Jim Jeffries Turns Down Offer of $20,000 To defend Against McVey In 1903.

McVey, Jesus.

Jeffries generally defended against the fighter with the biggest groundswell of support. Munro is, perhaps, NOT an example of such a fight.

Therefore it would be representitive of a modern voluntary defence - that is, a defence without the proper mandate, regardless of the fact that, technically, yes, all were voluntary. Just as a modern voluntary may not have a mandate which we are used to seeing when title fights are made, such is the case here.

Of course, as has been pointed out to you by myself and Janitor, there was considerable interest in the Munro fight.

The article you link points out that the Munro fight grossed roughly a third of what the Corbett fight brought him, and that doctor's bills and carrying an entire camp for two build-ups ran him at a loss. That is fine. I have no idea what baring you think it has on what I am saying to you as, to be clear once more, I am not saying that Munro was fought upon a groundswell of support. I am saying the OPPOSITE of that.

 

It wasn't a "huge bust". It grabbed 20k, a huge figure for the era, superfights generated 60-70k. What cost Jeffries, as per the article YOU linked was running two training camps and "doctors bills."

20k does NOT = no bums on seats I'm afraid.

But actually it's not as relevant as you paint it anyway. Fighters were generally paid by clubs, not receipts. Sometimes titles were contested in front of 100 spectators, not 20,000 worth which is a heft sum.