I am doing a bit of boxrec surfing at the moment. I started looking at Philadelphia jack obrien. O brien was a great fighter who was on a role in 1902 and he had strung together a string of about 15 or 20 wins, including recent wins over JOe Choynski and a good win over Marvin Hart. Suddenly his progress was stopped by Limerick who knocked him out in 3 rounds. Obrien would string together more good wins and would not be knocked out again until Ketchell did it 6 years later, all this, despite him facing such class fighters as Bob Fitzsimmons and Jack Johnson. Looking at boxrec, Limerick was 6'4 and 193 cm tall and 220 lbs. Dimensions which would suggest that he may not be out of place with todays modern heavyweights. His record is obviously not complete on boxrec as it shows just one other fight, which is a loss to Jack Monroe. this is interesting because Jack Monroe is one of the fighters who Jeffries is badly criticised for fighting.Clearly, it would seem that this would be one extra decent win for Monroe. Ironically, Jeffries could have taken an easier fight against a decent superheavy by fighting Limerick. But looking further at Monroe, He also had wins over peter maher and Jack Sharkey both of whom were top fighters (although admittedly Maher seemed to be losing quite a few fights at the time) and he went on to go the distance with Jack Johnson in a short 6rnd fight. Looking at Boxrec, i think that Monroe was probably quite a bit better than he is given credit for and definitely as good a defence as was available to jeffries at the time.
O Brien was twice beaten by middleweight Ketchel ,once by ko,he beat a 42 year old Fitz for the title and NEVER defended it,his tame affair with Johnson was a 6rd nodec,Johnson ,aware that OBrien had zero punching power ,did not train and came into the ring nursing a bad hangover,since O Brien could only win by ko ,Johnson was safe.OBrien was involved in several crooked fights,one a cross that became a double cross was against Burns.At the refs instructions Burns informed OBrien the fight would be on the level, the referee ,then announced "all bets were off". O Brien ran all night ,his usual MO. As a boxer O Brien was harmlessly clever ,as a man he stank.What evidence have you that Al Limerick had additional fights?You seem to read things and come to very strange conclusions .as in your post about Tyson's reach vis a vis Burns . How you can conclude that Monroe was the best available challenger for Jeffries is baffling.
I like Jim Jeffries, but the more I hear about him from such posters as Old Fogey, McCvey, and a number of others, the more weary I grow of the quality of his title reign. Sure, we can't ignore the fact that he won the crown with only 11 recorded pro fights, but was this the actual number? He has wins over signature names like Peter Jackson, Bob Fitszimmoms, and Jim Corbett, but These bouts were probably the equivalent of Tyson's victory over a diminished Holmes. Also, can we fairly say that Jeffries squard off against a man who matched him in size and strength? Is it acceptable that he gave actual title shots ( not exhibitions ), to the 1-2 Jack finnigan and Jack Munroe? Lastly, he retired at the age of 29 when men like Jack Johnson and Marvin Hart were ready, willing and available... I don't know. I have always held Jeffries in high regard, but after careful reconsideration, I'm not sure that I can rate him that high among history's best heavyweights. Other champs of that general time frame such as Jack Johnson and Bob Fitszimmons need to be placed well above him in my honest opinion.
In hindsight, definitely not. AT the time, i would say as good as in both had an argument. Not much different to say Mike Tyson choosing an opponent over Tim Witherspoon, or even Lennox Lewis choosing to fight Vitali Klitchsko when from memory Vlad Klitchsko was considered the better of the brothers. You need to understand the thinking at the time. Jeffries was the undisputed champion. There is no doubt about that and noone else had a claim. The best claims were from previous champions, all of whom he knocked out (with rematches to prove it wasnt a fluke). He also kod the coloured champion Peter Jackson with ease (I know and agree with the excuses but not everybody did at the time). By this time, there was noone really who was considered a standout challenger. Johnson had been knocked cold by the old Choynski just a couple of years earlier. He was having a big year though and was starting to emerge ahead of the likes of Denver Ed Martin, Mcvey etc. But, apart from the knockout loss to Choynski (who was older at the time than he was when he drew with Jeffries and who himself really had no overly great claim for a shot at Jeffries,Johnson had also struggled with Hank Griffin who had beaten Johnson on points and then drawn several fights with him. Hank is very interesting because his result against Jack Monroe was the same as against Johnson a win by decision. Against Jeffries he was knocked out quite easily. I think it is fair to say that Johnson was rated on par or just below Griffin at the time and Griffin probably would have been due a title shot before both Johnson and Monroe, had he not been old and on the decline, but more importantly, outclassed by Jeffries earlier. If you look at things honestly, at the time, Monroe and Johnson were not that far apart in rankings at the time. And (unfortunately) being coloured Johnson had to do far more than Monroe to get the shot. I believe that Johnson would have far bettered his claims at the time, if he had knocked out Griffen easily. A win over Choynski (instead of a knockout loss) would have also greatly enhanced his claims at the time. Although not relevant at the time, his Hart loss was another that ultimately cost him any chance of a shot at Jeffries. Up until this point, Johnson had failed against the best white fighters he fought (kod by Choynski and lost to Hart). Even his win over Fred Russell was only a Dq win due to low blows. Unlike today, there was no internet or tv to view his performance and the official decision is what most people would make judgments on. Had beaten choynksi and Hart, he would have been the standout logical challenger but he didnt. Monroe was not as good as Johnson but at this point he was close to him and the fact that his last fight was a victory over Tom Sharkey, the same Tom sharkey that gave Jeffries his toughest title defence meant that Monroe was as good an opponent as Johnson was, at the time.
Are you on drugs tonight or something? You think it is possible that Limerick had just the two fights? If so, you might be interested in a bridge i have for sale. I can probably show you a picture of it atsch There is a difference between the best and as good as. To clarify, if we assume Vlad Klitchsko is the current consensus champion, imo without a doubt the best challenger is Vitali Klitchsko. But this doesnt mean that there are not other fights that Vlad can take that will be as good a choice as Vitali for an opponent.