Top 10 ATG White Heavyweights

it's a joke, mate. like this thread.

 

Well if IT said it, then that bloke definitely knows what is going on.

He will challenge the winner of Jeffries vs Fitz. Did he challenge them? Probably not because when he got back to challenge them, Jack Johnson beat him and then he was KOd. If he beat Johnson he would be right in the frame still, Like Johnson with Hart.

We dont even know for sure what that quote means (ie challenge or fight). If you accept that report and evidence then you really cant question the SF Chronicle report which is a lot stronger evidence and clearer (although still not proof). The report credits Jeffries with a win over childs and Smith. So what you should have said was that in 1903, Martin should have been given the rematch that he was promised with Jeffries.

IF you believe one snippet of loose info, you must believe another.

 

Was Joe Savage white? I always thought he was black (never seen that tournament fight where he was KOd.

 

It means very little, we can agree on this. Certainly nothing in the context of prime Jackson vs Jeffries.

But, i would not say nothing. Jackson was an aged and shot champion. Only a very good fighter would have beaten him. He may have been alcoholic, but it took a while for the best to catch an alcoholic John L Sullivan. Corbett deserves credit for beating Sullivan, Tunney Dempsey, etc. What if Jackson (repordedly had walked to fight Jeffries and jeffries backed out citing the colour line?) WE would have hundreds of claims that Jackson was better than Jeffries and would have kod him. Much like what happened with old shot John L Sullivan who did not face Jackson. Jackson was still a champion and Jeffries simply beat him. Theoreitcally he ended the reign of a great. That is not a zero event. We dont know whether the old shot Jackson would have beaten a skinny inexperienced Jack Johnson at this stage or a young glass bodied Denver Ed smith or any of the other top contenders. We do know that none of those fighters were not the world coloured champion. Personally, i think that class wins through more often than not and i think that very few people would have beaten Jackson at that point in time (only the world class ones).

Who was his most dangerous challenger? Sharkey, who took him the distance twice? Fitzimmons who KOd sharkey and other top contenders, quickly. Corbett who was a former champ that kod arguably the greatest fighter ever, supposedly only lost his title on a fluke loss of concentration and supposedly (after the first challenge) totally embarassed and outboxed jeffries. Or jackson who was shot but was arguably the greatest fighter ever and the reigning coloured champion. Or do you think it was the man who was Kod by or lost to several of jeffries previous opponents. I am unsure. Maybe it was Langford who challenged every man in the world except Jeffries. Perhaps you refer to Munroe the Miner that "knocked" jeffries down in an exhibition (hang on that one did actually happen). What about the inexperienced Sam McVey was he the greatest challenge, even though at this stage he lost as many as he won.

I guess that just leaves Marvin Hart, Jack Root and Tommy Burns. No one realistically thinks those guys were his greatest challenge.

Even the real greatest challenge for Jeffries was actually accepted. He fought (when in retirement which was a lot of the challenge) one of if not the greatest fighters ever in Jack Johnson. I am sorry, but there is absolutely nothing whatsoever that the career of Jeffries can be criticised for. The only possible thing is that he retired too early, but better that than too late. In fact too early is probably the right time. I dont think Jeffries could have improved his reign without extending it. Even if he fought Johnson, Johnson does not become the great he currently is. Probably doesnt even get a shot at Tommy Burns and quite likely we would be hearing how he retired instead of fighting Burns.

 

Good list. I would rate Schmeling & Baer higher.

http://www.amazon.com/Joe-Gans-Biography-American-Champion/dp/0786439947/ref=pd_bxgy_b_img_a

 

Boilmaker you make some great points...but i honestly feel Jack Johnson would have always beaten jeffries to a bloody pulp, prime for prime....Jack Johnson was just too skilled for jeffries. Jeffries was a great ATHLETE, but not neccesarily a great fighter. He took many rounds of struggling to dispose of Inactive/older/much smaller 167-185lb fighters that 220lb monsters like tyson, foreman, liston would have destroyed in 1-2 rounds. I dont think Jeff was a knockout artist, more of a wear u down with my brute strength type guy.

 

I totally agree with you about Jeffries. I just don't understand how he was rated so high. Perhaps he looked so good on the eye test and that he was such a natural athlete that folks assumed this enhanced his fighting abilities. The truth remains that fighters are fighters first and last, not necessarily "athletes" in the sense of measurables. They are instinctual beings with a certain knack that cannot be quantified in a 100 meter dash or a bench press. It is a skill only measurable in an of itself.

 

Yes. Historians often talk up Jeffries 10 second 100 yard dash time, world class broad jump, and ability to run 9 miles with a big moose on his back....This has nothing to do with Boxing. It is all about how you are with your fists. To me even in the grainy footage of prime jeffries, I do believe Jeffries was quite limited both skillwise and defensivley. I am not the only one who thinks this, the Police Gazette and writers of that period had the same complaints too. I do believe most of the heavyweights of that era fought with a boxing style that would not be effective in modern day boxing. Transition in the modern boxing techniques did not start in the heavyweight division until around the 1940s

 

It is a matter of personal opinion. I think Jeffries may have beaten Johnson prime for, but that will probably change the next time i watch some Johnson fights, i find him to look near unbeatable on film (i am not even really sure why). My main point is that he was not the standout challenger that you would think (with hindsight). I have no doubt that a fight between the two would have almost certainly been a great one and a pick em.

I tend to think that modern fighters dont give enough dues to guys, solely because of size. Interesting that you mention Liston. Liston fought about 5 fighters under 185. 2 early KOs, 1 6 rnd decision and a split series with Marty Marshall. The smaller fighters seemed to create just as much difficulties, if not more than their larger equivalents. Foreman had more trouble with movers than the big bangers, so you would expect that he too would not mow through guys like you suggest. tyson was probably the most lethal puncher for a smaller fighter to fight and i have no doubt that he would take care of some ATG little guys in a round or two, but then again he did that to big guys often as well. I do agree that Jeff did not have the same type of knockout power as say Tyson, but he still did have genuine ko power.

 

The 10 second dash sounds much better because we now measure in metres not yards. I equate this to about 10.9 seconds for the 100 m (how does this compare to olympic standards of the time). I also think that it is fair to assume a half second or so exagerration. Either way, we know that in terms of athletic ability that Jeffries would not be out of his depth with current fighters. Whether some things are myths or not.

In relation to the modernisation of boxing, you are assuming this is a good thing. but in reality, modernisation as it is often called really happened because of the removal of much of the infighting in the clinch. I think that these are skills, which are not part of modern boxing and in any head to head fight, they need to be factor in. I think they actually give an advanatage to the older fighters, unless you are going to try to handcuff them. Many of the modern fighters would be taken by surprise with the wrestling in clinches and owuld not be prepared for it. Just look at how much trouble Ruiz used to cause with a modified unskilled version of the clinch tactics where he didnt even really hit and do damage on the break.

I think one of the biggest indicators of the difference in boxing comes from jeffries comments before johnson. I will bend his arm behind his back. Imagine tysons reaction to this tactic, i think he might have quite easily flipped out and started biting?

 

Oh please get real! Jackson had not had a fight for 6 years, there are articles detailing his physical collapse after he fought Slavin in London,he was a wreck.Even Mendoza dropped this line of attack when people put up clippings showing the reports of Jackson's decline. I give Jeffries the same kudos for beating Jackson as I give Johnson for beating Fitz , NONE.
Jackson was NEVER a Champion ,his main claim to fame was his draw with Corbett ,and he may allready have been in decline then,he kod Maher ,but who didnt ,he could only draw with Goddard,and he stopped Paddy Slavin who was very tough but also very hittable by all accounts, hardly earth shattering is it?
Jackson would have beaten Johnson at this stage ? How do you know? And why do you think so? Jeffries boosters ALLWAYS bring Johnson in to the argument?
What the F**K has Johnson to do with Jeffries V Jackson?
Jeffries defended his title against Sharkey ,a 40 year old Fitz a 33 and 36 year old Corbett ,Ruhlin whose corner chucked in the towel ,and 2 bums,one of which Finnegan sat on the floor after 55 seconds[ the quickest win ever in Heavyweight Tilte fights] crying.
Check your facts ,Munroe NEVER knocked Jeffries down, that was a fabrication by Munroe's manager, there have been many threads on this before.
You want to know who Jeffries should have fought?
You allready know the answer.The man who went on a 10 year undefeated tear before losing his title at 37 after 26 rds.
Why do Jeffries fans allways feel the need to bum him up to some super hero ,he was quick as lightning ,defensively adept etc ,Of course he was, thats why his face was a bloody mask in several of his biggest wins .
Jeffries was tough ,Jeffries was strong and big,much bigger than his challengers ,but he won his fights by wearing down his opposition,and absorbing extreme punishment.HE WOULD BE CAKE FOR SOMEONE LIKE ALI.Jeffries best wins are over a 40 superMiddleweight , and a 36 year old man coming out of retirement,conceding 30 lbs ,thems the facts.
PS.
Jackson claimed the Coloured Title in 1888 ,after beating George Godfrey, he NEVER defended it ,and fought Jeffries in 1898 10 YEARS LATER, callling him a Champion is gilding the lily don't you think?
NB.
"Very few people would have beaten Jackson at that time,only the world class ones".

Jackson had ONE MORE fight after the debacle against Jeffries,he was kod in 4 rds by Jeffords,world class? I don't think so!

 

If you were honest, Johnson struggled more with fighters who were not 220 pounds.

Do you really think Jeffires would be Ko'd by Choynski or Klondike Haines?

Do you really think Jeffries losses a points decision to the the Griffin or Hart's of boxing.

Do you really think Jeffires carries journeyman in his title fights as Johnson did?

Do you really think Jeffries draws with Journeyman?

Do you really think Jeffries would quit in fights the way Johnson did?

Do you really think Jeffries would use as many excuses as Johnson has?

Do you really think Jeffries would throw an intentional low blow when he was hurt to get out of a match as Johnson did?

The truth Suzieq is Johnson strugled more with smaller fighters. See the Choynski match, the O'brien match where Johnson was out boxed, or the Ketchel match were Johnson was knocked down...all THREE of these matches were vs fighters 170 or less.

You just are not honest, and use too many double standards. If you think Johnson beat Jeffreis in a prime vs prime fantasy match up, I'm fine with that. Its the I'm going to criticize one guy for " XYZ ", and give the other fighter a complete pass for it that just isn't very scientific or fair. You never seem to learn. Its a pity because you can be a good poster.

Personally I think Jeffries in his prime would TKO Johnson or win on points because he was a better overall fighter, threw more punches, and was far more skilled and quicker than the old man who returned 5 years out of his prime to meet Johnson.

 

Yes, Savage is was fat, white and bald. Joe Savage was supposed to be in the People Champion Tournament, which was a tournament style 4 round affair with 16 fighters. The winner advanced another round, and the loser went home. Extra cash was given to for a KO. The trouble was the field of fighters wasn't very good. Tony Tubbs won the event. One cool catch is the fans who paid for this PPV event got to vote on who the fighters faced in round one. In college my friends and I were going to vote for Savage to face the best puncher in the field, but the alleged 42-0 bare knuckle champion pulled out of the event! We wanted our money back.

As it was Savage had his first and last pro boxing match after the event. He meet Bert Cooper and was blasted out in one round. Never the less, we still talk about Savage today. He belongs on a boxing list for sure.

 

HH.. its a nice testament from Jeffries.. even though Jackson was well past it.

 

Nice summation McVea... I wish I had the ability to express on par with yourself. :good