Jack Johnson was stronger than Jim Jeffries

I'm thrilled your on the Burns book ... if you continue through Johnson it will be amazing ... through Dempsey a dream ...

 

http://query.nytimes.com/mem/archive-free/pdf?res=F70F16FE355D16738DDDA90B94DD405B808DF1D3

I found this interesting. 12 seconds is not a bad time at the end of a running session. I wonder if johnson was faster than Jeffries?

 

I believe all your books have been well received .I'm sure a book on Burns will be similarly received. Will Jack Johnson eventually get a tome?

 

I kinda' doubt it, bro.... Jimmy Jeff was amazing for a photo on July 4, 1910 at age 35 and 227 pounds, yet he had to be drained a tad since he lost 110+ pounds in a mere "6" months.... Jimmy Jeff was reported to be near 340 pounds earlier on January 1, 1910...

Had Jimmy Jeff been age 26 from 1901 and a lean 222 pounds and at his peak, his strength would naturally be more pronounced then...

MR.BILLhat

 

I would not find it hard to believe he was good on his feet or had very good stamina but this is hardly scientific.

Big Jim went under 10 seconds for 100 yards, which in that day, with those running surfaces and his size, is quite an accomplishment. Basically, he was as fast and the same size as most of the vaunted running backs of today's NFL. If you don't know Yank football, then maybe a Jonah Lomu-type athlete is a better comparison.

 

Read this article
Excellent stuff and a highly respectable time for Johnson's sprint, I used to do it in 11.2, but that was on grass.
Johnson most likely was not as fast as Jeffries over 100yds, indeed I was unaware he was speedy at all, remarkable really, since he was kicked by a horse when young and had a broken leg as a result .If you look closely at his left leg in photos ,you can see a vertical scar running down it , the legacy of the kick.

 

If Jeffries went under 10 seconds then he beat the Olympic and world's records of the time which I find highly doubtful.
Was this with, or without the Bull Moose on his shoulders?

 

....nah, wikipedia and another newspapers of the time suggested that big Jim could run the 100yrds in just under 10.5 secs.
Nonetheless very impressive for a big guy like him.

If he could had run 100 under 10, not only he would had been the fastest man in his days, but also the fastest white man in history...well if you take out from the equation the 19 yr old frenchie who ran this summer a 9.8.

 

The '96 Olympic Games were a joke with Tom Burke going 12 seconds over 100 meters, a time which I think I did when I was 13 years old... and which a fair amount of high school girls can break. By 1910 the hand-timed record was in the 10.6 second range. If Jim did 10 flat for 100 yards, that puts him at 11 seconds for 100 meters. Hardly implausible for a top flight athlete.

 

When was Jeffries supposed to have run this time and ,who timed him? Would have been my questions,if I cared.

 

Exactly. I don't even trust official times from way back when. Hell, I don't trust hand times from today. It probably based on some real occurrence, whether exactly that fast or not. Suffice it to say, he was fast and an exceptional athlete. That is what I gather.

 

I agree whole heartedly with you.I have no doubt Jeffries was very fast at running ,everything I have read about him agrees on this.
Of course this does not necessarily have to translate into the ring,eg, Ali was not a good runner ,on the track.Johnson ran against a kangaroo ,and a couple of jack rabbits in Australia, but the rabbits were in an enclosure ,so disorientated,and they will not run normally in such circumstances.
Jeffries appears to have been the first really big heavyweight , [for those days],who had athleticism as well as size .,he was described as the strongest man in the world .Today he would look a bit puny against less than huge heavies such as Holyfield.

 

Chemical assistance can't be discounted in that comparison, either. Steroids/PED's were in U.S., football from the early 60's on, and so it's likely they were in boxing from short time after that (if not at the same time given how prevalent the use of the chemicals were in the Olympics as a whole). By the time Holyfield rose to heavyweight prominence, it seemed like most of the entire heavyweight division was jacked up. The difference in guys from the earlier parts of their career to then are striking- Tyson, Holyfield, Morrison, etc. And those were the more obvious visual cases.

 

I do not disagree with you, however,for his day Jeffries was a giant ,today an average sized heavyweight

 

True.