Actually Sharkey doesn't need to be discussed at all, the thread is about Jeffries chances against Marciano's title challengers and any disparagement of Jack Johnson by you here is irrelevant ,unnecessary ,and totally superfluous to the subject of the thread.Rather like yourself really.
Well then, Sharkey was considered the Marciano of his times. Jeffries beat him twice. Once when he was green the first time. The second time he put Sharkey in the hospital fighting with an injured shoulder from round two- twenty-five. PS: You brought up the sparring with Johnson, not Iatsch
"Jeffries seems to have improved after this." He only fought a 37 year old Corbett who had laid off three years, and the mediocre Munroe, who was a fringe contender at best. I don't think the competition proves or even supplies evidence that Jeff had improved. I think Fitz in 1902 is the last defense Jeff made against anyone who could be expected to give a competitive fight.
"Sharkey was considered the Marciano of his times" By whom? Marciano was still fifty years in the future. It would be an interesting question if anyone actually saw both men in their primes. Folks didn't live as long back then, and to also be old and experienced enough to understand what you are seeing--well, you would have to be in your seventies by the time Marciano came along. And then the question of how reliable are fifty year old memories. You're the one who is making this comparison. The two men share some physical characteristics, but otherwise Marciano was much more successful (even putting the Jeffries fights aside) in his own era than Sharkey was in his. Marciano was sort of built like Uzcudun or Mauriello also, but that doesn't make either of them a good comp for Marciano.
on the original question I think Walcott, Charles, and Moore outpoint Jeffries. Boxing had just come a very long ways since the 1890's. Jeffries being basically a one handed fighter would also be a big disadvantage against fighters with this much skill. I don't buy the logic of Walcott lost badly to Marciano and so he would automatically be an easy victim of Jeffries.
While most folks didn't live long back then, boxing historians like Fleischer, Rose, and Odd lived from Jeffries championship years past Marciano's championship years! Into the 1970's. All three felt Jeffries was better. There you have it. There are plenty of comparisons out there on the web comparing Marciano to Tom Sharkey. Perhaps the most revenant one today is from the dean of historians, Tracy Callis. He's an expert on boxers pre 1930. He says It is the opinion of this writer that Sharkey was a Rocky Marciano "look-a-like" and a "near-equal"of the great "Rock" in ruggedness, power and size.
I mentioned the sparring to illustrate that Sharkey was as crude as a corn cob and had little or no defence,you then took it as an opportunity to denigrate Johnson,[when do you ever not!] Stick to the thread.
Sharkey was stopped several times, Marciano never was.Sharkey was 5'8" tall and from178/185lbs, he was as crude as f*ck and a temper dirty fighter.Plus he drew the colour line after being stopped by the only black fighter he ever faced. Any resemblance between them is pretty superficial. Gilbert Odd was born in1902 he saw neither Jeffries or Sharkey fight. Charley Rose was born in 1886 he was 12 years old when Jeffries first fought Sharkey,Nat Fleischer was born in1887 he was 11 when Sharkey fought Jeffries.
While most folks didn't live long back then, boxing historians like Fleischer, Rose, and Odd lived from Jeffries championship years past Marciano's championship years! Into the 1970's. All three felt Jeffries was better. There you have it. There are plenty of comparisons out there on the web comparing Marciano to Tom Sharkey. Perhaps the most revenant one today is from the dean of historians, Tracy Callis. He's an expert on boxers pre 1930. He says It is the opinion of this writer that Sharkey was a Rocky Marciano "look-a-like" and a "near-equal"of the great "Rock" in ruggedness, power and size. LOL, so you saying these people who lived boxing never saw any of the Jeffries films that are no longer here? And they never spoke to the managers, trainers or referees who were at the events live? You're a real piece of work McVey! As a footnote I read the Jeffries vs Sharkey film was shown in theaters and considered to be in excellent shape until the 1930's. But three of the largest historians in the game never bothered to see what was then viewed as the best title fight of all time? Um, okay ( Sarcasm ) Tom Sharkey in his prime was hard to stop. Marciano, if he fought past his prime as Sharkey did would have been stopped too.
If you are talking about contemporary opinions of these fighters, then we see more of a mixed picture. Jeffries was criticised by many early in his title reign, but by the end of it he arguably had the biggest aura of invincibility that any champion has ever had. A lot of people were critical of Sharkey while he was active. You occasionally hear things like “he is not in Ruhlin’s class”. You get the idea that he was seen as this Marciano like figure after the dust settled.
Corbett's corner thought so little of his chances against Jeffries in their second fight they had a pre-arranged signal to get the fight stopped.I don't know why people always say that because Jeffries did better against the now 3/4 years older Corbett he had improved.Corbett at that stage of his career was not going to be an accurate gauge to measure any improvement in Jeffries . Munro was a joke.