Jack Dempsey replaces Jim Jeffries

Not to be cute but for a celebrated Iron Man of the ring, it seems Jeffies’ encountered more injuries than one might’ve expected.

Also, I recall one or two of his injuries coming by way of otherwise innocuous training activities - perhaps implying a bit of clumsiness on Jeff’s part?

I think Dempsey would wreck Jeff’s opposition far more definitively than Jeff did - suffice to say, I can’t see Sharkey not being KO’d over a sum total of 45 rounds - Bob Fitz himself turned the trick TWICE in less than the sum total of 10 rounds.

Dempsey’s aggression and delivery system was so much greater than Jeffries - I also think Jack’s punch power, in its own right, was that much superior to that of Jeffries’ also.

 

With you on that mcvey.
Jack was so much more explosive than Jeff, I don't see such as old Bob Fitzsimmons and Corbett lasting very long against Dempsey.

 

Sharkey gave him a hell of a fight both times was Jeffries injured in the other bout?

If you put this with the damaged hand against Armstrong,and the drugged tea which was responsible for him losing to Johnson,he seems to have a reason for every less than scintillating performance.

 

Would you put say the Dempsey of teh Sudenberg fight in with Choynski?

 

Dempsey vs Johnson would have been interesting but I favour Dempsey over all Jeffries opponents

 

Dempsey was a middleweight in1915 when he fought Sudenberg..The OP wanted opinions on the version of Dempsey that fought Firpo v Jeffries opponents.Not the teenaged Dempsey of 8 years earlier.

 

When Fitzsimmons after beating the **** out of Jeffries for 7 rds was kod by him in the 8th he didn't blame his smashed hands for his defeat.

 

To each his own definition of course, but for me, being an iron man or what have you isn’t centered on being impervious - it would be about pushing through pain & punishment.

 

Very fair point Ney - pushing through pain and whatever damage can be definitely part of the Iron Man package - but the word on Jeffries in particular was often one of a man of uncommon physiology, including being literally impervious to pain - of course there was a lot of hyperbole about Jeffries plied in that regard.

 

"Choynski would be a tough tough out"

The real Dempsey lost to lesser men than Choynski when he had more experience than Jeff had. I think Choynski would beat him. Probably Hank Griffin would also in Dempsey's debut fight. Dempsey was not a prodigy like Jeffries.

Doesn't automatically mean Dempsey didn't end up a better fighter than Jeff at his peak.

 

By the way, my reading of the OP is Dempsey replaces Jeff for Jeff's career.

Dempsey was born in 1895 and the OP mentions 1914 to 1923.

Jeff was born in 1875 and so such a career would be from 1894 to 1903 or so.

So it would be the 22 year old Dempsey of 1917 who takes on Choynski.

It would be a teenage Dempsey who takes on Griffin.

That is why I think against Jeff's opponents Dempsey probably loses a couple of early ones.

 

Good points. Though Dempsey turned 22 in June of 1917, and from September of that same year he began picking up momentum preceding his prime tear to the title during 1918.

Unless I’ve misread, Jeff himself was 21 yo when he fought Griffin in Dec 1896.