1) Mendoza, in another post, supplied this link to The New York Times coverage of the 1900 Jeffries-Corbett fight http://query.nytimes.com/mem/archive-free/pdf?res=9506E6D91E31E033A25751C1A9639C946197D6CF (If the link on this post doesn't work, first try refreshing; if the article still doesn't show, go to post #20 of http://www.eastsideboxing.com/forum/showthread.php?t=43920&page=2&highlight=outbox+jeffries ) How would you score this fight, based on NYT's account? Here's what I came up with: Round One: I had it for Corbett (1-0 Corbett). (In addition to my scoring on rounds, I'll also give, first, a pro-Jeffries (10-9, Corbett) and pro-Corbett (10-9, Corbett) points scoring). Round Two: Jeffries, but arguably even (1-1), (19-19; 20-19 Corbett) Round Three: Jeffries (2-1, Jeffries), (29-28 Jeffries; 29-29) Round Four: Decidedly Jeffries (3-1 Jeffries), (39-36 Jeffries; 39-38 Jeffries) Round Five: Jeffries (Jeffries took the start of the round, Corbett the middle, Jeffries the end) (4-1 Jeffries); (49-45 Jeffries; 49-47 Jeffries) Round Six: Jeffries (5-1 Jeffries); (59-54 Jeffries, 59-56 Jeffries) Round Seven: Decidedly Jeffries (6-1 Jeffries) -- however this is the first round where Jeffries is described as punching in a wild manner -- see also rounds 8, 10 and 15; (69-62 Jeffries; 69-65 Jeffries). Round Eight: I gave this to Corbett, though arguements could be made for scoring the round even, or even giving it to Jeffries (6-2 Jeffries); (79-71 Jeffries, 78-75 Corbett) Round Nine: Corbett by a fair margin -- borderline two-point round (6-3 Jeffries); (88-81 Jeffries; 86-85 Corbett) Round Ten: Decidedly Corbett (6-4 Jeffries); (97-91 Jeffries; 95-94 Corbett) Round Eleven: Corbett by a fair margin -- borderline two-point round (6-5 Jeffries); (106-101 Jeffries; 105-102 Corbett) Round Twelve: Corbett, but arguably even (6-6); (116-111 Jeffries; 115-111 Corbett); NYT reports there was even betting at this point Round Thirteen: Jeffries (7-6 Jeffries); (126-120 Jeffries; 124-121 Corbett) Round Fourteen: Corbett (7-7); (135-130 Jeffries, 134-130 Corbett) Round Fifteen: Corbett (8-7 Corbett); (144-140 Jeffries, 144-139 Corbett) Round Sixteen: Even, but arguably for Jeffries (8-7-1 Corbett); (154-149 Jeffries, 154-149 Corbett) Round Seventeen: Jeffries, but arguably even -- both fighters effective, NYT called the round Jeffries' (8-8-1); (164-158 Jeffries, 164-159 Corbett) Round Eighteen: Corbett (9-8-1 Corbett); (173-168 Jeffries, 174-168 Corbett) Round Nineteen: Jeffries -- Jeffries knocks down Corbett and also generally has the better of the round (9-9-1); (183-176 Jeffries, 182-178 Corbett) Round Twenty: Corbett (10-9-1 Corbett); (192-186 Jeffries, 192-187 Corbett) Round Twenty-one: Even, but arguable count have been scored for either fighter (10-9-2 Corbett); (202-195 Jeffries; 202-196 Corbett) Round Twenty-two: Jeffries -- NYT also states that Corbett was weakening (10-10-2); (212-204 Jeffries, 211-206 Corbett) Jeffries seemed to hold the advantage during round twenty-three at the point when Corbett was knocked out. So, just going off of NYT, after twenty-two rounds I have an even fight on rounds, 10-10-2, with Jeffries having three big rounds (4, 7, 19 (knocked down Corbett), and Corbett having a big tenth round, and semi-big rounds in the 9th and 11th, and with Corbett appearing to tire. I'll be very interested to see how others would score, based on NYT. There are a lot of rounds that could have gone either way. (The above was my second attempt at scoring; in my first attempt, I didn't write down the rounds, just kept a cumulative tally in my head, and ended up with Corbett ahead 12-9-1, though Jeffries had more big rounds. Even on that reading Corbett hadn't yet cinched a decision). 2) How do you feel about NYT coverage? Are there reasons to consider it more or less accurate/unbiased than other coverages? 3) Have you read any contemporary coverage that suggested Jeffries could have only won via a knockout? I do not see anything in the NYT commentary that suggested Corbett had a decision cinched. It's clear that Jeffries had not prevented Corbett from boxing wonderfully; yet it's not clear that Corbett was decisively winning, or necessarily even winning at all when he was KO'd. (It was stated that, during round 15, Jeffries people looked worried). 4) Does anyone know how a decision would have been rendered? Were there judges in addition to the referee, or was it soley the referees decision? Were rounds required to be scored and, if so, was the decision to be based on score, or could other considerations be allowed? Apollack is writting a book on Jeffries which, I'm sure, will be invaluable when it comes out.
Guilalah, As I said before sometimes a quote gets out on the internet and people take it for face value without doing any re-search. I suppose we are all guilty of taking the internet at face value every now and then. Credible reports suggest Jeffries swept the first seven rounds, Corbett mounted a nice come back in the mid rounds, and by round 17 to finish the fight was in Jeffries favor. No credible report says the decsion was Corbett's. That was Corbett talking, and some people beleiving him 100 years later without doing any re-search. Jeffries was neve one to brag to the press. He actually had a good defense and made Corbett miss a few times. The New York Times is fine coverage. So is the Brooklyn Union, the Police Gazette, or the Chicago Times. The San Fran Times is good, Fort Wayne is good. There is a lot of quality news papers out there. Do not go on fighters quotes. Corbett, and Jack Johnson can be full of it at times. If the fight went the 25 rounds, I think it’s either Jeffries via UD based on a strong close, or a draw. I wish I could see this one on flim. Corbett's people say it was his best effort.
Corbett was coming off a long 2-3 year layoff when he fought Jeff and was 34 years old. Corbetts best effort was against peter jackson in 1891. many years earlier. good fight report
If you want the facts, Corbett was coming off a 1.5 year lay off, not 2-3 years as you say. Corbett was 33 ( not 34 ) and his own handlers said the first Jeffries fight was his best effort. But you got one thing right. It is a good fight report.
I dont see how you can score a fight from a newspaper report, a well researched book ,ok , but a newspaer ?,Its well known that the mangers used to pay the press to give their boy a favourable write up,the fact is Jeffries won by ko ,that is irrefutable.
1.5 year layoff for 33 years old is a long time........Also take note corbett had just ONE fight in a 3 year gap prior to fighting jeffries. Corbett's prime was around the time he tangled with peter jackson, not james jeffries.
I don't think he is. If Q was refering to the second fight he has Corbett's age wrong by a wider margin.
It is qalmost imposible to verify that Corbett was inactive over this 1.5 year period. I would also say that some people thought he improved after the Jackso fight.
Boxrec has this quote from the Durango Democrat (probably the AP) on the fight: "Corbett had been making a wonderful battle. His defense was absolutely perfect and while he was lacking in strength, he had more than held his own and stood an excellent chance of winning if the fight had gone the distance. He had not been badly punched and had managed to mark his man severely." I was impressed by the number of times Jeff was said to be bleeding "profusely" or "copiously". Nothing at all is said like this about Corbett. I personally would say it is almost impossible to judge on the basis of these brief round descriptions unless the paper calls the round for one fighter or the other. To get to the rat killing, the evaluation above is consistent with most I have read. I remember a correspondent from one of the San Francisco papers going into the reaction to Jeff losing his title on a decision, something which had never yet happened at least to a heavyweight champion. I don't see why they would go in that direction unless many observers thought Corbett was ahead and heading for a win.
NY Times of that time was mediocre in boxing coverage, and often either published very short reports (10-15 narrow lines) or didn't report at all. Say, Frank Erne - Joe Gans championship fight was not reported at all (NY Tribune, Evening World, Brooklyn Eagle, NY Sun and multiple non-local newspapers published reports).
But Jeffries being ahead does not seem to be the consensus either. Does anyone have a quote from the referee on how he had it scored up to the time of the knockout?
