My Top 50 HWs?

You called Georges list incredibly stupid while banging on about this one and that one being "better" when George said right from the start it was resume based.

Comprehension is obviously not your strong point.

You'd be better served sitting back, asking him questions and learning.

 

You never disappoint old mate!!!

Obviously you've never had a meat pie with tomato sauce or a vegemite sanger!!!!

I thought i might have seen you in the best inside fight thread!!!! You are one of the few that catches things at times!!!

 

Sugar Ray Robinson lost to Joey Maxim. Bobo Olson decisively beat Maxim, knocking him down twice. Robinson lost to Tiger Jones. Olson beat Jones. Robinson split with Randy Turpin and had a great deal of trouble with him. Olson beat Turpin decisively. Olson also defeated Rocky Castellani more easily than Robinson, who barely edged out a decision.

So Olson is clearly better than Robinson? At least by 1955?

I think Jeff's edge in common opponents comes from his strengths, size and power, being there from the beginning. He was from the start bigger than his opposition.

Johnson seems to have been relatively light early in his career, probably in the 170's, even for the time ordinary for a heavyweight. What separated Johnson from the field in the end was the superior skill he developed and which Jeffries didn't. It was pretty obvious when the two fought.

I see Johnson as clearly the greater fighter.

I also have a problem crediting Jeffries over Johnson when Jeffries blatantly ducked Johnson when Jeff was champion. I don't see rewarding a champion for avoiding his top contender. If Jeffries, and also Dempsey, supporters scorn me for this position, so be it, but it is the way I feel about it.

 

Some facts are mixed up. Post the Munroe fight, Jeffries mentioned Johnson as a possible opponent. If there was a Reno level purse, I think Jeffries vs. Johnson happens sooner, but there wasn't. To quote Jeffries when Johnson asked him for a fight in 1901, Johnson didn't draw flies. Jeffries did offer Johnson a private fight on the spot. Johnson refused. So who ducked who here?

From 1899-1902, Johnson lost or drew to often to be ready for Jeffries. He was beaten a few times during this span and stopped twice. You could argue from 1903, and 1904 Johnson was a top contender. I agree, however Jeffries gave rematches to Fitz and Corbett in these years, making far more than he would have vs Johnson. All of Johnson's momentum was lost when Johnson lost to Hart in 1905. Johnson vs. Hart was billed as an elimination match for Jeffries, Johnson did not do enough and lost. End of.

There's not much conclusion to raw in the 1910 fight. Jeffries was old, out of the ring for six years and Johnson hired his old trainer for tips. How shot was Jeffries? Fitzsimmons who sat ringside said Jeffries wasn't a quarter of the fighter he fought. You might as well say Trevor Berbick was better than Ali.

Jeffries beat better competition. We had a top 5 wins thread, Johnson's was on the light side. Ed martin was his best win. Enough said.

In regards to weight, it seems like Johnson best wins happened south of 200 pounds.

A 1905 fight would have been different Johnson lost to hart. How the heck is he going to keep Jeffries off?

 

The problem is that Johnson himself ducked the best available opponents and unlike with Jeffries, it's clear that Johnson ducked them.

 

"Jeffries dd offer Johnson a private fight on the spot. Johnson refused. So who ducked who here?"

The sport is boxing with two men meeting in a ring with rules and a referee. It is not a fight in a basement in which one contestant might well end up knifed in the back. I can't believe you seriously believe what you posted. It is insane. Johnson is supposed to go down into a basement with drunken white guys in an era when blacks were routinely lynched?

"Johnson vs Hart was billed as an elimination match for Jeffries."

Jeffries had made it grotesquely clear he wasn't going to defend against Johnson or any other black challenger. How can it seriously be an elimination? The most that could be said is that it could suffice in puffing up Hart. Everyone involved had an interest in seeing Hart win as a Jeffries-Johnson fight was not in the cards. It actually calls into question if the decision was really on the up and up or if all Hart had to do to win was be on his feet at the final bell.

Fitz on Jeff in 1910--Fitz had a vested interest in saying that Jeff wasn't anything like the fighter he fought. Fitz might be right, but is such a biased observer that I can't see taking his comments with anything but a grain of salt.

Jeff could have proved himself better than Johnson in 1904 or 1905 by fighting him. He instead drew the color line. When he did fight Johnson in 1910 he lost badly. Tough.

 

Fair enough criticism of Johnson as champion, but I don't see how this gets Jeffries off the hook.

Here is Jeff himself quoted by The Police Gazette: (from Adam Pollack's biog of Jeff, page 656:

"Jack Johnson is a fair fighter, but he is black, and for that reason I will never fight him." and later "the title will never go to a black man if I can help it."

What is interesting about these quotes is that Jeffries seems to be conceding that he might lose.

 

I prefer to be a pitcher than a catcher, mate, What thread's this, then>

 

The list looks pretty solid!
I am sorry for the gratuitous abuse you received about Vitali, but even based upon your own criterwa, I ask you tpo reconsider.
28 is just very low by even the standards you emplpy.
Wlad is fair enough, though yeah his consistent success would have him above Holyfield. And if you consider "sins" of too much holding vs. dirty fighting & definitely PEDs, it reinforces this.

But if you rank many modern guys & Wlad so high, I cannot see how you could possibly place his Brother more than 20 places below him.
Given his overall record & title run, & the record of his opponents, the only way I could see this argument is if his competiton was say as bad as sWilder's in overall skill & rankings.

People are always saying especially HWs only fought bums or winos from the alley...
But only a few guys like Wilder actually had a bunch of peak fights with guys ranked so low.

Vitali lost so few rounds-without any dubious practices-that I cannot see him lower than the mid teens.
And that is without any head to head consideration.

 

Would you rank Harry Wills above Jack Dempsey?

 

A few things it was a private match offered without a crowd. Johnson declined. Had he taken his lumps, he could have used the press to build interest in a ring match.

As Champion Jeffries did fight Hank Griffin, who had recently beaten Jack Johnson in a 4 rounder. Griffin of course was black. The color line was broken right there, with Jeffries easily winning the 4 round affair, flooring Griffin a few times.

What a fighter says and what he does when there's a high purse for him are two different things. That hasn't changed in 120 years!

Had Johnson beaten Hart, and there was a Reno like purse, no one can say for sure if Jeffries wouldn't have taken the match.

By 1910 Jeffries was a shell of who he was. It took Johnson 15 rounds to beat that guy. Fitz and everyone at the fight agrees with that.

Johnson simply has too many losses and draws and struggles with lesser competition to beat a prime Jim Jeffries

 

I do.

 

"private match"

Are you serious? Why would any professional fighter agree to fight a private match? Johnson wouldn't become champion if he won. Jeff and his supporters would simply deny the fight even happened. And what a double standard. You condemn Johnson for refusing a fight in which he wouldn't be paid at all and would probably get no credit if he won but defend Jeffries openly drawing the color line unless he gets a "Reno-sized" purse. (This assumes this event even happened. I understand it is an alleged drunken meeting in a bar)

"What a fighter says and what he does . . . are two different things."

Perhaps, but Jeffries openly said he was drawing the color line and then behaved exactly as he said he would and hid behind the color line.

"no one can say for sure if Jeffries wouldn't have taken the match."

And no one can say he would have, either. You are rebutting what we do know with supposition about what we don't know.

Jeffries came back to "regain the prestige of the white race" and remove 'the golden smile" from Jack Johnson's face. It was all as nakedly racist as it could get.

"It took 15 rounds to beat that guy."

With 45 rounds there was no reason to hurry. Jeffries was utterly destroyed.