Feb 1890 James Corbett vs Old Chocolate George Godfrey

I think Corbett would win with few issues, Godfrey wasn’t on his level.

 

This is the sort of post that causes a 20 page war and multiple bannings in Classic.

 

I don't see how a middle aged smaller fighter who managed to lose to Kilrain (I'm assuming that fight was on the level) would beat the Corbett that held Jackson to a Draw. And seeing that Jim withstood the bombs of Choynski (and later showed good resilience against Jeffries) I don't see him getting bombed out by the "wrecking machine" of Godfrey. It's not out of the question but I would certainly favor Corbett.

 

I strongly favor Gentleman Jim Corbett in this!

 

Honestly, none of this sound egregious for the era.

Hell, it sounds like an Ali, Lewis or Wlad fight.

 

While I would also pick Corbett all the evidence suggests Godfrey was on Corbetts "level". While Corbetts 2-0-1 and Godfreys 0-3 against their common opponents if we look at the actual context of those fights very little would have neeed to change to flip that.

 

Is there even a single person who saw both, black or white, who thought they were even close to being at the same level? Godfrey was a second rater, Corbett’s resume might be ass but by all accounts from anyone of note he was a first rate talent. Look at how both of them fought Jackson; one arguably got the better of the fight and the other was beaten like a red headed step child.

Admitedly, I do not know the context behind Godfrey’s fights with Kilrain.

 

They were both first rate talents for the era being discussed in this thread. Corbett got the better results I'm saying very little would have been needed to flip em. Godfrey lost a few big fights Corbett didn't. Corbett got the shot at mr "I'm champion in 1892 because I beat McCaffrey in 1885" and Godfrey didn't.

I've made it clear I agree with your assessment of Corbetts resume and would add a few more flavorful words to describe it. However in the era relevant to HSBs question both were top rate HWs. Whether Corbett was the singular best HW in 1890 or 1892 he was somewhere in the general proximity of being that. And Godfrey was right there with him. I would not bet on Godfrey because again Corbett did get the better results and he was younger and clearly closer to his physical peak. But very little would have needed to change those results or flip them.

While I'm not going to argue that it would certainly be easier to argue neither Corbett or Godfrey were on Peter Jackson and Goddards level then it is to argue Corbett was on a different level then Godfrey.

 

@Historical boxing society

“Finally someone who get's it. There's next to nothing suggesting they aren't right next to each other. “

Except for the opinion of everyone who’s seen, sparred or fought both of them. Name one person who rated Godfrey nearly as highly as they did Corbett.

“Suggesting that the peter Jackson bout with Corbett is an example of his superiority is someone who hasn't got a clue. “

No, quoting a singular news source of ONE ROUND to make the claim that Corbett basically didn’t throw anything for the first hour and only began doing anything until Jackson’s leg began to swell is someone who hasn’t got a clue. Both were cautious in the early stages and even though Jackson was mostly the aggressor, Corbett still threw counters and exchanged in the pocket with him;

Adam Pollack’s In The Ring With James J. Corbett both paraphrases and quotes what local papers SAN Francisco Examiner, The SAN Francisco Chronicle, and Daily Alta California had to say; San Francisco Chronicle, round 4: Jackson moved into close quarters and Jim clinched. A rally followed and Jim landed an ugly counter on the mouth and mixed it up grimly, landing several rights to the ribs that made Peter wince. There were hot exchanges of slugging, Corbett landing body punches that "plainly disconcerted the colored man." Jackson used clever counters and rately missed a left to the head. He landed effectively, though Jim was even with him all through. The crowd cheered as they went to their corners.

SAN Francisco Examiner’s account of round 4: Corbett scored three clean hits without a return, one a straight smash to the mouth and two swings to the body, clinching each time atter landing When Peter struck high, Jim ducked under him. When he went low, Corbett moved off to the side and Jackson was only able to hit him in the back Jim's stock doubled. "Corbett was so awfully clever" that Jackson "could not do anything with him."

See how easy it is to use one round to define how an entire fight went? I’m just using these to prove how competitive the fight was early on prior to when Jackson’s ankle began interfering with his movement. Here are others:

Round 3:
Peter rushed in and hit the ribs, though lightly because Jim was retreating. Jim landed to the ribs but received a blow to the ear. Peter crowded him, but Jim swung a left on the neck that shook Peter up. Jackson kept up a slow and methodical pursuit, leading with the left to the body or head, until Jim threw his left to the body and received a counter right. Jim rushed in and tried with both hands to the body, landing a light left and escaping a counter.

Round 5:
In the 5th and 6th rounds, "there was some very hot work, the fighting being fast and exceedingly clever. Each man imbibed a wholesome respect for the other and was more wary. Both men played for the stomach."
SFE: Peter landed two light blows to the face as Jim was on the retreat. The first close work followed. Corbett stopped Jackson's advance with a left to he body, and traded half-arm hits. He was "quite as good as Jackson, and he crowd cheered while Jackson clinched." Jim hit the mouth and then copped back down to the body.

Round 8:
After another clinch and break, Corbett fiercely rushed Jackson to the ropes and slugged him. Jim tried to hold him there and hit him, but Jackson drove him away with a punch to the nose. Another clinch and long range fighting followed.
There was a rally in the center of the ring, Peter landing the left on the jaw and Corbett responding with a left to the ribs and a left and/ or right swing to the neck that shook Jackson up considerably. "Jim's swing on the neck was the beauty of the fight so far."

Round 9:
This time Corbett did the work and took a strong lead. He rushed in and landed a left to the head, but caught an ugly left counter on his nose, which reddened it. In the next rush Jim landed a right drive to the stomach that made Peter pant. Corbett held the lead throughout the round.

Round 10:
Jim was more defensive as he began to get hit more, but he still landed some good counters, including a couple of lefts to the body.
14th round

The SFC and AC agreed that Corbett landed several good blows to the wind and nose.

The SFE's version said that Jim landed solidly to the stomach but received one to the ribs. They exchanged slaps to the mouth. A pool of blood accumulated in Tackson's corner as a result of the leads to the mouth.

Corbett had a swelled right eye and a very red back.

15th round

After a couple minutes of sparring, Corbett landed a left to the stomach and drew Jackson into missing three times. There were several clever exchanges, and a left sent Peter's head back. Corbett closed the round with a double left lead that landed and made Peter angry.

16th round

SFC: Corbett landed many body shots, including "three lightning-like blows that caused Peter's bellows to blow." Jackson forced Jim to a corner and landed a good face blow, but Jim returned to the wind and a vicious left swing on the ear. "It was about an even thing."

SFE: Jim landed a swinging right to the jaw that rattled Peter's teeth audibly.

Jackson rushed and drove Jim to a corner with right and left rib-roasters.

Peter could not hit the head though. Jim finally drove him back with a punch to the jaw, followed by another as Peter moved away.

AC: There was a lively interchange of blows, Corbett fighting Jackson into a corner. Just before the bell, Jackson landed a straight punch to the mouth that caused Jim to spit blood.

This idea that Corbett merely ran and clinched into Jackson couldn’t move anymore is not grounded in reality, nor is the idea that Godfrey performed anywhere near as well as Corbett did against Jackson. Godfrey got dropped in the second, badly hurt in the fourth, fifth, and “took the severest ring punishment.” by one account I’ve seen. By the ninth even Jackson was asking Godfrey, “Do you want me to kill you?” and suggested that Godfrey retire in his corner. Compare this to Corbett regularly engaging with, and at times outfighting Jackson even before his ankle got compromised. Different levels altogether.

Also, Cardiff was not a “bonafide heavyweight contender” when Godfrey got to him. Cardiff claim to fame was barely beating Mitchell who he outweighed tremendously and drawing with Sullivan who broke his arm in the first round of their fight yet, despite Cardiff knowing this, refused to exchange with him and ran for the rest of the fight. And that was in 1887, by 1890 Cardiff had been knocked out by Killen, Jackson and losing to dudes like Jack King. Within two years of fighting Godfrey he would be knocked out by a washed Joe McAuliffe and a random. In 1887 he may have been a standout contender but by less than a year later he was low hanging fruit, especially by the time Godfrey fought him.

The only thing Godfrey has going for him in this fight is toughness, maybe he can outlast Corbett through sheer balls alone but I wouldn’t bet on it. Hes not a physically powerful juggernaut like Sharkey was who was on another planet with regard to strength and grappling ability. Sharkey also fought very inactive versions of Corbett who genuinely held his own second time around. Also next to no inside game???? He literally outfought Jackson at many stages on the inside, Sharkey’s success largely came from excessively clinching Jim.

“Godfrey fought often & was never overmatched by quick knockout's. It's a night & day difference between the two.”

Neither was Corbett.

 

It’s a stretch to call Godfrey a first rate talent if we call Corbett one, when I think of a first rate talent I think of the Sullivan/Corbett/Jackson/Fitz type of stock. Fighters who were revered by pretty much anyone who saw or fought them including ones who hated them. We see truly great talents have lackluster resumes today.

I’ve seen Godfrey compared unfavourably to even the likes of Kilrain who I wouldn’t put in the calibre of those 4 or even Goddard and Slavin. He a solid contender but he wasn’t a marvel.

I’d argue that Corbett was absolutely at Jackson’s level, and Jackson would probably agree with me. Just because Jackson’s resume far exceeds Jim doesn’t take away from the type of talent Corbett was, Godfrey was just never seen that way.

 

Let's not go overboard.
Godfrey was only a slight favorite over Patsy Cardiff at 10 to 8, and the betting was about even before the start of Godfrey's fight with Denver Ed Smith.

 

I'm going back to some of these older threads for my 1800s rankings but dude you really have something against Godfrey it's just sad.

You keep using the cop out narrative that "no one who saw both fighters rated Godfrey on the same level" which ignores the fact that Black North American fighters weren't covered fairly at the time. In fact even the great George Dixon wasn't treated fairly until it was undeniable, contenders like Godfrey never got their due.

Also your obsession with Corbett clouds your judgement with things like comparing him and Georges performance against Jackson/Kilrain once again conveniently ignoring that styles make fights. Let me educate you real quick: Jackson had never seen an ultra defensive mover like Corbett, and had messed up ankle now compare this to an offensive swarmer with heart (Godfrey) you can see why it's foolish to compare results. It's funny you even cite the San Fran papers when they're clearly biased towards their hometown boy .

So I'll ask what do you have against Godfrey? It's such a weird beef to have but you display it constantly on any thread he's brought up in