Jeffries in the 1970's

MAgoo,

Power, durability and stamina translate into any era. Who in the 1970's has a better triple of these areas in comparison to Jeffries?

If you watch the training film or read first hand testimonials you will see Jeffries had good agility and footwork

You could argue the skills of 1895-1910 were not as good as they were now, but skills are modern fans think of it don't include hooks, body shots or uppercuts. They refer to more of jabbing, combinations, and counters.

At any rate, punchers in the 1970's were not very skilled, were sometimes chinny, and other times gassed.

I think Jeffries could be champion in some years of the 1970's.

 

His power stamina and durability were prominent in his era because he was fighting men were significantly smaller, weaker, some cases older and at a much slower pace. If a 215 lbs man smashes a 167 lbs man in the face and knocks him out, well sure the bigger man is going to look like he has " power." And being bigger, stronger and younger and going at a slower pace is why we see fights that went 25 rounds on his record. The dude had his nose broken by guys that could be super middle weights today. I'm not even sure Jeffries would enjoy fighting George Chuvalo let alone George Foreman.

 

Or he was moved quickly and fought mostly name fighters. At 220 pounds, Jeffries would still be the biggest ranked guy in the 1970's.

Jeffries produced a knockdown in every fight he had save his comeback fight in 1910. More importantly he produced many ten counts. Sometimes the other guy was out cold or went to the hospital. If you look at his record, the larger men he fought lasted a shorter amount of time.

The only fighter who beat on him was FLtizsommons, who was a lethal puncher that produced three fatalities from boxing. Nat Fleischer himself said Fitz hit harder than Joe Louis. And when he fought Jeffries in the re-match many feel Fitz tampered with his wraps or gloves.

I think some here pick and choose to use weights.

Example, Foreman was knocked down and would have been stopped in a 15 round match vs a light punching Jimmy Young.

Ali was badly floored by a 185.5 pound Henry Cooper and might have lost if not for the smelling salts and gamesmanship of Dundee. Prior to that he was nearly out boxed by a sub 200 pound Doug Jones, and floored by Sonny Banks

Joe Frazier went down from a non-name who was under 200 pounds.

Foreman took Peralta the distance in 10 rounds, and could have gassed out had it been 15.

See how easy it is to use one blanket statement that apply it by saying so and so would never be top 10 today because he had trouble vs sub 200 pound guy? And none of the guys I mentioned were close to Fitz in class.

 

Named fighters who were past prime and wouldn't even be fighting in the heavyweight division in the 70's.. If Wlad were to knockout Bernard Hopkins tomorrow would that be something that two arguing internet posters a 100 years from now could use to draw any conclusions with?

Neigh.. He wasn't always 220. His weight ranged all over the place from 206 to 240 and I suspect that when he was a bit heavier he wasn't in the best shape. He was 206 when he lifted the title from Fitz George Foreman was 6'3", 224 when he demolished a prime Norton. Ken was also 6'3", and around 215 when prime and ripped. Ali was 6'3", 215-220 for most of the 70's. Even the guys who were smaller than Jeffries wouldn't be facing nearly as wide of a gap as the men who fought him back in his day.

The larger men he fought weren't world class and still not as big or as athletic as the men he'd be facing nearly a century later. The smaller guys who WERE world class were hopelessly out matched yet he still took a beating from them. Christ, Bob Fitz was thirty nine years old with the build of a light heavyweight and broke Jeffries' nose, gave him cuts around both eyes and I believe even broke one of his ribs.

Wrong. Tom Sharkey gave him a beating in their second fight and that's without doing any significant research on some of his other ones. Again a beating taken from a smaller man who managed to take him 25 rounds and wasn't taken out.

Did Nat Fleischer FIGHT either Joe Louis or Bob Fitz? Because in my book that's the only way to make that distinction.

As do you which is one of the more common tactics that you use when picking Vitali Klitscko against smaller men.

LOL.. Jimmy Young had more boxing skill and elusiveness in his pinky finger than Jeffries had in his whole body.. Never mind the fact that he was larger than anyone Jeffries ever faced and had the experience of being in the ring with some of the greatest fighters of all time.

Yes using a fight that Ali had at 21 years of age with 19 pro fights and still ended up beating the shlt out of the other guy anyway. Not especially convincing on this end.

Was that non name Oscar Bonavena? You mean a seasoned contender who fought Frazier in his 12th pro fight and still lost?

Yes a 100 fight veteran who at 6'1" 197 lbs was STILL bigger than most of Jeffries opponents and facing a 15 fight Foreman and STILL lost..

Yeah but none of your examples were good.. They don't help Jeffries.

 

WRONG. Choynski, Sharkey 2x and Corbett for the first match at age 33 were not past their prime. Ftiz was like Hopkins. His prime went into his late 30's

In the 1970's more like 230 in shape.

In terms of raw athelteism, Jeffries would perhaps be the best in the 1970's. Frazier wasn't much of an athlete. Neither was Foreman.

I think part of the issue is you shoot first and aim later missing details in this thread. Jeffries floored Sharkey in round two, and hurt his shoulder. At the end of the fight, Sharkey took the beating. Many who saw Sharkey or Marciano said the two were comparable. If not for the early injury, Sharkey is stopped. In fact with a modern ref, Shakey is TKo'd

Then you can never say who hit harder in any thread! Do you want to pigeon hole yourself? Nat could be correct or wrong, but the comparison alone shows Fitz was a great hitter.

Ever man he fought was smaller. But your missing the central point. If your a super heavyweight with skills, you are not getting out boxed by smaller men. Smaller heavies who are near the same height and reach can out box the heavier man, but that goes away when the smaller guy if giving up a lot of height and reach...if the much bigger man has skills forgetaboutit!

Oh sure, please tell me why Young lost so often then? He was a good boxer, but not fast or big. And he wasn't a puncher. Boxers gave Foreman trouble. Foreman was almost Ko'd by Lyle. You're telling me he'd last with Jeffries? He would have to win early.

Bonavena was likely the 2nd best puncher Frazier fought. He floored him twice and by Frazier's own admission he was close to defeat. Score the fight on a 10 point must, and you come out with a draw. Frazier didn't fight punchers for a reason.

By what 5-10 pounds? Big deal. The class of the fighter matters a heck of a lot more than 5-10 pounds. If the fight was 15 Foreman losses. He almost gassed out.

I get the feeling you have not seen or done enough research on the topic to formulate an opinion that you are capable of. Jeffries not in the top 10 in the 1970's??? You on your own there. No historian would agree with that.

 

The underlined is wrong. Jeffries only once scaled 220lb s for a defence 224 for Munroe.Many of the 70 top ten weighed as much if not more than Jeffries and they were all taller guys like:
Ali
Holmes
Norton
Lyle
Knoetze
Coetzee
Bugner
Wepner
Evangelista
That's just a sample.
Even Frazier was around the same weight as Jeffries in the 70's.


Jeffries examined Fitzsimmons,[ not FLtizommons], wraps in the ring prior to their second fight he was satisfied with them ,it's all documented. Dundee drawing the referee's attention to the tear in the glove bought an extra 10 seconds.
You are the one making blanket statements and they are easily disproved.

 

NO, the non name was Mike Bruce who did weigh under 200lbs , he was 199lbs, it was Frazier's second fight.
Pretty desperate argument.

 

Never said anything about Choynski and yes Fitz and Corbett were past it.

Pure speculation and frankly I don't think it does him any good.

Well they certainly had a lot more contend with than past prime super middles and guess what? They didn't even get their nose broken in the process. Ain't that somthin'?

I don't care what the details were... Tom Sharkey was a 5'8" light cruiserweight who took Jeffries a combined 45 rounds and was never stopped by him and even gave Jeff a good beating in their second fight. Jesus you'd actually pick him to beat Forman, Frazier or Ali knowing this?

Not doubting he was a good hitter at all. but blindly claiming that he hit harder than Joe Louis is not a statement that I'll give credence too especially when its based on nothing more than an empty comment.

Jeffries wasn't a super heavyweight though.. And he DID get outboxed by smaller men at times. He just had the necessary advantages to break them down and stop them later.

Young lost often because he was mismanaged early and fought long past his expiration date. Foreman was off for 15 months, coming off a devastating loss and facing a more formidable heavyweight than anyone Jeff ever fought save Jack Johnson. A better Question would be, Could jeffries rise from two knockdowns from Lyle to go on to win the way that Foreman did?

Be that as it may he was a novice when he fought Bonavena and still won. Then beat him again in the rematch minus the knockdowns.

I mentioned it because he was actually on the small end of the spectrum as Foreman opponents go and yet still bigger than some of Jeffries Biggest. Furthermore this doesn't address the fact that Foreman was a prospect while Peralta had nearly 100 fights of experience. Kind of an important detail

Good. then don't bother responding to any of the above. I know I have better things to do.

 

I gave him the benefit of the doubt that he picked a man in his 12th, but yeah that's pretty sad.

 

Wow! 90 FIGHT Peralta went the distance with15 FIGHT novice Foreman in their first fight! Peralta had 110 fights and was stopped 3 TIMES , when he was a 173lbs light heavy, by Pastrano on a cut eye and by Foreman in their rematch ,he twice went the distance with Ron Lyle, managing a draw when he was 38!
How pathetic are you?atsch

 

Guy tells me I don't know what I'm talking about with an arrogant tone then goes and shoots for the weakest possible links he can find. How much do you wanna bet that if I started a thread claiming that Jeffries would never be champion in the 70's, the first name he'd shout out would be LEON SPINKS !!!!

 

According to Pollack's book, many thought Sharkey was worth a draw in the first Jeffries fight .

 

You know the strength of him and so does everyone else.:yep
Foreman likely gasses out to Peralta? And the evidence for that is?atsch
Here are the scorecards.

Referee: Mark Conn 9-1
Judge: Jack Gibbons 7-3
Judge: Tony Castellano 5-4

• Unofficial AP scorecard: 6-2-2
• Unofficial UPI scorecard: 9-1

 

Jeffries is arguably the outstanding example of somebody who would have done well in any era.

Look at it logically.

He was a tremendous natural talent, who was thrown in the deep end earlier than any other champion in history, and probably won the title with less ring experience than any other champion in history.

He wasn’t successful because of his era, but despite it.

If you put him in an era where he is nurtured from early in his career, backed financially from the outset, and matched carefully, he is only going to get better.

 

Magoo who is a good poster, but he's lost at sea in this thread. Some of the things he says are head scratchers.

Jeffries would not be top 10 in the 1970's? - Magoo

You can't compare punchers unless you fought them? - Magoo.

WOW. Just Wow.


Then he choose to pick lower weight for Jeffries opponents, but ignores then when I point out Ali, Foreman, and Fraizer had trouble ) Lost or floored, something Jeffries never did ) with guys below 200 pounds as well and he acts like it did not matter? A huge double standard and a sign he's not debating fairly as nothing was acknowledged.

I think McVey must have hacked into his account...either that or he's just out of his element in this thread.

Either way I'm finished from commenting in this thread. Maybe I'll return if something untrue or shockingly bad is said.