James Jeffries vs Deontay Wilder

Oh bull. You don't get to make up ratings. You don't get to change results.

Wilder dropped him twice and fought him to a draw. The only people who gave Wilder two rounds were the nitwits on this board. The only HIGHLIGHTS of the fight you ever see are Wilder flooring Fury twice.

Jack Johnson successfully defended his title on a draw against Jim Johnson. Tommy Burns successfully defended his title against Philadelphia Jack O'Brien with a draw. Chris Byrd successfully defended his title against Andrew Golota with a draw. Hasim Rahman successfully defended his title against James Toney with a draw. And Wilder successfully defended his title against Tyson Fury with a draw.

And Johnson, Burns, Byrd and Rahman didn't floor their challengers twice along the way.

Jeffries wasn't better than Wilder. Jeffries didn't fight anyone remotely as good as Tyson Fury. Most of Jeffries opponents wouldn't have even been ranked if there were ratings back then, since he defended against nobodies or old super middleweights who hadn't fought in years ... and not even BOXREC rated challengers who haven't had a fight in three years.

And the ridiculous Wilder haters on this board are embarrassing.

Wilder would win. And the longer this thread is open, the further back Jeffries falls in the poll.

Because people know you guys are pushing nonsense.

 

I saw the fight live.

I watched it again, scoring it as favorably as I could for Wilder.

I couldn't for the life of me give Wilder more than four rounds, and two would probably have been more realistic.

I agree with Ring Magazine's decision to ignore the result!

 

Might I ask which footage you are basing this interpretation upon?

 

This is simply not true though.
Do you think that Carlos Baldomir looks better than Zab Judah for example?

 

That's nice. But this isn't a Wilder-Fury thread. It's not a "Where are guys who fought for the title five years ago rated on Boxrec Today" thread.

It's a Wilder-Jeffries thread.

Wilder beats "Sugar" Jim Jeffries.

 

Any footage available of Jeffries honestly. Listen don't get me wrong, he was a good boxer for his time but anyone who thinks he can beat a modern heavyweight is delusional, hands always down, punching from the waist, crossing his feet, all against unathletic and uncoordinated fighters (compared to the ones of today) and I can time stamp the videos if you want examples of what I'm talking about.

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

Fighters like Luis Ortiz and Tyson Fury started boxing as kids, have fought internationally as amateurs against all sorts of different styles and have competed against the best in pro boxing, if they can get knocked down by Wilder even with considerable skill and size advantages, he's murdering a guy like Jeffries, is not that hard honestly, all sports have evolved tremendously and I do think boxing is not as based on speed and pure strenght as other sports but the skillset, training methods and overall level of competition has clearly evolved since the 1900's. I will defend guys like Tunney, Dempsey and Johnson because they clearly had a good understanding of boxing techniques for their time and guys like Robinson, Pep, Armstrong can compete at any era but there's a limit, Jeffries is not touching Wilder, he's getting Brezeale'd for sure.

This content is protected

 

Not when said draw should be a loss.

Not when your losing. I'm sure if guys who you've fought, but not beat, equates to a good résumé, you'd have no problem saying Kevin Johnson has the best résumé in today's division. And why'd you bring Joshua into our chat? I didn't mention him.

If an old man with a heart problem, and a walking punchbag who relies solely on size to win is his best wins, then yeah it is horrendous. No-one worth listening to had Breazeale top 5.

You do realize that's a valid criticism, right? People often accuse Big George of sitting on his ranking and padding his record. LOL

Also, when Wilder beats the likes of Frazier and Norton, let me know, and we can make this comparison again.

Who cares who Jeffries fought in 1904, it's not 1904 anymore....

This is your issue. You don't read properly. No-one has a problem with Wilder fighting Fury. No-one is taking it away from Wilder, that he is clearly willing to face Fury, the #1. What we are saying, is that Wilder hasn't beaten anyone of historical value. Unless you think Ortiz and Stiverne are (they're not), I'm sure you agree with that.

Guys who Rob him of one the greatest comebacks ever...

If Covid prevents that from happening, and Joshua fights Fury in 2021, you'll look almost as stupid as you did on Feb 23rd.

 

That's not Jim Jeffries and Bob Fitzsimmons. But I can understand your confusion. They often had actors play boxers and recreate fights when matches weren't filmed.

They didn't worry about how poor the actors looked, because the boxers at that time weren't much better. (LOL)

 

No, the stupid people are those who thought Wilder was going to step aside, Whyte was going to step aside, Pulev was going to step aside, Usyk was going to step aside, and an Irish Mobster banned from his country and considered a global terrorist was going to negotiate with a Middle-Eastern oil baron to stage Fury-Joshua in 2021 ... and everyone would be fine with that.

And, apparently, you were one of them.

That thread is as stupid as this one.

Wilder beats Jeffries.

 

That's a reenactment with guys who aren't Fitz or Jeffries.

 

Actually, I wasn't. I never said it was likely that that's what happens, I just said you'd look foolish if it did.

Based on what? Give us some analysis, and 'Jeffries was old and small', doesn't count.

It's interesting how you ignore all the good points I made. Although it's quite poetic for a wilder fan to duck the tough shots from someone younger.

 

Tough shots?

Why do I think Deontay Wilder beats Jim Jeffries?

It's a boxing thread where this has been debated for a couple weeks. Everyone has said their peace. Now it's sunken to a "Where is Eric Molina rated on Boxrec right now" thread, because everyone didn't pile on against Wilder like they normally do and vote for Jeffries.

Go back and read my posts in this thread. I don't care to repeat everything because you're too lazy to read.

Clearly you haven't, because I never said Wilder wins because "Jeffries was old and small."

 

(LOL. Ha. Ha. ha. ha. ha. LOL. Snort.)

Fury (in shape) weighs 100 pounds more than Fitz ... and Fury has a two-FOOT reach advantage over Fitz (85 inches to 71 inches).

Let me repeat that ... 100 pounds in weight and TWO FEET in reach. Not to mention eight inches taller.

And, on tape, Fury is sure as hell a better boxer and much better defensively than Fitz. I have no idea why you think Fitz is remotely a better fighter. Watch the films of Fitz. There's nothing to write home about there. They don't lie, unlike many of those wildly exagerrated newspaper clippings.

Show me ONE CLIP OF FITZ DOING THIS IN AN ACTUAL FIGHT.

This content is protected

The sport has changed RADICALLY in the last 120 years.

I know YOU don't care, but it certainly matters.

Are we finished now?