The most under rated thing about old time heavyweight champions is....

Discussion in 'Classic Boxing Forum' started by Mendoza, Jan 13, 2010.


  1. Mendoza

    Mendoza Hrgovic = Next Heavyweight champion of the world. banned Full Member

    55,255
    10,354
    Jun 29, 2007
    The most under rated thing about old time heavyweight champions is....

    After watching some of the up close and clear sparring sessions, I'm beginning to think the most under rated thing about the old timers in general was their speed and athletic ability. Dempsey could move and hit extremely well on the up close sparring sessions. Corbett was kid quick with his hands and feet and could feint a man out of his shoes. Johnson was smooth and very coordinated. Jeffries looks like superman working out.

    While I agree 100% that Jeffries. Johnson, Corbett, and Dempsey lack modern techniques, I think it’s important to know that the game evolved. If something wasn't invented or practiced back then, we should not assume they could not do it today. I've always tried to rate the man, not the era he was boxing in.

    Could Jeffries, Johnson, Corbett, and Dempsey adapt to newer boxing techniques which include the fundamentals of defense, using the jab, combination punching and such? If they show good athletic ability, which they all have, I think each man could do it as easily as a fish takes to water. That's why these up close and clear sparring session are extremely important when all that we have on the fighters in the ring are old / grainy films shot at a distance.

    In closing, were the old timers crude on technique by modern standards? Perhaps. Were the old timers short on athletic ability? No way!

    Today things in the heavyweight division seemed to be reversed. Many are big on technique and power, but average on athletic ability.

    Thoughts?
     
  2. lefthook31

    lefthook31 Obsessed with Boxing banned

    20,862
    138
    Jul 6, 2007
    Maybe cruder on technique but ten times tougher mentally. Boxing is not about what it used to be and for that we dont see the best of what a fighter is capable of.
     
  3. Sardu

    Sardu RIP Mr. Bun: 2007-2012 Full Member

    3,581
    52
    Jan 22, 2008
    They generally had to pay their dues more on the way up. Had to earn their shot at the title rather than be inactive for over year (Gerry Cooney: May 1981 to June 1982 shot at Holmes). Although, as I recall that fight was supposed to take place in March but got postponed until June of that year. I believe it was an injury Cooney suffered in training.
     
  4. amhlilhaus

    amhlilhaus Well-Known Member Full Member

    1,840
    12
    Mar 24, 2005
    What new techniques have been developed? you mean modern nutrition and weightlifting? ever see a modern heavyweight the last ten years fight hard for 12 rounds, fight after fight?
     
  5. bodhi

    bodhi Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    19,229
    257
    Oct 22, 2009
    Most definitly! Especially Jeffries and Johnson!

    Corbett, Jeffries and Johnson did not lack modern techniques! they just used technique that was adapted to the rules they were fighting under. Dempsey was a guy of the transition era so it´s even more wrong with him.
    The bold thing is what should be done. That´s the proper way and the method used in historic sciences. You can´t judge an event, or here a fighter, by modern standards but you have to judge them by the standards of their time. Else you won´t be able to understand what you are looking at. :good

    Of course they could. I have absolutly no doubt about that. I disagree with the bold statement. Watch Johnson, he is very sound defensivly, uses the jab and threw combinations - watch the first 10-12 rounds of the Willard fight, you´ll see some nice combinations from him.
    Those things didn´t look exactly like it does nowadays whoch is partly the fault of the films and partly of the rules they fought at. Those "modern techniques" already existed but where adapted to the rules of the time. Of course it looks different.

    Yeah, they look crude by modern standards. But that doesn´t mean they were crude by the standards of their time.

    Jeffries and Johnson would probably top today´s division if they would adept to today´s rules. Dempsey would easily rule cruiswerweight.
     
  6. turpinr

    turpinr Boxing Junkie Full Member

    12,227
    1,253
    Feb 6, 2009
    ali would ko jeffries,corbett and fitzsimmons without breaking sweat.
    comparing those old timers to modern fighters is a joke.roy jones junior,who i'm not a fan off, would make jeffries look like a right twat
     
  7. Seamus

    Seamus Proud Kulak Full Member

    61,561
    46,155
    Feb 11, 2005
    I don't think Jeffries or Johnson would take the average tough man competition today, let alone make a dent in the rankings.
     
  8. turpinr

    turpinr Boxing Junkie Full Member

    12,227
    1,253
    Feb 6, 2009
    :roll:i know.i can see johnson had skills but jeffries was a caveman
     
  9. Jersey Joe

    Jersey Joe Well-Known Member Full Member

    1,820
    7
    Mar 8, 2005
    Endurance - the amount of fights they had, and rounds they did, was ridiculous compared to today's fighters. It wasn't uncommon for a champion to fight once a month, and contenders did even more on the way up.
     
  10. Flea Man

    Flea Man มวยสากล Full Member

    82,426
    1,465
    Sep 7, 2008
    They don't need to adapt. There styles may stump more 'modern' fighters due to their perceived awkwardness, at least in accordance with what we expect from a 'modern' fighter in terms of technique.

    As awful as it looks, the style Fitz implements against Corbett might frustrate the Hell out of a 'modern' fighter.

    MIGHT:good
     
  11. Boxed Ears

    Boxed Ears this my daddy's account (RIP daddy) Full Member

    56,086
    10,493
    Jul 28, 2009
    I...don't even know what to say to that. :!:
     
  12. Seamus

    Seamus Proud Kulak Full Member

    61,561
    46,155
    Feb 11, 2005
    Pretty special, I think. Almost poetry.
     
  13. TheGreatA

    TheGreatA Boxing Junkie Full Member

    14,241
    157
    Mar 4, 2009
    I've always been more impressed by the sparring sessions of Jack Johnson and Jim Jeffries than their actual fights.
     
  14. Seamus

    Seamus Proud Kulak Full Member

    61,561
    46,155
    Feb 11, 2005

    Neither of them impress me with what they did in the ring. Johnson had enormous cajones for what he did in that era society, almost unprecedented. However, he had a lot of marginal performances against smallish, crude and/or shot fighters. Jeffries also struggled mightily with the same lot.
     
  15. TheGreatA

    TheGreatA Boxing Junkie Full Member

    14,241
    157
    Mar 4, 2009
    Would you say that Jack Johnson and Jim Jeffries look completely crude in sparring exhibitions such as this:

    [ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vBHTzfclc10[/ame]

    3:17

    [ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BWJNa93ndZE[/ame]

    2:10

    or this:

    [ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=beygNk7O-so[/ame]

    2:43

    So much that they couldn't even compete in today's toughman contests? Obviously an intentional exaggeration by you but still, don't you think they could be competent? I think both of them could very well be molded into modern boxers.