How many historians ranked Jeffries #1, up to 1940?

How far into the 20th century are we talking about Chris, when asking the question " how many historians rate him #1"?

 

Fleischer rated Jeffries no2 ,just behind Johnson,even into the 60's ,and after the FOTC.He found no place for Ali ,or Frazier.

 

but u can also see why boxing talent got better 1940 onwards. Styles changed to more modern style fighting, post 1940

 

1940 would have been in mid-career for Louis. That leaves Sullivan, Johnson, Dempsey, and Tunney for competition. Certainly a case can be made for Jeffries being arguably better than any of them due to his dominance. It is, in my judgement, much more difficult to put him at the top after Louis finished his outstanding career and reign, and Marciano had a run that was even more dominant than Jeffries. And then there are all the big and athletic men of the last fifty years.
But in 1940, picking Jeff as the best was reasonable.

 

The Associated Press poll of 1950 put him #4 behind Dempsey, Louis, and Johnson among the heavyweights of the half century.

Not every contemporary of Jeff thought all that highly of him and neither did all critics. I know that Jack London in 1910 found him wanting a bit in punching power. Hype Igoe scored him as a one-handed fighter. Tad Dorgan wrote a column prior to the Johnson fight in which he quoted Jeff's critics who were supporting Johnson:

Tad Dorgan 7-1-1910 SF Examiner:

"Jeffries never was a boxer, never had a fight he wasn't used up in, and as far as meeting a man like Johnson goes, he never dreamed of it.
Why, he never beat a young fellow in his life. He made his reputation off old men like Fitzsimmons, Corbett, Jackson, and the like. They were all in when he got them. Young fellows like Sharkey and Choynski, although they were half a foot shy in height and fifty pounds lighter, went the distance with him."

Gene Tunney wrote this in 1940--quoted from World Heavyweight Boxing Championship by John D McCallum:

"I know there are first-rate judges of boxing who pick the big fellow as the greatest of all. But I am not one of them."

"The ring strategy of Jeffries was entirely the thinking of Tommy Ryan."

"The Ryan system was for Jeffries to take all the beating the other fellow could give him, just go plodding in a couch and adsorb all the punches that came his way, until his opponent wore himself out hitting him. It has been said that Jeffries . . . often displayed little love for battle, and sometimes wanted to quit. Well, you could hardly blame him with that Tommy Ryan strategy of having Jeffries take all the beating the other fellow could hand out."

 

I don't think Mendoza is going to like Tunney's take on Big Jeff.

 

No, you are wrong. Boxing styles changed to adapt to different rules, from about the 1920s onwards. It's the 1920s when you start to see the big changes (rounds limits, neutral corner rule, end of ND-era etc.) which changed boxing into what it is or at least what it was until the next series of rule changes.

Boxing has evolved, but one must remember that evolution is adaptation, not perfection. Wlad is extremely well-adapted for the 2008 sport of boxing, but would be ludicriously ill-equipped to fight 100 years ago.

 

I think the 1920s are the biggest single "changing point" in boxing. In the 1930s you start to see some very significant changes in the style and nature of boxers, especially heavyweights. I'm not sure someone like Primo Carnera, for instance, could physically go beyond 35 rounds.

 

"I'm not sure someone like Primo Carnera, for instance, could physically go beyond 35 rounds."

35 rounds!?!?

Other than perhaps Corbett, what is the proof any of the old champions could go 35 rounds?

 

Tunney was an erudite who's hero was Corbett, whom Jeffries KO'd twice. To hear Tunney tell the tale it was a lucky punch that stole the pot of gold on St. Patrick’s Day. That is what Tunney said by the way. Jeffries got lucky vs Corbett in the eyes of Tunney. Tunney also was fond of Tommy Ryan, who had a falling out over Jeffries. Jeffries reply to Tunney's sucker punch in the press was he was a no acocunt fancy dan.

Jeffries never quit. Not even as an old man. He went out on hsi sheidl. If Tunney hinted this he is mistaken.

Most historians up to 1950 that lived to see Jeffries had him 1, 2, or 3. And all the fighters from Corbett to Dempsey had Jeffires #1. This includes Corbett, Fitz, Burns, Johnson, Langford, and Dempsey. You can listen to the clips on the web on you tube. PM me if you want it.