Prime Jeffries v prime Fitz?

Fitz was not past his prime after he lost to Jeffries. Indeed he killed a man, then badly Kid Sharkey and Ruhlin. Fitz had enough left to win the light heavyweight crown a few years later, then draw with O'Brien who seemed to be even or a shade better with a prime Jack Johnson in 6 round match.

 

Well what exactly is Fitz's prime?

He seems to have been 36 not 37 in the first Jeffries fight based on his birth certificate. Apparently he was vain enough to take a single year off his age.

Intuativley I have to think that there could have been a better version of Fitzsimmons than the version that fought Jeffries, but I believe that his two career best performences came between the two Jeffries fights.

If the Ruhlin fight and the second Sharkey fight were not Fitz's two best showings then what were?

 

Another McVey-Mendoza dogfight, this should be fun. McVeys going to rip this:

 

Lets take cover.

 

Con Coughlin was a much bigger player in the division that the surviving fragment of his record indicates.

He was regarded by some as a future prospect and was fairly heavily hyped in the press.

 

There's a good chance Jeffries would beat a prime Fitzsimmons, because of the styles.
I mean, they didn't stop fights in those days, and both men were as tough as they come. Fitz's style was to KO his foes at every opportunity, Jeffries liked to wear the down with his brute strength.

Jeffries wore Fitz down in 11 rounds in their first match, and 8 in the second. So, even against a prime Fitz I'd estimate Jeff had a good chance to do the same sometime inside the 20-round distance. But the question remains, would Jeffries survive the Fitz onslaught to be in a position to do so ?
Apparently Fitz gave Jeffries quite a beating while he lasted. If he was younger maybe he'd have the extra sharpness and energy to get Jeff out of there. It's an intriguing match-up.

 

While Jeffries took a shelacking in the second Fitzsimmons fight, he seems to have come out of the first encounter largley unscathed, and controled the fight prety handily.

I would further suggest that Fitzsimmons was genuinely puzzled by Jeffries style and deffence in their first encounter.

 

This and the fact Fitz would sustain his initial pace for longer giving Jeffries a more sustained beating

 

It depends on Fitz to some extent.

No two Fitzsimmons fights were quite the same.

I see two verry different strategies in the two Jeffries fights.

It could be argued that Fitz did a much better job in the rematch although he was taken out more quickly.

 

I am sorry Mendoze, but please do not confuse the fact that Fitz against Jeffries 1 and 2 was still an awesome fighter with the fact that he was prime.

At best, Fitz , in relatin to his prime was on par with the Ali/Frazier in their 2nd or 3rd fight. ie still one of the best fighters in the world, arguably still able to beat any or most heavyweights that ever lived, but he was not prime!

There is actually a very good argument that Fitz was past prime when he actually won the heavyweight championship of the world! Fitz is no different to anyone else. His actual fighting goal was to prove that he was the best fighter in the world and no one else could beat him. this was achieved when he beat Jim Corbett. After that his performance dropped, his activity dropped and like Dempsey, Johnson, Liston, and the vast majority of other champions he was never the same afterwards.

It is not possible to become the same after this. I think we all can agree that Fitz Jeffries I was an upset caused a lot by Fitz underestimating Jeffries (not that he necessarilly would have won anyway). Once Fitz lost, he lost his aura of invincibility, and mentally that is a massive thing. It can wreck a fighter. Look what happened to Jeff Fenech when he lost the aura against Azumah. No fighter who had the wrecking machine aura has ever come back to their best after losing that Aura, not one (well except for Joe Louis ). Not Dempsey, Tyson, Liston, Foreman, Baer etc. And it probably even holds in the lighter weights as well.

Jeffries is often undersold on this board. And Fitz as a heavyweight always is. Prime for prime I need to do some thinking. But, Fitz definitely was not prime.

 

Do you even know what past his prime means? A fighter is past his prime when he looses matches he would have likely won in his prime.

After he was Ko'd by Jeffries in 1899 ( Fitz went 57 recorded fights from 1894-1904, only being stopped by Jeffries ) Fitz came back to score two first round Ko's, and a 2nd round KO over 260 pound Dunkhorst. After that Fitz earned the title re-match by Koing Gus Ruhlin in 6, and Tom Sharkey in 2. Clearly Fitz was still skilled and producing great results leading up to the re-match with Jeffries in 1902. Fitz lost to Jeffries in 1902, despite having a good effort.

Was Fitz shot in 1902 after he lost to Jeffreis again? Hardly. Again he came back and scored a 1st, 2nd, and 1st round Ko, floored a guy 20 times in a six round match, then took the light heavyweight title from a very good Gardner in 1903! Fitz floored Gardner 3 or 4 times depending on the score. In his next fight in 1904, he knocked down and drew with a prime version of Jack O'Brien.

In closing, Fitz was not past his prime in 1902, and was still producing great results in 1903 and 1904.