Does Jeffries belong in the top 30 of all time?

Corbett getting a rematch with Jeffries based on the first fight is perfectly reasonable. Jeffries not fighting Johnson is not such a big deal for his legacy because Johnson was only a top contender for a short part of his reign and then lost to Hart. People are not bashing Jeffries for not fighting Hart so I don't see why not facing Johnson is more of an issue.

 

Here is the extent of Corbett's "activity from his "win over McCoy August 1900 ,until he fought Jeffries in August 1903.
Exhibition March 1902 3rds v Bob Fitzsimmons
Exhibition December 1902 3rds vTommy Burns
Exhibition December 1902 2 rds v Harry Niedelander
Exhibition August 1903 2rds v Yank Kenny

 

Not three years later for ****'s sake!

 

He hadn't won a legit fight in 7 years. Meanwhile, in the year leading up to Jeffries second fight with Corbett, Johnson had beaten Ed Martin, McVea x2, Sandy Ferguson x2, George Gardiner and Frank Childs.

Yeah, you're right. Perfectly reasonable.

 

How is Jeffries-Corbett any worse than Tyson-Lewis. Tyson hadn't done anything to deserve a fight but I don't see people bashing Lewis for fighting a shot Tyson

 

could be top ten, really, 7 defences was a lot back then.

 

So you admit that Louis, Johnson, and Dempsey were KO'd by smaller men, yet you blast Jeffries for also beating smaller men, many of whom are in the hall of fame?

Nice double standard Rich! If you did the research, you would see that Jeffries did fight a few 200 or over, and those matches tended to end sooner. You would also note that even in victory, Louis, Dempsey, and Johnson had trouble vs. smaller men of lesser class.

Which really big and skilled heavyweight in his prime that wasn't chinny did Johnson of Dempsey ever beat? That would be zero. I guess you could say Louis beat Buddy Bear ( Who floored him ) and Abe Simon but these two were not very skilled.

Back to Jeffries, why do you only to blame for not fighting name black fighters? The truth beat some good ones on the way up, and returned past is prime to fight the best with his lineal title on the line, old and inactive.

Which Black opponent did Dempsey ever fight for his title? How about zero.

Johnson only fought one to defended his lineal title, and he was lucky to draw with Jim Battling Johnson, who had a journeyman like record.

And Joe Louis had 26 title defenses. Only two were black men, one had a vision problem, the other likely beat him the first time ( Flooring him twice ), and floored him in the re-match.

Rich, you need to learn and think a bit. So far I have not seen it. What I do see are bias and double standards. I hope you change.

Rich,

You did not answer one of my questions or acknowledge any facts.

Judging Jeffries out of the ring for six years means nothing. Would you say look what happened to Ali when he meet Homes to prove a point? Man, you need some work

Jeffries fought some black name fighters. Blowing away Peter Jackson early, beating a very good Griffin, the same guy who beat Jack Johnson, and beating Armstrong with a broken thumb.
Now can you tell us why you can't compare apples to apples? If Jeffries fought and beat guys under 200 pound many of whom are in the hall of fame, why should Louis, Dempsey, and Johnson get stopped by guys under 200 pounds? You so busted here...

How come your color line double standard does not apply to Johnson, Dempsey or Louis?
It was hard for blacks to get a title shot, but once there in the ring, race wasn't a factor. The primary factor was famous champions like Johnson, or Dempsey using the color line not to fight any talented black fighters as lineal champion. Louis gave light heavyweight John Henry Lewis a favor...the man could not see well, and as I told you, Walcott, likely beat Louis on a fair scorecard.

You've obviously got an ax to grind on Jeffries but your presentation is very dull, and only examines one person, often using him out of his prime for an example while ignoring the others who did the same thing!

PS: Janitor would agree, Jeffries, got old and fat. Out of the ring for 6 years no one in history came back in his mid 30's to win back a championship. Boxing an exhibition when you this inactive means little at Jeffries age. Mostly it's an easy sparring session. However, boxing many in your prime year's in-between fights implies something to being active.

 

Right.

Corbett was 33, in shape at his best fighting weight, and preformed very well. His own people felt it was his best ring effort.

Tyson was 35, had stamina for just one round, and looked terrible.

See a difference?

 

Tyson had beaten Nielson, Golota, Savarese and Botha in the three years running up to the Lewis fight. Not exactly a murderer's row but actively beating guys who showed up in the rankings. That is better than nothing, which is what Corbett had done.

 

Had not lost since ?He had only had one fight in the previous 3 years and many called that a fake! God Almighty you're becoming a joke! -McVey

Hey Mcvey, at least Jeffries gave re-matches as champion.

Jack Johnson did not re-match O'Brien, who some felt beat him, or avenge a dubious draw when he was lucky it was only ten rounds vs Jim Battling Johnson!

Nor would be dare give Prime versions of Langford, Jeannette or MCvey a championship match from 1909-1915.

Janitor is correct again, I hope you are taking some notes.

 

Well the money wasn't good back then for easy fights. Corbett did KO Kid McCoy, a hall of fame fighter. I suggest you read the clips, it was an active type of fight.

 

Ahem ,we are discussing the SECOND Corbett fight!lol

 

Out of the guys mentioned for Tyson I don't think any of them were ranked in the top 10. Fighting opponents of that calibre does not make him a credible challenger in my humble opinion.

 

What about Joe Louis re matching Billy Conn?

 

Also the Francois Botha fight was more than 3 years before he fought Lewis. Is a fight that far back really still relevant more than 40 months later?