Some extracts from that interview lifted from The Ring, October 1950. I've concnetrated on Jim's opinions of his peers and those that came right after him. He starts by talking about Jack Root, who was at the party, along with guys like Jimmy McLarnin and Willie Ritchie. I'm betting there wasn't a lot of trouble [Jack Root] was a great fighter. He was one of the best light-heavyweights and i'll bet he could teach the heavyweights of today a thing or two. As great a man as was Corbett with whom I was most friendly, I am satisfied tht he would have been still greater, had he done heavy weork before making his ring debut instead of working in a bank. He would have been stronger and had more endurance. He was clever and I always considered him as an exception because though he followed boxing more for the pleasure he got out of it in his early days, he could go the long-distance route without tiring. How figure what he could have done had he the strength and endurance of men like Fitzsimmons, Tom Sharkey and myself...take the case of Fitzsimmons. He was a horseshoer, as you know, and Bob didn't get into the fighting game until he was a full grown man. Be he was an iron man. The work he did got him into great condition as a fighter Even when he became a pro and and was in training for a battle he condinuted to turn out horseshoes. It was a hobby that he never gave up and it kept him in trim. I wish Tom Sharkey had been able to come over [to the party], but the old fellow, a grand man, is busy. He sent me a telegram. There's a fighter who was as strong as a bull. I'd back him to KO every HW you've got rated among the first ten [Charles, Savold, Walcott, Maxim, Baker, Baksi, Layne, Oma, Hoff, Woodcock]. When the sailor boy was in his prime, they came no better. An iron man with iron fists...He never did learn much about boxing and was better off when he didn't try to do anything but rush in and slug away. For his size he was a wonder. I always admired his gameness, toughness and courage. Nat then asked Jim to explain his crouch, where the unique style had come from. There's nothing to it! It just came so nautrally. I got hit in the solar plexus region and it hurt. So I stooped low fought for a time form a crouching position. I soon found that I could hit just as hard that way as I could fighting orthodox style so I adopted the crouch as my special style and soon it was copied by many other fighters. On Jack Dempsey: They came no better. I like Dempsey. He's my favourite. Dempsey was a great fighter. I pick him over all the crop since my retirement. As for myself, leave me out of it. On Joe Choynski: Joe was one of the hardest hitters in the ring. Four years before I met him, Joe, who helped me later to train, dropped Bob Fitzsimmons on his back in their Boston battle and drew in five rounds with Bob. Fitz later told me that nobody ever hit him as hard as he was hit by Choynski and I could believe him, judging by what I got. I can say the same. I often wondered how men like Fitz and Joe got their terrific punch. When I fought Choynski the weights were announced as 167 for Joe and 219 for me. Joe at his best was only a light light-heavyweight, yet could punch harder than most heavyweights. Every one who fought him, including Jim Corbett, said the same of Choynski as a hitter. And he was as clever as they came. He had everything a great fighter could possess.
I never knew that Joe dropped Fitz. I always thought it was the other way around. It is very interesting also that he rates Sharkey so highly. I think he was probably right in this regard, i think the sailor is a lot better than he is given credit for nowadays.
Great interview. :good I think Tom Sharkey was a beast of a fighter. For courage and toughness, and roughness, he's up there with anyone. Under the rules and distances of the day, with the minimal gloves, he'd probably be too much for most fighters, only the absolute best and the guys who could hit him hard enough to put him out for "10" before he'd hurt them too much would be able to beat him. Many of the flash fancy dans would just get crushed.
Some cool ye olde pictures from the article: This content is protected "In the 8th Jeff rushed Fitz to the ropes and with a pile driver left dropped him to the floor". This content is protected "Men who helped train Jeffries for his bout with Bob Fitzsimmons. The photo was taken at Jeff's quarters at Allenhurst, N/J - Left to right - Jack Jeffries, now living in Calafornia; Tommy Ryan, Billy Delaney, sitting; James J Jeffries and Jim Daly". Cool pic.
Comparisons have been made. The contemporary press did not seem to rate Sharkey verry highly. They seem to have thought that Gus Ruhlin was somewhat better. Sharkeys standing has increased with tme and was always stronger among the contemporary fighters than among the contemporary media.
While Nat Fleischer was indeed respectable in his views, he was also favorable to the old-time boys of yesteryear... I felt a lot of talk that Fleischer spat from his mouth was horse manure....... I do like Ol' Jimmy Jeffries..... I wish more quality footage existed on him..... MR.BILL:bbb
Interesting that Jeffries and Fitz both confirm Johnson's opinion of Choynsky's power. Corbett too. I see that Jeffries was a big fan of Dempsey,this was heartily reciprocated by the Mauler.
According to Gilbert Odd in THE FIGHTING BLACKSMITH, Choynski dropped Fitz in the third round but Fitz beat the count and avoided further punishment until the bell. In the next round he turned the fight around and dropped Choynski four times. In the fifth round Fitz put Choynski down and apparently out. The police stepped in and stopped the fight and the referee ruled it a "draw" which caused quite a bit of controversy as it meant that the Choynski supporters did not have to pay off their bets.
Brilliant article, thanks for that. Jim was definately biased to the heavyweights of his era but thats to be expected I suppose. Interesting opinions on Fitz, Sharkey and Choynski in particular.
This seems to be the recurring theme for any fighter, during any era, reflecting on past vs any current fighters. Currently active boxers are rarely thought highly of.
Aboslutley right. Generational bias is a part of picking through any fighter's opinions, regardless of era. I do think his individual points made about individual fighters are pertinent though. And for the sake of posterity, I think everything this great fighter says should be considered. Jeffries was a certain type of man that they just don't make the same way any more, in my opinion.
Yes, and here is the quote about Choynsky's power attributed to Corbett. I found this on the Jewsinsports site Joe never got a shot at the heavyweight title -- when Corbett, Fitzsimmons, and Jeffries were World Champions, they refused to give Choynski a title bout -- despite having battled, on equal terms, all the top fighters of the division. His opponents testified to his greatness, and Corbett, his rival from San Francisco, confessed that "Little Joe was the hardest hitter I ever tangled with. To this day I can't figure out how a runt like him could hurt so damned bad."
excellent find....You got to respect an era....Choynski must have been a beast for his size and Jeff said he hit harder than Heavys...he did stop Johnson
