Jim Jeffries versus Seth Mitchell

Discussion in 'Classic Boxing Forum' started by Seamus, May 22, 2012.


  1. Seamus

    Seamus Proud Kulak Full Member

    61,298
    45,676
    Feb 11, 2005
    Could the amateurish Jeffries even dent today's heavyweight scene?

    Is there any greater condemnation of the relative heavyweight talent from the early 1900's as compared to today than that Jeffries would certainly lose this fight?

    Can you envision Tom Sharkey lasting any distance, let alone 25 rounds, with Mitchell?

    Case closed.
     
  2. Nightcrawler

    Nightcrawler Boxing Addict Full Member

    4,432
    32
    Dec 18, 2011
    jeffries wins cause seth mitchell hasn't done ****

    ali is the greatest heavy ever and destroys jeffries
     
  3. Seamus

    Seamus Proud Kulak Full Member

    61,298
    45,676
    Feb 11, 2005
    You don't bring resumes into the ring. You bring skills and talent.

    How would a Seth Mitchell do if his opponents were an old ass Peter Jackson, a midget off the docks, or a geriatric freckled light heavy?
     
  4. Nightcrawler

    Nightcrawler Boxing Addict Full Member

    4,432
    32
    Dec 18, 2011
    good point. you want my honest opinion, he loses to all but the size difference against choynski might make it interesting. actually, considering jackson's age and tuberculosis who knows how badly he performs.
     
  5. fists of fury

    fists of fury Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    19,297
    7,046
    Oct 25, 2006
    I get the point you're trying to make Seamus, but Mitchell though big and strong, hasn't shown me the kind of intangibles that we need to see before even entertaining the idea.

    I just wish people would appreciate what fighters did in their own era and leave it there.
     
  6. mcvey

    mcvey VIP Member Full Member

    97,718
    29,052
    Jun 2, 2006
    Jeffries at least has some form at the top level of his times.
    Mitchell is as yet an unknown commodity.