Peter Jackson - Best HW in the world from 88-92?

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

 

This. All accounts I've read of Fitz at the time are in agreement he was the craftiest operator going, and a master of 'Science'.

They knew their stuff, and knew Fitz was extraordinary.

 

While it is true that Godfrey hadn't many name wins under his belt when he fought Peter, he was highly regarded and after the Jackson fight-(while probably past his 'best-by' date) he beat top 10 men like CC Smith, Lannon, Ashton, Cardiff and the very underatted Denver Ed Smith. He drew with Steve O'Donnell and put up good shows in losing to Maher Choynsky and Kilraine-make no mistake he was no second rater.
The only hit against Jackson as the number one at that time is the draw with Goddard.

 

Thought that was gonna be 1988-1992

Don't know enough about most old timers to have an opinion, still enjoy reading the opinions though.

 

Corbett would never go in with him once he had won the title, he waited until Jackson had returned to Australia then challenged him, calling him a coward. Corbett was a nasty piece of work imo.

 

Right, Jackson took a tumble off his buggy and bruised his leg from what I've read. He rested it and took salt baths and was soon belting around his sparring partners again.

It has to be said that the Corbett fight hurt him and his legacy. Patrons were walking out after 30 rounds because neither man would lead and the fight was a complete dud. It may have been the most boring fight in history -after 61 rounds, the ref declared it no-contest.

Corbett's stock rose and he became the next logical challenger for Sullivan, but Jackson really needed to beat him for obvious reasons. He didn't seem willing to take the necessary risks.

 

Hard to get title shots, yes. But not credit. Not really; not when you peruse the newspapers of the time and follow what people were saying. No doubt some were overlooked and underappreciated, but usually if a black fighter was good he was given major credit in the newspapers. Peter Jackson, Frank Craig, Joe Walcott, George Dixon, Joe Gans, Kentucky Rosebud, Johnny Banks, Larry Temple, etc, etc.

Heck, some were even given undeserved credit based solely upon reputation via word-of-mouth and failed to live up to those lofty expectations when put to the test (Young Pluto).

 

Likely ... Sullivan was a serious boozer and had suffered numerous serious health related isues as well ... John L. was not in anywhere near physical prime condition likely after 1884 ... he got in terrific condition from a stamina condition in 89 but as far as his physical peak , that was gone ...

Jackson was always in shape and by all accounts a terrific fighter ...

 

Not really, from what I've gathered. Some fighters no doubt used it to avoid getting beat, but for the most part there were lots of black vs. white battles in the sub-heavy ranks.

In Pittsburgh it was an absolute no-no to draw the color line. To do so made you the butt of derision to the point where you might as well fight elsewhere. It was an inbred principle in the fighters. For instance, when Jim Scanlan left the Smoky City and fought in Galveston, he was challenged by a certain "gabby negro" (I think that's how the newspapers described him). Scanlan drew the color line at first. But somewhere along the way he must have remembered his Pittsburgh roots and rescinded.

He took Jack Johnson up on his challenge and they fought a short time later, Johnson getting the better of their draw.