Gerald McClellan v James Jeffries

Film of that period never is.

It is still obvious that we are looking at a fast and coordinated 220 lb man.

 

We have Jeffries weigh in weights for
Sharkey 2
Fitz1&2
Ruhlin2
Corbett1&2

He was never 220lbs for any of them,his average weight being 213lbs.

 

We have Jeffries weigh in weights for
Sharkey 2
Fitz1&2
Ruhlin2
Corbett1&2
You will dismiss them as they do not suit your narrative, which I stated earlier in reverse!

He was never 220lbs for any of them,his average weight being 213lbs.

 

Yes and we also know that he came into the ring significantly heavier.

 

No we don't Jeffries dried out for fights and the weigh ins were the same day.His manager William Brady was always trying to get him to add weight.

 

It is well documented that Jeffries dried out for weigh ins.

Brady did steer him away from the practice latterly.

 

Exactly. Press stories of the day are unreliable. They were written as if Thor was fighting Zeus, but when I see the fight it puts you to sleep. Writers were paid to sell newspapers so the more sensational the story the better it was.

IMO the only and best way of evaluating and comparing fighters with no existing film is seeing who they fought. Greb fought so many great fighters and was so highly regarded in his time that he HAD to be great himself.

Jeffries fought 22 times...not a lot for his day. Jim"Thongs"Corbett, Choynski, Sharkey and Fitzsimmons were his best opponents. We don't have to rehash each fight. Johnson doesn't count....although Jeffries has been quoted as saying he couldn't beat him in his prime.

I see Jeffries as the Chuvalo of his day. With better and younger opponents around he would have been a top 10 guy but not champ.

That's my story and I'm sticking to it.

 

Chuvalo v Sharkey might have been revealing.

 

They were not entirely reliable, but they were not entirely unreliable either.

Even if a journalist had an agenda, they would be unlikely to lie about something like a fighters basic style.

Nobody is going to say that Mike Tyson was a primarily defensive fighter, or that Chris Byrd was a massive puncher.

Then you prefer the mythology over the evidence.

You prefer the tales written years later, by people who never saw Jeffries fight, to the testimony of the people at ringside, and even in some cases to the film evidence!

That is not a good place to be, as a student of boxing history!

 

But its not well documented that he added weight between the time he weighed in and the fight a few hours later.

 

I think Joe Walcott may have walloped a 218 pound Mike Tyson and a 225 pound George Foreman. He would show that size doesn't matter.

 

I have read it implied, but we don't have definite data.

 

Then its not admissible is it.

 

Size can be overcome with talent but when talent is equal, or in favour of the bigger man,all things being equal,I think it wise to bet on the bigger guy.