PETER JACKSON V JAMES JEFFRIES prime for prime.

Interesting match up.

It is worth noting that some common oponents/sparring partners actualy believed Jackson to be the better of the two.

Much would depend on the rule set. Given a relatively short distence such as 20 rounds it is quite likley that Jackson would win by decision. The longer the duration of the fight the more likley it becomes that Jeffries wins through.

I would also point out that you have probably not picked the best version of either fighter for this match. Jackson was injured when he fought Corbett and had already started to decline. Jeffries had not yet atained his peak when he fought Fitzsimmons.

 

Jackson was a very good fighter. A skilled boxer puncher type, with a quick 1-2, good footwork, a pretty good punch, and good stamina. The foot work and defense were not on Corbett's level though. Jackson was more aggressive than Corbett. The only think Jackson lacked was a top chin. It was merely solid. Jackson's action oriented nature got him into some trouble vs the best punchers he faced. It also gave the fans their monies worth. There are two things we should note.

Jeffries easily hurt and finished Jackson quickly in their fight. Jackson was in shape and in fine form according to all papers. Stmaina did not come into play in teh fight. In Jackson's defense he was past his best, so perhaps it is best to look at his fight with Goddard.

Goddard was something of a poor man's Jeffries. He had a similar style. Goddard and Jackson was a close fight. Both men were down, Jackson once, and Goddard twice. Papers seem to be split on who won.

In a prime match up between Jackson and Jeffries, I think Jeffries takes out Jackson in the mid rounds. Boxer-puncher's style by nature always seem to give good punchers their chance to land back. Jeffries was the more durable of the two, and far better on defense than Goddard or Slavin.

 

Jackson was already suffering from tuberculosis by that point. And some 10 years removed from his prime, trying to collect enough money to return to Australia. That fight should be just ignored as if it never happened.

 

The next-day report of the fight does say that Jackson "was pronounced by physicians to be in perfect condition", but I think they made it made up or didn't examine him very attentively. One of the sources says he was diagnosed with TB as early as 1894 while he was still living in England. Which he got either from that lungs injury in 1892 or from the daughter of the black woman who gave him cheap lodging upon his first arrival to San Francisco in 1888, the girl died from TB in October 1891.

 

I have the news reports leadign up to the fight. They all say Jackson was in fine form and in an ideal fighting weight. The bettign odds of the fight were close because many of Jackson's fans felt he did very well in sparring.

Jackson did fine in round one. He got hurt in round two and went down twice. In roudn three he was knocked senseless into the ropes. This was not a stamina related loss. It was chin related loss and poor tactics by Jackson. Jackson later said he should have boxed more. While Jackson was past his best, I don't think his durability fell off the charts before the fight.

 

Same as it didn't fall off with Joe Gans in his 2nd and 3rd meeting with Battling Nelson? He was living with TB also by that point. A man may look ok, but often fatigues very easily.

 

Gans was a hard man to ko. But like Jackson, once the TB got him Gans found himself taking the ten counts more often than not.

Think of it like fighting very weak, or something.

 

The bout was seen as a pick em fight in the run up to it for whatever that is worth. While Jackso was known to be past his best it was thought that he still had a lot left.

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 content is protected

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 content is protected

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 content is protected

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 content is protected

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 content is protected

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 content is protected

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 content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

 

There is no doubt that Jackson was a shell of his former self but I am still prepared to give Jeffries some credit for beating him in dominant fashion while himself inexperienced.

I agree that this fight dose not have much bearing on how they would have matched up at their respective bests because neither of them was close to it.