Vic Toweel or Jim Jeffries, who had the tougher run to the title?

Jeffries undoubtedly had some heavy duty scalps on his belt during his early years. Choynski was perhaps the best . he was conceding a ton of weight but was a very experienced, hard hitting boxer.

Sharkey had drawn with Choynski in his previous fight so was probably seen as a safe bet, he too was conceding a big chunk of weight. Goddard was 40 years old and was well past it, he had lost his last 2 fights. Ruhlin was like Jeffries a novice, Griffin too, had not many recorded bouts to his name at this stage of his career.As he was a novice Jeffries did well against all these men , but I do feel his case has been somewhat overstated as years have gone by.
I thnik possibly the biggest factor in Jeffries development was his sparring with Corbett when he cannot have failed to absorb valuable moves and tricks of the trade.
Toweel has so many names on his record that I know nothing about, so I'll defer to your knowledge of him,[and them] .

 

I'll follow the thread but am not qualified to answer it.
Hopefully I will learn something from it ,as I have about Gilroy on another thread. :good

 

Then **** OFF!!!

 

"Toweel gets low-balled a bit, say, compared to Jeffries."

You are the first person I have seen compare them.

Toweel got to the championship just as quickly as a pro, but he had an extensive amateur career, losing only 2 of 190 fights, with 160 ko's.

Manuel Ortiz was certainly a big-name scalp, but he was 34 and Toweel seems to have caught him at the point of his career collapse. He lost 5 of his next 7.

In comparision, Fitz still had several big wins in him and several years later would win the lightheavy title. Ahead of him were wins over Sharkey, Ruhlin, Gardner, and O'Brien.

Obviously, the big difference between Jeff and Toweel is that Jeff sustained his dominance over the next several years, while Toweel was blown out by Carruthers and quickly faded away.

 

"his case has been somewhat overstated"

Fair enough.

"Goddard . . . was well past it"

Fair enough, but fighting fading big names is what rising contenders do, and Goddard still was dangerous enough to ko Peter Maher in his next fight.

"conceding a ton of weight" "conceding a big chunk of weight"

Unfair criticism of a heavyweight. This isn't p4p.

"Sharkey . . . was seen as a safe bet"

He was seen as a big hitter. I don't think big hitters are ever seen as necessarily "safe" bets. Sharkey was a dangerous opponent for Jeffries at the time.

 

Toweel had an extensive amateur career, but the reasons he doesn't make ATG lists are

one--Ortiz seems to have been a great champion who was at the end of the line. Toweel got him at the right time. This might be unfair, but it puts a cloud over his accomplishment.

two--he was blown out by Carruthers in one round at 23 to lose his title, and was again blown out by Carruthers in a rematch.

*Fair or unfair, Toweel is viewed as taking the championship from a champion who was ripe for the taking, and then getting ko'd in one.

**Jeff dominated the heavyweights up to 1903 after which he can be criticized for avoiding Johnson. Prior to that, there isn't all that much to criticize.

 

And to think Carruthers, also inexperienced in pro bouts, ripped everything from Toweel. Both of 'em had very short primes in a transitional period for the division that is, understandably, often overlooked.

 

I disagree. The only defeats (other than the fluke DQ against Sharkey) that Fitz suffered from 1890 to 1905 were to Jeffries.

Fitz went on to ko Sharkey and Ruhlin, win the lightheavy title, and ko O'Brien. That is certainly a lot more impressive than Ortiz who did not do much of anything after the Toweel defeat, losing 5 of his next 7.

I just don't think that the two years off argument is strong enough to make the case you are trying to make with it.

That outweighed by forty pounds argument is valid in a way, I suppose, if not valid for heavyweight boxing. Fitz, though, as a triple champion was a much more formidable fighter than Ortiz.

Or put another way, what other heavyweight defeated Fitz between 1890 and 1905? Ortiz lost four fights in 1949 alone.

 

I've said before Jeffries was very precocious in his development , but my point was some of the "names" on his belt were either well past it ,or like himself , novices. Goddard was 40 years old, he had not won a legitimate fight in 3 years and that was over a 4-4-2 MIDDLEWEIGHT .

Goddards win over Maher was greeted with astonishment as he was seen as finished, decribed as a "dead one", this was the last win Goddard would post in a subsequent 15 fights,and it should be noted that Maher reversed the win a couple of months later.

It should further be noted that though Maher had steel in his fists, he had china in his chin.
Here is a brief report of Goddard's win.

http://cdnc.ucr.edu/cdnc/cgi-bin/cd...-------en--20--1--txt-IN-+JEFFRIES++V+GODDARD----# Goodard is listed as scaling 194 for Jeffries ,extremely doubtfull as a couple of months later he weighed 177 for the two Maher fights. Goddard 's time was a decade earlier . I said Sharkey was probably seen as a safe bet because in his previous fight he had drawn with Choynski, whom Jeffries had earlier drawn with, that seems reasonable to me , but you do not have to agree with it ,its only supposition on my part. I don't think its unfair to mention that Choynski and Sharkey were both conceding huge amounts of weight ,its the truth so how is it unfair?

Choynski gave Jeffries 63lbs ,not Jeffries fault , but don't you think that should factor into the assessment of the result?


A month prior to taking on Jeffries Goddard lost to 4-1-0 novice Van Buskirk who beat him in a poor fight , dropping him in the 6th of an 8 rounder.

Fight report.
http://cdnc.ucr.edu/cdnc/cgi-bin/cdnc?a=d&cl=search&d=SFC18980102.2.78&srpos=1&e=-------en--20--1--txt-IN-+van+buskirk+%2c+v+goddard----#



Sharkey and Choynski are the real names on Jeffries record before he became champ, Sharkey scaled 178lbs when he fought Choynski two months before tackling Jeffries who scaled 205 for their encounter so, Sharkey probably conceded around 30lbs , plus 6 inches in height. Factor in he was a walk in slugger with zero defence , coming up against a man considerably bigger in all departments, who should win?