford was not worried about the size difference.
Totally ignoring the fact that Jeffries retired in1904 at which stage Ferguson had just a draw with a used up Ruuhlin and a win over a past it Armstrong as his title credentials .
Totally ignoring that Langford did not fight Ferguson until two years after his manager Joe Woodman had that card printed by which time Langford was 22 and had grown into being a big light heavyweight.
He cites the fact that Langford fought McVey as proof of his willingness to take on the bigger men ,totally ignoring the fact that Langford first fought McVey in1911, 5 years after the card challenge was issued,and he himself was a 26 years old full fledged heavyweight.
Janitor has a well deserved rep for being courteous in debate, unfortunately he is also a poster who,no matter what, will never admit to being WRONG!
He will doggedly and blindly defend his position long after his defences are completely blown to the four winds.
Like you I have often been suckered into interminable circular debates with him that go nowhere, and like you I have had cause to regret ever engaging in them, I do so now!
I'm annoyed with myself for not having the good sense to side step his," round the rugged rock the ragged rascal ran" litany , droning on and on,like a mosquito around your head when you are attempting to snooze in a deckchair on a sunny day.
Well we will see if I ,an old dog, can learn a new trick and refuse to engage in his ,"venus flytrap "debates in future.

There is a thread on here asking posters who would they pick to help them in a street fight ? I'm going for Janitor,because he never knows ,or accepts that he is beaten.
"No mas ," is not in his vocabulary.
He will always say."otra vez".

 

Romanticized statements without proof don't cut it with me .. Fitz was 37 or so, weighted 170 pounds and had one fight in two years prior to fighting Jeffries .. that says enough .. the tape of Jeffries - Sharkey shows itself , watch it .. if you can;'t see him get ht you sure can't see anything to proclaim his greatness from it against a 5' 8", 185 round guy .. Corbett ? Read

https://www.amazon.com/Ring-James-J...ames+j+jeffries&qid=1639054185&s=books&sr=1-1

Plenty of descriptive coverage of the Corbett (1) fight that back me up ..

Where does Ruhlin rate all time with you ?

We have zero on Jeffries to show he was anything but a slow starting , economy punching , big, strong, durable guy with a good chin fighting small , older guys past their best other than legend .. again, maybe he was more but we have zero to go on ..Some fighters seem to me to have styles that would transfer to other generations like a Gans or a Langford but I simply don't see enough in Jeffries to see him beating guys that match and surpass his size and speed and power ..

 

The Sharkey footage is a mess, filmed from a another bit of film. You can see whatever you like in it, it's not clear the punches are landing at all.

Even if it was good enough quality to make anything out, you can hardly judge a 25 round fight from a couple minutes, at best, of film.

 

This content is protected

This content is protected

I can see plenty ..

 

Your brain fills in the blanks with whatever you want to see.

You can see Sharkey landing over and over, or Jeffries doging him and countering him to death.

 

I think we have seen different reports then.

 

Really? Do you really see anything clearly on these clips?

 

The guy went 25 rounds with in giving up thirty pounds\ so if he was countered to death Jeff must have been feather fisted.

 

All there in black and white .. https://www.amazon.com/Ring-James-J...mes+j.+jeffries&qid=1639085667&s=books&sr=1-1

 

And after he lost the fight, Sharkey was taken to the hospital.

 

Who wrote the ones you have seen Janitor?