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

Ortiz is obviously a big name for 13 fight Toweel , but he lost the vast majority of his subsequent fights ,and so was probably a burnt out case by then.

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sHhKoVElk8I[/ame]

Below Toweel ,and Carruthers.

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yIgbNSpp41U&feature=related[/ame]


More good stuff from, " The Great A".:good

 

2 national titles, an Empire title and a world title within 15 fights certainly suggests Toweel wasnt held back.

Strange comparison of title runs.

Personally dont know really anything about Toweel's opponents prior Ortiz. Seems a decent arguement mounting in his favour though.

I dont think Toweel gets "low balled" in terms of his career, he certainly flys under the radar though.

 

Nice to see the name Toweel mentioned for a change. Props McGrain.

I can't talk about the topic at hand, for I'm definitely no expert on either man.

I think Toweel is a bit of a strange case. As said, he rose quickly and fell off just as quickly. Yet, speak to anyone who saw him fight, and their faces light up and they can't say enough good things about him.
Most still insist he is without doubt the most talented fighter SA ever produced.

Perhaps the quick fall from grace had a lot to do with wieght issues. He had huge issues with making weight well before he even challenged Ortiz for the title, and what he did to make weight, usually drastic and extreme measures, probably screwed up his body to the point of no return.

The Toweel story is a good one (He came from a fighting family) and I have some nice info on the guy, but to be honest how many people would even bother to read a thread that would take a long time to prepare?
I'm not sure it's worth the bother.

 

If you've got the time to share that stuff i'd love to hear some Toweel stories mate :thumbsup

I know the heavy handed Aboriginal Elley Bennett was a contender for Toweel's belt, from what i've heard Toweel's peopledrew a line in the sand in regards to that matchup due to Bennett's colour. Bennett's loss to Carruther's presented a new oppotunity. Carruthers had also defeated Toweel's conquerer during the '48 olympics.

 

"Ortiz was an active champion"

Who was losing fights and no longer seemed confortable making weight. He fought Harold Dade at 132 lbs two months before meeting Toweel. And his next fight after fighting Toweel saw him at 131.

Ortiz had lost 2 of his previous 5 fights, and would lose 5 of his next 7. So he was on a 5-7 run NOT COUNTING THE TOWEEL FIGHT. His best days were clearly behind him.

Fitz fought in an unlimited weight class and I don't think the issue is what fighters from 100 years later could have beaten him at unlimited weights. That is an apples and oranges comparision with a bantamweight. The real issue is who besides Jeffries could have beaten him in his own day. Off his ko's of Corbett, Sharkey, Ruhlin, Maher, and Choynski--it appears the answer is no one.

*While one might debate what level of opponent the 34 year old Ortiz was, what is not in dispute is that Toweel's rapid rise and championship reign was ended abruptly by a one round ko by Carruthers. There is no comparision of career success with Jeff who retired at 30 undefeated.
Would Jeff have ever been considered an all-time great if he had been flattened in one round by a challenger in 1901, and then ko'd in a rematch. I think not.

The best heavyweight comparision with Toweel I can think of is Ingemar Johansson, who had an impressive rise to the title but was then blasted out. Who rates Johansson as an ATG heavyweight?

 

"Fitz was forty pounds lighter than his opponent"

He was fighting in an unlimited class. The definition of the heavyweight champion is the man who can beat any other man in the world in a boxing match, regardless of weight. Fitz beat a lot of men who outweighed him.

Size does not make the achievements of big heavyweights, whether Jeffries or Foreman or Lewis or the Klitschkos, any lesser achievements in heavyweight boxing.

*Let's agree to disagree on Fitz. I see a man who lost to no one else in fifteen years as being perhaps a more dangerous opponent than a guy on a 5-7 run.

**The whole argument about Toweel defeating Ortiz strikes me as on par with claiming that Paul Pender deserves to be rated above Marvin Hagler because he won his title from the great Sugar Ray Robinson while Hagler won his title from Alan Minter.

 

"Sharkey was probably seen as a safe bet as in his previous fight he had drawn with Choynski"

Sharkey had knocked Choynski down several times and the fight ended when Sharkey knocked Choynski clean out of the ring and down onto the floor. The police stepped in and stopped the fight and it was ruled a draw.

That is basically the description on IMDB. Why would anyone think this made Sharkey a safe bet?

"Goddard's win over Maher was greeted with astonishment"

Doesn't mean it didn't happen. It does show Goddard still had a dangerous punch.

*You might be right about Goddard's weight, but that 63 lb bulge with Choynski is based on Jeff weighing 230 lbs for that fight, way out of line with his weights in other fights. The San Francisco Library had five newspapers on microfilm from that era when I lived in SF, and I remember the weights given in one of them as 212 for Jeff and 165 for Choynski, still a big gap, but 212 is a much more reasonable weight for Jeff in 1897.

**As for the weight gaps-no, they don't matter at all. It might in a fantasy matchup, but fighters fight in the real world and size is just what it is. If an elephant fights a tiger, the tiger must live or die with the fact that it is giving away many tons of weight. So must Choynski, who was a heavyweight in that era.

***I don't necessarily disagree that there might be less to Jeff's record than many later judged, but I think the critique can be pushed too far. It is one thing to point out the glass is half empty, but one shouldn't claim there is no water there at all.

Ruhlin, Choynski, Goddard, Jackson, Everett, Sharkey, and Armstrong were among the best out there for Jeff. That is certain.

 

What about Carruthers then?

BTW, he looked absolute class battering Toweel twice.

 

Those underlined were emphatically not viable as," among the best out there".
Everett had beaten no one of note ,and had recently been beaten by a welterweight, Goddard was finished , Jackson was a physical wreck ,and no amount of you stating to the contrary will alter that fact.

Your interpretation of Jeffries weight is not a given, he stated he was at his heaviest earlier in his career. supposing you are correct that is still 47lbs.
How anyone can say that huge weight disparities should not be factored into the assessment of a man's record is beyond me.:huh

 

"How anyone can say that huge weight disparities should not be factored into the assessment of a man's record is beyond me"

Because this is real heavyweight boxing. P4p is a fantasy. It does not exist. Saying Manuel Ortiz is p4p better than Jeffries (or Jersey Joe Walcott) means nothng in the real world. He would never have beaten those men.

It is like inch for inch in basketball. Ask any coach if he wants the best inch-for-inch basketball player (that terrific 5' 6" guy) or the best 7 footer. All would pick the best 7 footer.

Goddard was finished--He was obviously past his best, but the fact that he knocked out one of the very top contenders in his next fight does indicate he still had something left. Did Ortiz have a win over anyone as respected as Maher after the Toweel fight?

Jeff's weight--I sure don't know. I wasn't looking at the scales, but the SF newspapers did give his weight consistently as between 200 and 215 in the 1896 to 1898 period in the articles I read.

 

"unquestionably one of the best fighters ever to lace them up at his weight"

His contemporaries didn't seem to be as impressed as many are now. I looked up the ESB poll and Ortiz was at #3.

I have access to a couple of older lists.

Nat Fleischer did not list Ortiz among the top ten bantams, but in the list I have he did list Eder Jofre.

A ring listing done after Fleischer died did not list Ortiz, although both Eder Jofre and Fighting Harada made the list.

So his own generation seems to have been less impressed than they were with Jofre and Harada.

Ortiz's record certainly seems impressive on the face of it, as you pointed out, but many of his defenses came during WWII--were the best men available to fight then?

The 1947 loss to Harold Dade certainly raises questions, as Dade seems to have been so-so (41-30-6)

looking at the Ring Magazine ratings from 1942 to 1950, the #1 rated bantamweight contenders were

1942--Lou Salica*
1943--Rush Dalma
1944--Sammy Reynolds
1945--Benny Goldberg*
1946--Harold Dade*
1947--Peter Kane
1948--Cecil Schoonmaker
1949--Danny O'Sullivan
1950--Luis Romero

*Ortiz fought

I don't know much about Ortiz, frankly, but I think it would be worth while to check if his long list of defenses were mainly against the best men available, or if he is one of those "statistic" fighters. He does seem to have run up a lot of defenses on the west coast.

I think Ortiz is certainly a subject for deeper research.

**if Lewis made his rep beating up 170 lb men--But a hundred years from now, when the heavyweights average 300 lbs (not impossible), using your logic they will dismiss Lewis for beating up little 220 lb men like Holyfield. In fact, Lewis will still have been just as good as a heavyweight during the 1990 to 2005 era as he ever was.

***Hagler--yes, he could be #1. That is my point. He rates that high because of his whole career, not because he beat a second-level champion. My point was that Robinson certainly rates above Minter but beating him doesn't put Pender above Hagler.

 

I'm sorry but this is pure 100% bull**** whether intentional or not, I don't know.

Sharkey rushed Choynski and bundled him out of the ring he did not land a blow.

Choynski had much the better of it ,despite being blatantly and repatedly fouled.
Read a primary sourced report and think again.

http://cdnc.ucr.edu/cdnc/cgi-bin/cd...en--50--1--txt-IN-+tom+sharkey+v+Joe+choynski----#