Obviously we could never really know for sure without footage of the fight, but what was the general consensus? From what you’ve read in post fights, accounts from that period, who would you say got the better of it?
Posted a bunch of post-fight write-ups, local Alta California, Chronicle, Examiner, Call, and a bunch of non-locals who had had correspondents attending the fight This content is protected
Per the account on boxing rec Peter Jackson probably wins a decision if this fight had went to one. Jackson had a majority of the eventful rounds but Corbett had the single best round of the fight in the 25th when he broke Jacksons ribs effectively ending the fight as a contest. If Jackson won the first 6, Corbett won the 25th and the remaining 18 were debatable there is a mathematical path for Corbett here. But Jackson most likely won if a decision was given by this time. The account notes that Corbett was in worse shape by the 25th and was in bad enough shape by the 26th that he was unable to take advantage of Jacksons injury. So it seems very unlikely Corbett ran up the margin needed in rounds 7-24 to catch Jackson. Maybe Corbett was unaware of Jacksons injury but he had 35 more rounds to go after Jackson if he was capable.
I read an account that Corbett finished stronger, and that Jackson collapsed soon after the draw was announced.
And all this while Jackson had a bum ankle. It took a proper fighter in Joe Goddard to put a fit and prime Jackson on the canvas twice in 8 rounds.
