Rocky Marciano vs. Jim Jeffries

6'1 220lb joe baksi, never stopped

pat valentino never stopped

6'4 220lb contender johnny haynes

 

Willie Reddish listons trainer claimed walcott and liston were the two strongest heavyweights hes ever seen. I dont think spinx was stronger than walcott, and naturally walcott was bigger than spinx. if walcott beefed up like spinx did, hed be 220lb.

 

First, merry Christmas, all!

I don't have much time at the moment, so I'll make this quick...

I think this was directed at Mendoza (whose latest post I plan to respond to a little later...), but to give my stance here, my point was that guys like Kevin Isaac and Renaldo Snipes, who, judging by any objective criteria, were not as dangerous of punchers as a Walcott or Moore, floored Holmes and in one case had him significantly more hurt than Walcott or Moore, but he was able to stand up against top-notch punchers when the time came around, that this was the case with many other champions as well, and that it's therefore illogical to think on the basis of his very brief knockdowns at the hands of Walcott and Moore that Marciano would be unlikely to survive against a top-notch puncher.

Just what I was saying above.

 

I think you underestimate the power of joe louis even in 1950. he was big 6'2 215lb and very heavy handed

 

Not a chance. The old Joe Louis was done for. He could even hurt Charles who went toe to toe with him for most of the match. Charles was a fighter who went down 30 times in his career. A prime Joe Louis would have rocked Charles world when he landed.

Again, please explain to me why Louis only had 3 Ko's in his last 10 fights. It is an elemenatry deduction. Louis was past his prime, and lost his speed and snap on his punches.

 

Talking about his last fights Louis said,"I could see the openings but my right hand just didnt leave me,its a timing thing".I agree with you Louis by the time he fought Marciano was getting by with the remnants of his immaculate jab,he threw very few right hands in that fight ,he was definitely not the "Bomber" of old,or even close to it.In his prime Louis would have kod Charles inside 10 rds,Joe himself stated that he had no doubts he would have stopped Charles a few years earlier.

 

Have you seen the Charles fight? Charles was hurt and badly bloodied by a left hook. He bobbed and weaved his way out of it. Also, Charles always has quite a bit of movement--also, Louis himself felt he did not have enough time to train for Charles.
The important fact about Louis is certainly he had gone back, but if he hadn't, Marciano would have faced a better puncher by far than most of the other champions, and certainly the earlier ones, ever faced. The issue is how far had Louis gone back? Cesar Brion was an extremely durable fighter of the Baksi-Chuvalo class. He went 10 with Louis twice. Bivins was an extremely durable fighter and elusive. He went the distance with Louis. Agramonte ran and fought only to survive. The Louis of the 1930's would have gotten a couple of extra knockouts, but even he might have had trouble finishing men who were tough or only fighting to survive. After all, Pastor twice went 10 with him. Simon went 13. Godoy and Farr 15.
Louis did knock out two tough and rated fighters, Beshore and Savold, and an opponent who should know, Bivins, said this of his punch:
"He might have slowed up a bit, but he could still punch. He could punch same as he always did. He never did lose that zip, that punch with that power."

By the way, if Louis only knocking out 3 of 10 opponents proves he could no longer punch, in your judgement, what does only knocking out 4 of 24 opponents prove about Choynski?

 

Both Jeffries and Marciano have truncated careers. You have a point about when these men reach their "primes" and what we should hold against them. Jeffries is especially difficult to gauge as we have very little definitive information on his early career prior to 1896 and the Dan Long fight. He began boxing at the East Side Athletic Club in 1891. The SF Chronicle in 1898 listed his first fight as with Hank Griffin in 1893. On May 22, 1896, a profile in the Chronicle stated that "Jeffries has fought not a few men, and has won every battle he has had, though some antagonists had nothing better than local reputations at most."
Of course, none of these bouts, whether considered amateur or pro or just tough man competitions, are listed on his record other than the bout with Griffin. Still, I think it reasonable that Jeff was somewhat more experienced than the record implies. The 5-22-1896 article names Jeffries as in the "legitimate succession to the wreath that so long adorned the brow of John L Sullivan." This is a rather incredible statement to make of a man who supposedly had but one serious bout.
Getting to the point, fights with Ruhlin and Choynski in 1897 were considered battles of contenders. All of Jeffries fights in 1898 were with contenders. Jeffries had been viewed as a coming champion as early as 1896. He had boxing experience going back to 1891. He actually had fought more rounds on the record, (79), going into the first Sharkey match than Marciano had (75) going into the first LaStarza match. Everyone can make their own decision on this, but I think the problem is that if you restrict Jeff to fights in a prime beginning in 1899, he is reduced to fights with only four serious contenders, Fitz, Corbett, Sharkey, and Ruhlin, and that certainly is a thin resume, even compared to the rather thin resume of Marciano. The earlier fights are needed to add depth to Jeff's resume. If he struggled some, he is no different than other ATG's who also struggled on the way up.
By the way, Jeffries is probably the most dominant champion against the opposition he faced with the single exception of Marciano.

I might add, and this does not refer to you, but there is quite a bit of spin on a dime double standards here. When I pointed out that Fitz was ko'd often, the rebuttal was only by Jeff in his prime, thus dismissing his early ko's. Walcott, on the other hand, is "chinny" off his early ko's and the fact that only Louis and Marciano ko'd him once he hit his stride is brushed aside.

 

I can't be sure of how much experience Jeffries had. However, it seems very doubtful that the guys who lasted against him early in his career would do the same against a prime Jeffries.

 

I would agree that Jeffries legacy would be better had he beaten more top contenders during the 1899-1904 period.

 

Let's just go over these last 10 fights, one by one:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Charles- a prime great champion, in the middle of a 45-fight run in which he faced and defeated numerous elite-level punchers and was floored/stopped only once ("floored 30 times" is just a flashy statistic- he was decked 15 times by Marshall and Bivins while he was barely 20 and an immature fighter facing bigger men who were future Hall-of-Famers at their peaks, and a bunch of times while he was a shot old journeyman); not stopping him does not indicate you don't have high-level punching power.

Brion (twice)- Brion was well-known as one of the most durable and awkward fighters around, had never been stopped before and never would be until John Holman TKO'd him at the tail end of his career.

Beshore- a fringe contender with a reputation for toughness and tenacity. TKO win.

Agramonte (twice)- A speedy boxer-type known for his lateral movement and shiftiness, just the sort that Louis always had trouble with. Louis had him down and hurt during at least one of their fights.

Walker- a decent journeyman. Stoppage win for Louis.

Savold- a legitimate contender, and had only been stopped once in the last 10 years. Clean KO for Louis.

Bivins- a veteran contender and excellent boxer with a solid chin. Only Archie Moore, Ezzard Charles (what a wimp, eh?) and Lem Franklin (a monstrous puncher) ever stopped him in a 15-year, 110+ fight career. Louis wins a sound decision.

Marciano- one of the greatest heavyweights of all time, undefeated, had never been down or stopped in any fight of any kind in his life.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------How many knockouts would you expect, say, Earnie Shavers to score if he fougt this exact same schedule?
Personally, I doubt Shavers would stop Charles, Brion, Bivins or Marciano, and there's a good chance at least one of the others would last the distance with him. I doubt Shavers would have a substantially higher knockout average than Louis did fighting the same schedule that Louis did in his last 10 fights. And that does not mean Shavers wasn't a dangerous puncher. Far from it. It's just that even the hardest punchers, when they don't have a great deal of supplementing skill, are unlikely to knock out top-tier opponents.

For example, being pretty liberal in counting this out (including guys like an over-the-hill Buster Mathis just to be nice and excluding fights when he himself was shot), Ron Lyle has three stoppage wins in 13 fights against opponents who would even be considered top 20. 9 of Louis' 10 comeback fights were against opponents who would definitely or probably have been seen as top 20. This is how I would see a 1950-51 Louis; more or less the equivalent of a Ron Lyle. Which is more likely; that one of the biggest punchers of in history's power just evaporated, or that, above all, his speed and skill diminished with age and he became less capable of stopping top-tier opposition?

 

Marciano Frazier,

In my opinion, Louis depended on the velocity of his punches to generate his power. His punches had a lot of snap on them, and that diminished when he returned to the ring to pay off Uncle Sam. In addition, I don't think Louis heart was in boxing for his comeback either. Louis was not a " heavy handed " puncher. I'm sure he landed plenty on his last ten opponents. Let's examine who he knocked out in his last ten fights.

History shows us Louis only stopped three of his last ten opponents. The earliest stoppage of the three was in round four vs Belshore, who was on a 4 fight losing streak coming into the match. The stoppage was on cuts, not knockdowns.

Savold was stopped by the count, but he was 35, and would only fight once more.

Walker was a journeyman who ended up with a 17-24-7 record. It took Louis 10 rounds to get the TKO. Four other fighters stopped Walker inside of four rounds prior to facing Louis! Post Louis five other fighters topped Walker in much quicker fashion as well. Louis brown bomber days were all but gone.

Conclusion: A prime or near prime version of Louis would have stopped anywhere from 8 to 9 of his last 10 opponents. He would have plenty of early stoppages too. None of the come back version of Louis’ KO’s are impressive at all if you examine who he stopped, and what shape his opponents were in coming into the fight. And only 3 of ten were stoppage wins. Though Louis had his share of moments vs Marciano, his power was clearly gone.

 

1. Why is the issue whether Louis was prime or near-prime. No one is arguing he was near his prime. If he were, Marciano would have faced the toughest series of punchers of any of the old champs, period.

2. How well did a prime or near prime Louis actually do. From Bob Pastor in 1939 to Billy Conn in 1941, he stopped 9 of 11 (should be 10 of 11 counting Baer), but what if these were 10 round fights such as the ones of 1951. Pastor went 11. Godoy a full 15. Simon and Conn 13. So in 10 round fights Louis would have had 6 knockouts in 11 fights (should be 7 of 11 counting Baer). Also, Musto lasted 9, and Godoy in the second and McCoy got to the 8th. As can be seen, Louis did not necessarily score that many early knockouts even in his prime-near prime.

3. What of Jeffries? In his prime or near-prime. Starting with Sharkey in 1898--He went a full 20 with Sharkey. A full 10 with Armstrong. 11 to knock out Fitz. A full 25 with Sharkey. 23 to knock out Corbett. 5 to stop Ruhlin. 8 to stop Fitz again. 10 to stop Corbett again and 2 to stop Munroe. He scored 6 ko's in 9 fights, but if the fights were 10 rounders, he would have only had 4 knockouts in the nine fights, not all that much better than Louis in 1951. Only Munroe was stopped before the fifth. (I ignored Finnegan who was not a championship level fighter and was more an exhibition).

4. Beshore did have a cut eye, and also a broken nose. According to Richard Bax, in his biog of Louis, the referee stopped this fight with Beshore floundering and helpless with 12 seconds left in the fourth.

 

I hate to pick on SQ, but actually, Jeffries won that fight and he did it my out muscling Sharkey in the clinches and beating his ass on the inside. One can't produce 10 seconds (or 1 second for that matter) of footage of Sharkey moving Jeffries backwards.

But ITALIANS RULE!!!!

YES!!!!! ITALIANS!!!!

 

(Except for World Wars 1 and 2).