Prime Jim Corbett v. prime Jim Jeffries

If there was a time limit with a decision to be rendered, I'd favor a peak Corbett to take it, even in a 45 rounder. Nobody beats Jeff in a fight to the finish though. When they were sparring partners training together, Jeffries was able to out sprint and outlast Corbett on long distance runs. Corbett simply didn't have the power to stop him.

 

In their first fight Corbett was well ahead until he tired,and a battered Jeffries then overwhelmed him. Going on that,I would say that a prime Corbett takes this one. Jeffries' strength would always give him a chance,of course.

 

May depend on the length of the bout.

I'd give Corbett a chance at 15 rounds; 20 rounds I'd favor Jeffries, 25 rounds I'd strongly favor Jeffries.

To my mind, there's a considerable difference between 'prime' Jeffries and the Jeffries who faced Corbett in 1900. The later Jeffries was a lot faster and more active. Also, the Jeffries who faced Corbett had a bum left that hadn't healed properly -- after the fight one he was examined and found that one of the bones that met at the elbow was still a quarter inch displaced; he had to have the arm reset and was in a cast for several weeks after the contest.

I think the Jeffries of '02-'04 , in his actual performance level, was the best Queensbery hvywt boxing had seen to that point. Now, if Sullivan and Jeffries had come along -- been born into -- the same era, developed in ways analogous to how they developed in their own times, and peaked together ..... that fight, I don't know how it would have gone.

 

Corbett was past his best when he gave Jeffries a great fight ,of course there are many who say Jeffries improved radically between the two fights with Gentleman Jim,and therefore he was not at his peak either.

The case for Corbett being past his prime is more solid than Jeffries being short of his, imo.

Jeffries rooters point to the fact that Jeff handled Jim easier in their second fight, personally I would think it strange if he had not.

Age takes its toll quicker on reflexes and footwork, than on power ,and strength,correspondingly Corbett was slower than in their first fight and easier to hit.

Corbett was a month off 37 years old when he faced Jeffries for the second time, Jeffries 10 years younger.

He had engaged in 1 contest in 3 years a 5 round dive by Kid McCoy

A less than ideal preparation for facing a man 10 years younger ,who out weighed him by 27lbs.

Jeffries had 19 rds of combat between the two bouts ,how much improvement should he be expected to achieve from this?

Corbett was unable to duplicate his wonderful effort of the first fight, I beleive this was more a case of age , and inactivity catching up to him ,than in any marked improvement in the young Champion.

I think over anything up to 20 rds it would be a toss up ,with perhaps a shade advantage to Corbett.

The longer the fight goes ,the greater Jeffries chances of eventually running down the fleet footed Corbett.

 

It is a known fact that Jeffries was a good runner,Dempsey could run a 100yds in 11 seconds,in contrast Muhammad Ali was not fleet of foot on the road.
I don't think there is much correlation between running ability and footwork in the ring.
Corbett did not have the power to ko him,but he might have hit him enough times to force a referee to stop it because of facial damage,as Fitz nearly did.

 

Corbett's wife pointed out to Jim around the time of the first Jeffries bout that he was squinting while reading the newspaper, an observation the former champion mulled over. Corbett reported that while he saw the knockout punch coming in that match, he misjudged the distance. Nearly a century later, Holmes was able to generate an impressive boxing life at an advanced age with the help of modern contact lens technology not available when Corbett was competing. (Larry's worn glasses for years. How many other former heavyweight champions were seen sporting corrective lenses after retirement, even into old age?) When considering how far past prime Gentleman Jim was against Jeffries, perhaps his eyesight needs to be taken into account.

A couple years ago, I experienced a trial with Abilify, a prescription medication. Before taking it, I had 20/10 vision. A nasty side effect of this drug is that it can induce blurred sight, and this happened with me. (If any of you are given an opportunity to go on these pills, run like hell! Any benefits are very temporary, while the compromised eyesight is far more lasting. I experienced vision induced symptoms of motion sickness for months after discontinuing it.) Deteriorating vision wreaks havoc with hand-eye coordination, reaction and response. Does Corbett lose that initial meeting with Jeff if he still possesses the eagle eyes of his youth?

Corbett-Jackson is critical in my determination that Corbett has the edge over 20 and even 25 rounds in this one. There's no question that Jeff could excel over longer distances, but Corbett's the one who actually did it in competition, and he had Jackson in trouble with a flurry in round 28 before starting to wind down after round 30. Keep in mind that he was past 34 at Coney Island, and it looked as though he was going to win if still on his feet at the end of 25.

 

Granted, Ali looked dreadful in every competitive sprint I ever saw him participate in, and he was never marathon material either. My point here is that Corbett prided himself on his athletic prowess and physical conditioning, a pride that Jeff wounded considerably with his ability to outperform Corbett. As you inferred when mentioning Ali, all that didn't help Jeff when it came down to who the better boxer was the first time they squared off. Over the eventual classic 15 round distance, Corbett would have become the first to regain the title.

Referees didn't do that often in that era, so as tough as Jeff was, Corbett would have had to blind him completely defenseless to force a stoppage. (Even then, Jeff may have used his sense of hearing to try tracking Corbett down, as a totally blinded Langford did to an opponent decades later.)

 

Good post! Of course you are correct along with slower reflexes ,judgement of distance becomes impaired as we age, and a boxer of 37 was considered an old man in those days.

 

I believe that if Corbett and Jeffries , met in their primes, 15 round fight, Corbett would have won a decision over the Boilermaker...Jim Jeffries,was more suited for the days of bare knuckles, fight to the finish, than any modern heavyweight...Naturally powerful, and impervious to punishment....Incidentally, about 20 years ago, while at work in Bayside,Queens,NY,an interesting thing occured to me...I past a street sign, reading " Corbett Place "...Curious I walked to an old ,but well kept house...A sign on the fence read,This Was The Home Of James J Corbett, Heavyweight Boxing Champ "...Alone in front of this house I had visions of John L,Jim Jeffries, Old Ruby Robert, and all those historic times of that bygone era, long ago....

 

Corbett would lose badly due to the fact that he fought in boyshorts. That's not gonna get you far against Jim Jeffries.

 

Prime Corbett outboxes for the distance, over 45 he might lose but Im not 100% on that

 

Jeffries improved his finishing skills somewhat in his last few fights.

I would not rule out him getting a prime Corbett inside 15 rounds.

Fitzsimmons did and Sharkey arguably did.

 

You seem to think extremely highly of Corbett, which is a refreshing change form the norm.

Where do you place him among the old time HW greats, and beyond that all time?