I think James J Braddock could have beaten James J Jeffries

This for me.

 

Really good stuff McGrain.

 

"he was slow, his jab was fair at its best" "he did not throw combinations, he did not go to the body, he did not hit nearly hard enough to get Jeffries" "He was not terribly well conditioned nor was he strong defensively"

I have just watched film of Braddock against Loughran, Baer, Louis, and Farr, and have to agree. He at best was just a marginal and very limited fighter. Credit to him for managing to earn a shot and pulling it off, but

He looks totally amateurish against Loughran, who toys with him. At this point, besides poor footwork, he had no left at all.

He does look much better against Baer, but nothing exceptional, and I agree that this fight is more about an unprepared Baer than Braddock's ability. And off the film of the 1937 Baer-Farr fight, any reasonable boxer could spear Baer all night.
As a matter of fact, Farr looks better against Baer and Louis than Braddock does, and off the available film, he was getting the best of Braddock when they met regardless of the controversial decision.

As for Jeff, we have little film, but off the little available, he sure looks better than Braddock, even p4p, not counting that he would have 20 to 30 lbs on Braddock. I think a better question is should Braddock be favored against Hart or Burns, or even Ruhlin.

As for the big run to the title

Griffin--whatever he was thought of as a prospect, he basically lost almost every fight he had for the rest of his career.

Lasky--Was coming off two fights he didn't win, and would be stopped three times in the next year or so

Lewis--Most impressive of the bunch, but he was a lightheavy and would be outboxed not only by the aging Rosenbloom, but by Abe Feldman. This win is impressive, but many fighters have a victory this good.

Bottom line--if Braddock had challenged Louis in 1941, both by record and his performance on film, he would have fit right in with the bum-of-the-month club.

Sorry, but I just can't go along with the Braddock revisionism

 

McGrain, this is an unusually poor thread for you ... Being the HW champion makes him a god fighter ? TO begin with the post Tunney pre-Louis era was filled with poor champions ... Schmeling and Sharkey, the two best were highly inconsistent. Carnera was a complete third rater. Baer a semi-physically gifted clown and Braddock a journeyman light heavyweight .. as far as his astonishing comeback, putting the hype aside Braddock had a few victories and then fought a very limited, highly over confident and under trained Baer .. in one of the poorest title bouts in heavyweight history he squeezed out a boring decision .. makes for a good story but let's not glamorize Braddock as a fighter ... his record clearly shows he was very limited as a light heavyweight , one handed, plodding and across the board unremarkable ... far and away his greatest attributes were his heart and his chin ... as another poster wrote, his greatest achievement was going seven plus rounds against Louis but even that has to be factored by the fact that JOe was fighting cautious that evening to get the title in his early post Schmeling one era ...

 

My initial observation was that the thread would prove popular because it feeds into the partisan split over the quality of the 19th Century heavyweights .. The rest of your argument remains weak and you are clearly splitting hairs in an attempt to maintain some form of creditability , an attempt that is clearly failing ...

 

I'd have to agree with you, McGrain.

Braddock willed himself to world class; He just didn't have enough left to continue to improve and fight at a high level.

Late career renaissances are possible; Watching Braddock from Loughran to Baer, he learns to box in the interim, and I give him all the credit in the world for it.

I think he was still a small heavyweight, and while he was a numbing puncher down a peg, was merely serviceable at the weight he won the title. Jeffries was like a slow rolling, inexorable tide, and while I do think Jimmy could pile up the points if he was boxing in his absolute top form, 15 is a long time. Long, long time.

I have to go with Jeffries, but the fight ends with respect shared, as he'll know he was in a fight.

 

Braddock willed nothing .. he would not have willed himself a victory over Loughran if he fought him ten times ... he fought Max Baer, a clown in his own right who was out of shape and grossly over confident.

 

Do you juggle and make balloon animals as well ? We can book you for highbrow entertainment when the comic books run out .....

 

Just joking as I assume you are ... if you are sensitive think before you start the Smilies ...

 

Styles McGrain ... thread is very weak ..