"Jim J. Jeffries vs. Max Baer" (Heavyweight Title Dream Fight.) Who is the man?

For somebody his size against the opponents he faced i'd seriously call it average perhaps even sub par. Ed is giving Baer flack for not being able to KO Braddock (even tho i said 10000 times he injured both hands in the bout, barely trained etc.) and Uzcudun who both were only KO'd once in their entire careers by Joe Louis, whereas Jeffries couldn't KO a man who weighed 60lbs less than him in 20 rounds a man who was himself KO'd by a Welterweight.

 

1--my point with Braddock (and Uzcudun) is that however tough they were, there is no point in giving Baer credit for power when he failed to ko them.

2--to criticize Baer's power, I would probably focus more on opponents such as Arthur De Kuh, who took Baer to a disputed decision but was stopped in one less than a year later by Mickey Walker. In fairness, I don't think this is fair to Baer either, but it is the sort of thing you are doing with Jeffries, dwelling endlessly on the Choynski fight. Well, this might be considered a poor performance by Jeff, but he was only in his seventh fight and Choynski was not only world class, but a fast and elusive opponent, regardless of size. Tunney and Gibbons, after all, proved tougher for Dempsey to ko than Willard or Fulton or Firpo.

3--The big weakness in your whole argument is that most of Jeff's opponents were in the 180 to 200 lb class--I would estimate 18 out of 23 (with 2 over 200 lbs). He never lost to any of those. Baer lost to Tommy Loughran, Les Kennedy, Johnny Risko, Paulino Uzcudun, Jimmy Braddock, Willie Davies, and Tommy Farr in the 180 to 200lb class (as well as Joe Louis).

4--And Jeff's loss to the over 200 lb Johnson not only came at an advanced age and after a long layoff, but to a man far more skilled than the big men Baer faced. I don't see Baer beating Johnson at any point, let alone at 35 and after a six year layoff.

 

Which welterweight?

 

Barbados Joe Walcott.

 

From the limited footage we have from Jeffries,you can see he is not as primitive as most people think,he has a underrated defense and by the reads I about him,a good chin and was hard to hit (because of his crouch stance,Bob Fitzsimmons broke his two hands trying to hit him) that plus unending stamina.

So what we have on the menu:Great chin,hard to hit,unending stamina,ko power.

Max Baer reminds me of Foreman,but it seems to me that he wasnt as hungry as Foreman to finish a fight,sometimes he would make the fight difficult for him like in the Braddock fight.Max also ate alot of jabs and didnt had a very good defense.It seems to me that Jeffries was the better fighter of the two,i would say Jefffries wins by UD or KO in final rounds.

 

I thought he was referring to Sharkey-Fitz. My mistake

 

Johnson called Jeffries the greatest in his book, not Fitzsimmons. But Johnson says lots of things, so taking what he might say is best with a gain of salt

Since Jeffries beat Fitszimmons twice via KO, picking him as the better it a bit far fetched, and before you say Fitz was old for the 2nd match, keep in mind Fitz cleaned up on two contenders before the re-match with Jeffries in Sharkey and Ruhlin. Hardly the sign of a shot fighter.

I have a list of about 50 historians. You would be hard pressed to see more than 3 of them rating Baer over Jeffries or Fitz over Jeffries.

 

What reality when this is a fantasy match up?

 

Why did you quote Johnson then?
Johnson gave his quoted opinion that Fitzsimmons was the best ,that opinion I posted .Show a primary source to the contrary,and I don't mean" Mes Combats, " which was ghosted and translated 4 times.

Fitz had been retired for 2 years when he challenged Jeffries , he was 39 years old.

I would be hard pressed to find many rating Baer over Jeffries?

Yes I would, I would rate Jeffries over Baer myself, but you would be hard pressed to find many that rate Jeffries highly,which is what you implied.

Bearing in mind that the opinion of Johnson L Sullivan is very limited,because he died in Feb 1918,so never saw Dempsey, Tunney,onwards.

Jim Corbett said Johnson was the greatest boxer he ever saw ,so did Tom Sharkey, both hated Johnson.

 

Excluding Jeffries comeback fight , the average weight of his opponents was 182lbs.

Jeffries average weight in his bouts was 217.7 5 take off the .7, that gives him an average weight advantage of 35 pounds, over his opponents.

I have used the 190lbs given for the Maher fight for Munroe's weight ,though I think he likely scaled less than that for Jeffries title fight.
Please note that the weights given for the title fight were those given by the participants , neither weighed in.
The papers duly reported those figures.
Munroe was described as having shed excess fat for this fight, just 5 months previously he had scaled 190lbs for a fight with Peter Maher.
Do you think it reasonable that he would put ON weight ,[20lbs] for the biggest fight of his life?

The only verified fights Jeffries had with a man of 200lbs,[ excluding his comeback ,] was with Ruhlin ,who scaled 200lbs on the button. Jeffries never faced a heavier man , Baer did ,at least 14 times.
The average age of Jeffries best opponents ,Sharkey,Ruhlin, Fitz, Corbett, is 33 years old.

 

1. It takes a certain kind of puncher to take out such granite chinned opponents, hence why only Louis did. Like i said in one of my earlier posts Jeffries chin is not very proven, esp. against a puncher the level and size of Baer. I've sparred with opponents who were both smaller and larger than me and you most certainly feel the difference. Jeffries being able to stand up to punchers who were well past their prime and/or considerably lighter doesn't mean much.

2. Fair point, look into any 'punchers' record and you're bound to find such anomalies, it took Liston rounds to stop Scrap Iron Johnson, Foreman 7 then a year later gets stopped in 2 by Juergen Blin who has a 16% KO ratio.

3. The size of the opponents are regardless i was trying to say that Jeffries isn't proven against larger, stronger opponents which he isn't. Baer had what 60 more fights than Jeffries of course he's gonna stack up some losses.

4. Even tho i don't agree with everything you said i certainly don't hold the loss to Jeffries. However it can be used to give light to the issue of Jeffries chin.

 

"Excluding Jeffries comeback fight, the average weight of his opponents was 182 lbs"

Well, yes, but excluding the fights with Fitz and Choynski, and the Johnson fight if you prefer, using the 186 of the old Ring Record Book for Munroe, the average weight of Jeff's opponents with listed weights would be about 190 lbs.

Max Baer lost to Tommy Farr (198-, Willie Davies (192), Jimmy Braddock (194), Paulino Uzcudun (195), Johnny Risko (195), Tommy Loughran (183), and Les Kennedy (ab 190)--average weight about 193. It appears to me that what you are proving is that Baer has a proven track record of losing to fellows about the same size as most of Jeff's opponents while Jeff lost to none of them.

Jeff only lost to a man bigger than any of the men who beat Baer, but who was more skilled than any of them (with the possible exception of Loughran and Louis, if you like), and, of course, at 35 and after a six year layoff.

*But on this size thing, what if we replace the two fights with Fitz and the one with Choynski with fights with Joe McAuliffe (6' 4" 230 lbs), Ed Dunkhorst (6' 4" 260 lbs) and Jan Plaake (6' 5" 235 lbs). The average weight of Jeff's opponents would now be OVER 200 lbs, but the quality of opposition would fall into the cellar. Choynski ko'd McAuliffe. Fitz ko'd Dunkhorst. Kid McCoy, smaller than either, ko'd Plaake.

The fact is, size does not equate with quality, power, skill, toughness, or anything else, at least in the old days.

Nor did it in Baer's day. You mention that Baer fought 14 men bigger than himself. How many beat him? Only Schaaf who had a negligible three pound weight pull, nothing for 200 lb men. But Baer lost to plenty of the little guys he outweighed by quite a bit.

"Jeff weighed 217"

This is heavyweight boxing. This doesn't mean a thing. Jeff wouldn't become better if he were 15 lbs lighter.

**Average weight of 182--I don't know how convincing this sort of number is. If Jeff had fought the Dempsey of the Willard fight (187), the Marciano of the first Walcott fight (184), the Charles of his first Walcott fight (181), the Patterson of the Moore fight (182), the Gibbons of the Dempsey fight (175), and the Conn of the first Louis fight (174), the average weight would be only slightly over 180 lbs, a tad below the listed Jeffries average. I guess we would have to assume Jeff would then have had no real competition.

 

"I've sparred with men both smaller and larger than me"

So you are certain your conclusions from these sparring sessions are valid for Fitz and Choynski? There are no exceptions in the case of great fighters?

Do you think Bob Baker puncher harder than Bob Satterfield? Joe Baksi punched harder than Rocky Marciano? Carnera punched harder than Dempsey?

**"Jeff isn't proven against larger, stronger opponents"

As at least up to the 1960's, there were very few larger heavyweights who could fight, and possibly none who were stronger than Jeffries, how exactly is Jeff supposed to meet this criteria?

As for his chin being proven--of the men who fought either Baer or Jeffries, Louis is certainly my pick as the biggest puncher, but Baer didn't last with him. Fitz and Tom Sharkey would be my picks as the #2 and #3 punchers, and Jeff did last with them.

***"of course he's gonna stack up some losses"

Why? Louis only lost one time until he was 36 years old. Marciano never lost. Jeffries did not lose until he was 35 and then only lost to a great fighter. In contrast, Baer lost when he was young, lost in his prime, and lost when he was past it. He lost to some great fighters but lost to ordinary ones also. He lost pretty consistently all the way through his career. It is not that he had more fights (many of which were against setups, after all). It is that he was erratic and mediocre compared to ATG's like Louis, Marciano, and Jeffries.

 

You stated that "most of Jeffries opponents were in the 180-200lbs class". Actually most of them were below 190lbs, and Jeffries only fought one man of 200lbs ,[before his come back,] Ruhlin , and he was 18lbs lighter than Jeffries.
If you wanted to take an average weight for Jeffries opponents , why would you exclude Choynski, and Fitz?
Why would you want to substitute Jeffries opponents with those of another ? What would be the point?
The point of my showing these averages for Jeffries was to show:
1. He never met a man his own size .
2.He never met a man he did not hold a weight advantage over.
3. Jeffries chin is untested against men of that size.