Who's An Old Time Fighter, That You Find Overrated?

Braddock and Sharkey.
To determine which one is more overrated, I would have to think deeper, and I'm too lazy for that right now.

 

Totally agree Greg. Fitz was born with reasonably broad shoulders, chest size etc. but not not naturally a HW at all….you can see the extra muscle/size that manual labouring (including work as a black smith) put on to his frame - upper body only though, still had those damn skinny legs, lol.

Even with the extra muscle borne out of hard labour, he was optimally maxed out at the 175 lbs or so as you say…not that it always holds based on physical appearance but just looking at him, Fitz did look like a major puncher…

 

George Foreman:
1. Never proved he was capable of stringing together a legitimate title reign.
2. Didn't win a 12 round decision until 1995 and it was a robbery.
3. Looked like crap in his prime against Ali, Young, and Lyle, losing twice.
4. His best wins were circumstantial due a size difference (Frazier) and a notably poor chin (Norton).
5. A 220 pound Foreman would have pedestrian size and strength in modern eras.
6. His second heavyweight title was due to fighting a woefully undersized and chinny heavyweight who was fortunate enough to barely win the belt off a guy who belonged in ICU instead of a boxing ring (same guy who, not surprisingly, dropped him like ten times in the rematch). Foreman won the title because he was able to cut the the line and have some luck on his side when they actually fought.
7. No significant wins outside of Moorer in his comeback. Guys like Stewart and Cotezer were used as stepping stones by world class heavyweights.
8. The loss to Holyfield does nothing for his standing. Holyfield let him tee off and routinely made mediocre heavyweights look good on their way to loses.

He was born pre 1950 so I'm going to leave the post up.

 

Honestly, through my own interpretation of Jeffries' career, it seems like the public looked down on him for most of his reign. If anything, I'd argue that Jeffries was an unpopular champion. The press didn't really have much of a motive to exaggerate the feats of an unpopular, and generally 'boring' champion compared to the colourful personalities that came before him like Sullivan, Corbett and Fitzsimmons. I'm just having trouble seeing a motive here for the press, unless Jeffries has these Soros\Schwab-tier connections that allow him to control mainstream, reputable media sources. That would be quite the twist!

I'd say that Jeffries went from ridiculously overrated, to being pretty underrated. He certainly wasn't an Ali in terms of speed and defensive abilities, but I'm certain there's more to him than the punishment-soaking brute that most people see him as. Even in the footage we have of him against Ruhlin, where Jeffries was somewhat green compared to 03-04, I'd say Jeffries showcases solid speed and patience.

 

Interesting. Of the reports I’ve read, the descriptions of Jeffries were more often affording than not.

For instance, citing major improvements in Jeff’s game when he rematched an even older and more inactive Corbett were overly generous and somewhat ignorant of the “then” quality of the opponent in front of him - confusing Corbett’s deteriorations with Jeff’s alleged improvements.

Just a tidbit and you might already know this - IIRC, in his auto bio, Corbett admitted that the ref for the Jeffries rematch was a close acquaintance of his - and that ref afforded Corbett multiple long counts after KDs to allow him to stay in the fight - upon the final KD, Corbett said he basically indicated to the ref, no more long counts, I’m done.

So, without such support, it’s conceivable that Jeffries might’ve seen Corbett off that much earlier than he did.

What perhaps strikes me most about Jeffries is that he wasn’t that confident and not in love with the game at all - it was simply a means - with far better $$$ to be earned than run of the mill hard labouring.

Suffice to say, he famously bet his purse against himself for the first Fitz fight.

It’s in the realm of speculation but I do think he could’ve been better - but he was trained to play it safe and soak it up. Tunney critiqued the methodology and wisdom of Jeffries fighting style.

Performance in training doesn’t always translate, even when a fighter tries to replicate in the ring.

With Jeff however, while he does look acceptably fast and nimble in the available training footage - when it came to an actual fight in the ring, I don’t think he consciously applied himself in the same way - rather, he fought like a lower risk, percentage fighter.

That might sound contrary since he did still soak punishment, but given his durability and general size advantage, he knew what he could take without opening himself up to even more harm.

I mean, it’s possible to conclude that his natural athletic abilities were woefully under-utilised given the style he and his trainers chose to adopt.

 

That is a fair assessment. I myself have mainly seen the more complimentary articles from the time about Jeffries, but from my knowledge on the era I have heard that the public found him to be an underwhelming champion with a boring personality and not very exciting style.

It seems like Jeff was criticized for the same reasons we critique him now: he was very poor at finishing his vastly smaller and older opponents. I find these poor finishing abilities apparent from the Ruhlin fight as well, Jeffries is overly cautious throughout the round.

 

Kind of like my grandfather who used to tell me when i was 10 or 11 that Wilfredo Gomez would get on his knees and shine shoes if he ever fought Sixto Escobar.

And I believed him somewhat, until i wrote to Ring Magazine in Spanish to ask for Escobar's record and they published my letter, and answered that he had 21 losses.

That day, I laughed at my grandpa until bed time lol

 

Nice one Antonio!

 

Lmao! Thanks!

 

Great ****ing post, Greg!!!

 

You were a kid. You didn't understand what Sixto Escobar meant to your grandpa and why Sixto meant so much to him. You were too young to understand his importance to Puerto Rican people. You couldn't have been expected to understand the suffering, the obstacles he faced in life. I salute your grandpa for his loyalty to his hero and for his pride in Escobar's achievements. A won-loss record doesn't tell the whole story of a man's life and career. It gives only the outline of the story. The rest you have to learn by seeing, living, loving, feeling, experiencing life on your own.

 

This is true. Plus Escobar lost 21 times but he lost to very good fighters.

I still dont think he beats Gomez.

But he'd probably gone 11 or 12 rounds without getting dropped. A tko for Wilfredo. Possibly a corner stoppage.

 

Cheers Clinton

 

Corbett

 

Jake, a top fighter sure,

but how he gets slotted into the places you sometimes find him is a puzzle to me, he was a Welter Hunter and the Middles, especial, produced hundreds of great & dangerous men over the years.

a great sure, just not in the top 10 or 25 even... again which I always say, Lists are Impossible to put in any sort of order anyway.

But Hey Ho.