Jeffries vs Schmeling who is greater

IMO Schemling.......I´ll explain later.....

 

Interesting thread, hope there will be some discussion.

Big Schmeling fan here. But overall the highest I ever ratedhim was Top15 while Jeffries is most of the time in the Top10 for me. Jeffries had a shorter career but fought about as many contenders as Schmeling in his, had more defences and was more dominant - although not as much as it might seem, Schmeling beat some number one and two contenders as impressivly or even more as Jeffries did, see Stribling and Walker for example. Schmeling had a longer career, has the better top win, proved he could comeback from losses and IMO has a bit better resume overall. Depends what you like, dominance vs. longevity, title defences vs. great wins. Hm, honestly, I think my opinion might switch to Schmeling. It´s close though. Perhaps JEffries doen´t deserve a Top10 ranking anymore.

 

Jeffries for me.:good

 

I think the greater win would be the Joe Louis KO by Max but Jeffries was the more dominant man in respective era's with Schmeling being in the tougher era...Jeffires had a short career like Joe Frazier but Jeffries loss came way after his prime and Frazier shortly after his prime.....Schmeling had some good wins but had his share of losses but the Louis and Baer losses happened post prime for him also.....this is a close call but I am going to give it to Jeffries

 

"Louis and Baer losses happened post prime for him"

Schmeling was past his prime in 1933?

 

1934 was the loss to Baer. Arguably, considering he already had a career in Europe before moving to the US. I don´t think so though. Schmeling was prime for and lost to Baer at his very best. No excuse but also no shame in that. Outside of the Baer loss in his prime he beat every fighter he fought - he didn´t lose to Sharkey. He avenged the loss to Hamas and even his "draw" to Uzcudun. He definitly was past his prime against Louis though (both fights, less in the first).

I actually don´t think Jeffries was much more dominant. Schmeling fought in a tougher era and while he had some closer fights than Jeffries he also dlivered beatdowns of numbet one and two contenders that were as or more impressive as Jeffries best wins. Jeffries was more dominant but how much has this to do with his size advantage and his weaker era?

 

I rate Schmelling higher. He beat a higher calibre of fighter than Jeffries did,and he was a better boxer per se. With the exception of Jack Johnson,those old time fighters were n't as good as the the ones who followed.

 

Can you envisage Jeffries beating Joe Louis though ?

 

In a fight to the finish? Yeah, I think he would do that.

I guess many people asked the same question about Schmeling before he fought Louis. Or about Douglas before he fought Tyson. And ...

Honestly, I don´t know what this has to do with anything.

 

For years, lists compiled by guys that had seen both of them rated Jeffries very highly- I've seen him as high as #3 into the 1950s- while Schmeling was not rated at all. The gentlemen compiling those lists were much more familiar with either/both of them than I, so I'll defer to their judgement.

 

Jeff has to be rated higher on basis of cleaning out the division... at least the white part. Head to head, Schmeling takes him, just seemed possessed of a lot more science and clout.

 

The 225-pound Jeffries had a much better chin and durability than Schmeling. Head to head he'd knock Max out. Just too strong for him and could take whatever Max doled out. Jeff was tough enough, skilled enough, and had a strong enough punch that he could have stopped Louis too, if he happened to nail the same Louis that Schmeling fought. Jeff could attack and fairly quickly KO opponents, but he also could be patient and box and counterpunch and play defense too, and come on strong as the fight progressed.

 

On legacy alone, I'd have to give the nod to Jim Jeffries. Beating the best of his era, and establishing a solid title reign with very few fights, then retiring unbeaten is a remarkable claim.