The evolution of the style of Jim Jeffries.

Is it free? Didn't even know it was on tonight. I'll probably watch the UFC card (shitty as it is), being as I'm staying at my boy's house and everyone here hates boxing, despite how much I denigrate MMA to rile them up. Fine hunnies coming over as well, so I hope to be putting to use the methods used by the genius in my avatar to get some play tonight.

I'll have to stay away from the liquor, though. Apparently I make a complete ass of myself when I'm wasted on it (dancing, random anger outbursts, listening to Sinead O'Connor, etc.), so I'll just build up a steady buzz and try to keep my game tight.

I'll see if I can get the Ward fight on if it's free. Otherwise I'll just make their night hell by adamantly backing James Toney to knock out Randy Couture when they fight in their upcoming UFC bout, despite the fact that he has next to no chance.

 

Adam's book opened my eyes on Jeffries .. tons of first hand accounts by people that saw him his whole career .. really great stuff ...

Jeffries did evolve through his reign keeping in mind how few professional bouts the man actually had .. I think if he fought Johnson in 1906 it would have been a totally different fight than Reno. If you factor in the fact that Hart , bum decision or not, went 20 competitive rounds with Johnson you shudder to think what that Jeffries would have done to Jack ..

 

What's interesting to think of is if this fight took place then and how much of an effect a crushing victory over Johnson would have impacted his long term, all time standings opposed to the Reno disaster ... the more you learn about him in his prime the more you realize what a shell he was ...

 

Is this perhaps because Jeffries had a 40-60lb weight advantage on them?




ps very nice read thank you

 

I almost always learn something when you get these types of threads going, Janitor! Keep it up! :good

 

I'll accept that. However, Bob Satterfield was 185lb. There have been many cases of 185lbers hitting like superheavyweights(Marciano, Dempsey, Langford)....but Fitz was 20lb lighter at 165lb. I can't think of hardly any cases of a 165lb man in later eras hitting as hard as 200lb + heavyweights...was fitz the one exception?

 

Who is in your avater?

I think Fitzsimmons is THE best puncher ever. Punching is not purely about size and the 'weight' behind the punch, we all know the speed x force = power equation, but 'functioning power, as in how hard the guy hits in practise rather than theory, is slightly different again. I think there are more factors in 'functioning' power such as: being able to catch people unaware; accuracy; and where the punch lands.

In regards to Fitzsimmons he was fast and had really good punching technique allowing himself to maximise the 'force' in his body to make up half of the power equation. I think in theory Fitzsimmons hits as hard as most big sized Heavyweights of about 180-190lbs easily. But the second part of my theory is where Fitzsimmons excells, his 'functioning' power is tremendous. He was the master of disguise in most ways as he was able to catch people with punches they never seen coming, right in the sweetspot. Do you understand that? What do you think of it?


Also this has been an excellant thread, I'm not too read-up on Jeffries but I am learning alot and I have definitly underrated him in the past, in terms of his technical ability.