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

Don't bite me M ,bite Tunney .I never said it! I thought I was quite gracious towards Jeffries in this thread.As to a "Lucky punch" .There was an article in an old BI magazine ,Ive still got it somewhere ,its a double spread entitled "you were lucky Mr Jeffries,[with a picture and interview from Corbett].The other side says "No I wasn't Mr Corbett " [same ,Jeffries plus interview].Possibly Tunney got it from Corbett that it was a lucky punch Jeffries landed with Corbett,as he put it "far in front visualizing his name up in lights Champion again".Jefries never quit ,I said he went down fighting ,but I did read that before the Fitz fight he lacked confidence and his manager arranged for Fitz to be manhandled in an altercation by the big guy,all about the interpretation of the words "clean break",Brady and Fitz had a row about it ,which was what Brady wanted .Jefries came bursting into the room stripped to his shorts said something like "you talk too much Brady ,this is how we'll break grabbed the bemused Fitz who had been out on the lash the night before and threw him bodily across the room,Fitz turned gray and walked out Jeffries pleasantly surprised how easily he had manhandled the Champion ,remarked to Brady," Shucks he aint half as strong as Sharkey I licked Tom and I can lick him too",Mission accomplished by Brady,Fitz was shaken by the young Giant ,and Jeffries was given a confidence boost.That's the story.

 

Tunney said it was a lucky punch. I never said you did!

I got a PM to post the link I spoke about before on Jeffries ranking post 1950. Since my space is about full in my box, here it is.

[url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MtOjXb3EsW4&feature=related[/url]

 

Nat Fleischer had it right when he rated Jeffries number 2 and Johnson number 1.

 

Very Interesting!

 

Not all. For example, I know Harry Wills considered Johnson the greatest, and Jeffries himself said he didn't believe he could ever have beaten Johnson. There is strong testimony in terms of contemporaries considering Jeffries #1, but it isn't unanimous.

 

This is good information to get out there. Not that I dislike Jeffries or have a poor assessment of him; as a matter of fact, Jeffries' standing in my personal ratings of past champions has only increased over time. Say, seven or eight years ago, Jeffries would have been at the tail end of my top 15, but he's slowly crept up over the years as I've gathered knowledge and perspective, and now he's firmly within my top 10.
However, I think that, while many people tend to disregard Jeffries offhand due to the faded memory of his career, lack of footage and lack of widely-distributed material, those who do write and talk about him are often doing so as a reaction to these things, with the specific idea in mind of preserving and promoting his legacy, and so they take a hyperbolically reverential tone towards him, casting him in an unfailingly and uncompromisingly positive light and failing to provide a balanced picture either of Jeffries himself or of public assessment of him and his career. It is good, then, to hear a bit from the other side of the contemporary discussion.

 

Peter Maher didn't rate Jeffries as good as generally thought of either.

 

Was Maher in any shape for a title shot while Jeffries was champ?

 

As the century turned ,so did Maher's fortunes ,by 1902 he was losing more than he won and often by ko ,he was a drunk,even at his best he usually lost to the top boys,I don't think he could have troubled Jeffries overmuch.Maher could hit but had the curse of some big hitters ,he wasn't to sturdy round the chops himself.

 

I agree. Jeffries would beat Maher whenever he pleased. I just wonder if Maher was ever in shape, say from 1889-1901 to interest the public.

 

I have a ton of info on Jefferies on another computer (and I can tell you MOST historian rated Jerries #1) but here is a little bit:

All-Time List (Survey of 12 Old Timers Historians) compiled by John McCallum

1. Jim Jeffries
2. Jack Johnson
3. Bob Fitzsimmons
4. Jim Corbett
5. Jack Dempsey
6. John L. Sullivan
7. Gene Tunney
8. Joe Louis
9. Rocky Marciano
10. Muhammad Ali

The tipping point for me to rank Jeffries #1 was his sheer dominance and his sheer athleticism:

-Jeffries stood 6 feet 3 inches tall and weighed 225 pounds in his prime(meaning he would be able to fight modern day supper heavies).
-could run 100 yards in just over ten seconds,
-could high jump over six feet

This guy had well documented size, speed, freakish power (in both hands), amazing stamina, and able to absorb tremendous punishment.

That's goes down as #1 in my book.

 

Nice post.

I too have developed a fond appreciation of Jeffries' career. I have always been impressed by the fact that he won the title with very few fights and how devoted he was to training ( or at least when his boxing career was in progress ). He was apparently capable of jumping rather high, and sprinting at speeds that were not far off from that of world class runners of the day. He incorporated strength and conditioning into his workouts, and was arguably boxing's first super heavy. His career is full of interesting facts and trivia, as is his life in general.

 

I have defended the old timers quite often on this board but this list, with the 167 pound Fitz, a remarkable p4p fighter in his day, but still 167 pounds, rated at heavyweight way above Ali, Louis, Marciano, and Liston, and with five of the top six heavyweights active in the 1890's, is a really over the top old geezer's list.

Jeff might be able to defeat modern day super-heavyweights, or perhaps not, but what is certain is that his major fights were against men who would be modern day middleweights (Choynski), super middleweights (Fitz), or cruiserweights (Corbett, Sharkey, Ruhlin, Jackson, etc). The only fighter he fought who weighed over 200 lbs was Johnson, who beat him. That said, Jeff was a dominant heavyweight in his era, although I do not think the most dominant we have seen, and a place in the top ten, and consideration for the top five, is not unreasonable.

 

Jeffries was probably not 6-2 never mind 6-3 and his best fighting weight 210-215. He was a heavy puncher, not a ko artist.
Maher was a serious public contender from 1894-00 but the McCoy fight finished him as a serious contender. Maher could probably ko just about anyone but he was never was really a contender for Jeff's title. Even at his best he would have only a small outside (punchers)chance of beating Jeffries. I accept Jeff's opponents were small but nobody had him in any sort of trouble and this to me is his greatest legacy-cant think of any other heavy champ that the same could be said of-except maybe John l.

 

A few things OLD FOGEY.

1 ) You cannot say Corbett Ruhlin, Jackson, and Shakrey were small, because they were, except for Sharkey heavier and longer than Marciano, and pretty close in weight to a prime Joe Louis. In most of their fights Marciano and Louis would be crusier weights too.

Jeffries KO'd Munroe and the papers weigh in say Munroe ( San Fran Chronical ) was 210 pounds. Kennedy, whom Jefrries KO'd in 2 was 200+ pounds too. Kennedy was close to 220.

2 ) The Poll was done before Ali made his legacy, but after Liston ruined his in the Ali fights. Perhaps that explains their lower ranks.

3 ) The opinion here is by not one, but a dozen historians. I have a hard time placing Fitz at #3, but it is plausible he might have deserved a spot as high as #3, because Corbett might be better than anyone Dempsey or Louis defeated.