Jeffries wasn't a racist. Unlike many white people of his time he counted several black men as his friends - his best friend was a pure native American. Besides, we should never judge people of the past by the social/cultural norms of today.
Langford was the greatest p4p ever. In my opinion, Johnson was the 3rd greatest heavyweight ever behind Louis and Jeffries and would have beaten Langford in a tough 15 or 20 round fight due to his size. Johnson did avoid after 1910 even the top white fighters as he did everything on his own terms and hand-picked his oponents. If you study his opponenets as champion other than Jeffries who was way past his prime, Johnson fought maybe 2 or 3 good heavyweights (including Ketchel).
Once he was taken to the ground by a brazilian jujitsu artist or a wrestler, he wouldn't know what to do. Not to mention that most UFC fighters are crossed trained in boxing, kick boxing, jujitsu, wrestling, etc. All Jeffries could do is throw hay makers! Please educate yourself about fighting and watch a George St. Pierre fight and see how far fighting has come.
Jim Jeffries might last 1 round in the UFC..then sadly he would be either knocked out or he'd tap out. The reason for this is that fighting/boxing has evolved big time since Jeffrie's day. But the number one reason he wouldn't do so well nowadays is that he would be about 130 years old!
I've seen all the Jim Jeffries videos and there's no way you can judge his skill/talent from some old grainy films from 100 years ago. Anything you read in sports history books about him will have been exaggerated. In 100 years from now books will say he was stronger then 10 men. It's human nature to exaggerate about a sports heroes physical abilities. I think it's time that you find a new modern day hero....like George St. Pierre for example!
Jeffries would have destroyed Johnson if they fought in their primes, no doubt Johnson would have jumped over the ropes after a couple rounds with Jeffries
Dorsi, here are the five fighters I'd put money on to give anyone trouble. Ali, Foreman, Lennox Lewis, Vitali K., and Larry Holmes. You'll probably think Vitali and Lewis stink since they're not from the good old days, but watch Dempsey vs Willard and then honestly ask yourself how he would beat either one of them.
@ernhutch187 Wow ... I must say, I am not surprised. Lewis would be KO'd by Dempsey as he had no chin. I would put Lewis around the top 30. Vitali ... not in the top 50 as he has no endurance (unless its a 6 round fight). Holmes is around 15th to 19th best fighter. Ali and Foreman are top 10. If you watched Dempsey and Willard ... how can you posisbly say Lewis and Vitali would have a chance ???
@dorsi68 You're crazy pal. The Dempsey Willard fight is embarrassing. I've seen better boxing by two drunks in an alley. Dempsey throws no recognizable punches and Willard fights like his IQ ranks lower than zero. Boxing has evolved whether you've noticed or not.
@ernhutch187 I am sorry you think that way. Dempsey's punching power and speed was devasting. When you have a jaw or two broken, your ear is pounded, bones are broken, it shows heart how Willard fought on. I know Lewis and Vitali would not have gone on.
@ernhutch187 Also, read commnetary on the Dempsey-Willard fight and see what experts think of the fight. For the record, Ali rated Dempsey and Tunney in the top 10 for heavyweights. Dempsey was a beast and saying Lewis or Vitali would ahve a chance is very wrong.
@ernhutch187 Yes, emhutch187, Ali said that on the Dempsey - Willard fight. Read his book on boxing and see who is rates as great fighters. Your man said alot of things ... do you belive it all ... and do you not think Ali was malicious at times in the 1970's. Take care
@dorsi68 Hey pal, me and you will never agree on the greats of boxing. But I respect your opinions and I've had a great time arguing with you. You take it easy out there. JHS, thanks for making the page. You're a good man. A racist, old, wind bag, but a good man. No more posts for me guys I've had enough of ol' Jimmy J.
@ernhutch187 Your man ... Don King ruined boxing and it no longre has credibility. How much do most boxers make now ??? Less than they did 30+ years ago even without factoring inflation. Why do you think MMA is big ?? Why do no fighters fight the best anymore ??? Boxing has been decling over the past 35 years and contimues to get worst. Yes, there are some very good fighters here and there, but the depth is weak and the best no longer box
@dorsi68 Don King didn't ruin boxing. It was the NFL the NBA and the prison industrial complex. They suck up all the good athletes these days. Guys like Ali and Foreman would be on the football field today. Jimmy Young would be shooting hoops, and Sonny Liston would be doing life under the 3 strikes law. Why is King "my man"? I dislike greedy people.
@ernhutch187 Don King was the main person who ruined boxing. The valid point you have is that football, basball, basketball and hocley are taking the best athletes, but when you have a monoply unfortunately, it ruins the sport. Don King is a virus and boxing is a disgrace with his presence.
@ernhutch187 Even though you are biased, not having Louis and Johnson on that list discredits it. Holmes is much better than Lewis and Vitali, but he lost to Michael Spinks (although he won the second fight). Michael Spinks is not a top 10 light-heavy of all-time. Lewis was KO'd twice by two 2nd rate fighters and never beat Holyfield as that was an injustice as well in the 2nd fight.
@dorsi68 Not sharing your opinion makes me biased, huh? Holmes was old and tired when he lost to Spinks. First time he was 36, Spinks was 29, second time he was 37, Spinks was 30 (he still gave Spinks a little bit of a beating in that one). Also, Holmes has the 2nd most consecutive title defenses ever (Louis has most) Lewis got revenge on Mcall and on Rahman, both times with KO's. Everyone has bad fights. He beat Holy, boring or not.
@ernhutch187 No, its important to have your opinion, but you tend to atke perosnal shots and use points that benefit you and not look at both sides as I do, thus your biased. Holmes fought good to bad fighters in his reign and there are at leats 20 fighters who would have beaten all the fighters Holmes did plus Spinks both times. You know Mccall had a nervous breakdown in the ring in the 2nd fight ... do you not ???
@ernhutch187 McCall had Lewis's number and if it were not for his mental issues, would ahve beaten Lewis again. The 2nd fight was a win, but many people thought Holyfield won and I tend to agree. Holyfield was a natural light-heavy and cruserweight fighter.
@ernhutch187 Vitali, I can not even comment on that as that is saying New Kids on the Block are a top 10 band ever ??? Please do some research. Frazier would have beaten Holmes, Lewis (KO within 8 rounds) and Vitali ... and those Liston would even do more damage in his prime. I apologize if I sound critical, but learn and research before you make comments in the future
@dorsi68 Vitali has won 94.% of his matches by KO. That is a higher percentage than any other heavyweight champion. Also, he is incredibly rangy and has good stamina and movement (awkward movement yes, but good movement). Frazier is my man, but he takes too much damage to gets inside. A 6'5" Lewis's left would hold him off and his right hand would crush him.
@ernhutch187 Also, you can not look at stats (you said this with Marciano), but opposition. Other than Lewis (whom he lost to), I do not know if he ever fought a first rater (I could be wrong, but boxing is so pathetic now). Lewis could not hold off Frazier and his body punches and left hook would take its toll on Lewis who had a greta punch, but was weak inside (see McCall).
ernhutch187 We're on the Jeffries board but guys like you bring up Ali and other jokes. Then, you ask why we talk about Ali. Heck, with your logic, you probably voted for Obama.
@jhs1958 Buddy. Look back a few pages to when I first started commenting on this page. I spoke only about Jeffries and his opponents. YOU brought up Joe Louis and Muhammed Ali. Not me. Look back and see for yourself. Also, I am much too informed about what is really going on in the world to ever vote for a democrat or a republican.
@jhs1958 Do you think Jeffries had many more fights than his record says? And that the articles about all these fights were lost in time? I think the small amount of fights on his record is a main reason why he's so overlooked.
Now Dorsi, I have a question for you. Why is it that here we are on the message board for a Jim Jeffries clip, but you keep talking to me about guys like Ali, Foreman, and Norton? If Ali is no big deal, and Jeffries is so great, why aren't we talking about Jeffries? Two reasons: 1. there isn't enough footage of him to conclusively study him 2. what footage there is, is not very impressive.
@ernhutch187 Hi emhutch187, unlike yourslef, I am coutesy to answer your questions and not avoid them. I have commented on Ali the most, Jeffries the 2nd most and Norton/Foreman the last for the record. I am clearly doubting your comments about Ali as being inarguably the greatest fighter ever. Ali is overrated. Even though Ali is in the top 10 of all-time, many people like you state that Ali is in a league of his own, and he clearly is not.
I never said Ali is the greatest fighter ever. Theres no one man who could just beat everyone. Styles make fights. Ali is the greatest HW champ because he kept everyone entertained and on the edge of their seats for so many years and he was beating other guys just as good as him. He always stepped up to the plate in his big fights and gave it his all. I believe in the any given Sunday theory. But win or lose, Ali was the embodiment of a HW champ.
@ernhutch187 You did say Ali was the greatest heavyweight ever, so do not deny this. Maybe Ali was the most entairtaining and contreversoly fighter ever, but he was not in the top 5. This is my point to you.
@ernhutch187 The fact about Jeffries was many boxing people and the greatest p4p fighter ever (Langford) said Jeffries was the greatest. But that was 60+ years ago. Its like basketball, who puts Bill Russell in the top 5 anymore ... very few people although he is probaly the 3rd greatest basketball player behind Johnson and Jordan. Jim Hines was the 2nd greatest 100 m sprinter behind Bolt, yet gets no mention. The list goes on. Jeffries is very under-rated
@ernhutch187 So your telling me with Jeffries running about a 10.8 100 m, benching almost twice his weight, high jump over 6 feet, running 10 miles in around 55 minutes etc. is not impressive ??? Comments from Nat Fleisher, Johnson, Langford, Dempsey and many other people should be discounted ??? How is that being objective ???
More on Jeffries for you Dorsi. Jeffries had 21 fights of which many were against much older, much smaller opponents. Despite this, he only had 14 KO's. He weighed between 217 and 230 when he fought a 165 Joe Choynski. The match was a draw. What facts do you have that support your opinion that Jim was such a big puncher? Ali had 17 KO's in his first 21 pro matches. He was hence, heavier handed that Jeffries ever was. I am objective.
@ernhutch187 The 8 greatest fighters to never win a belt in chronological order were Jackson, Choynski, Sharkey, Langford, McVea, Jeannette, Wills and Burley. You do know that Choynski as a light-heavy is in the top 5 ever and KO'd Johnson and taught Johnson how to fight better. Jeffries fought much better fighters than Ali did in there first 21 fights ... you can not even argue that.
@ernhutch187 Please do some reasearch on Jeffries as opposed (from my estimation) looking at Boxrec as your source. Jeffries's endurance was probbaly better than Ali's, there heart was about the same, Ali was faster and had better leg-work, Jeffries was alot stronger and agile and Jeffries had an awkard style for Ali to move around for 15 rounds. Also, who are your top 5 ever as I want to hear it
@dorsi68 Buddy, I have seen him fight. There is no research to do better than that. If you want to research a boxer, you watch his fights. Jeffries clinches every 5 seconds. His foot work is slow. He's got no jab. He's got no cross. I don't care what anyone says. I've seen Jeffries fight. I've seen his record. He's nothing. He'd be a bum today.
I agree with you, Jeffries was certainly not very fast with his hands. But you are incorrect in saying he had no jab. He was in fact a natural left hander who fought in a conventional stance. He was known for doing serious damage with his left. Check out the details of the first Fitzsimmons fight, the second Corbett fight. The key to his success was his left. He would have excelled in any era. No bum, just not the greatest as the poster of this of this video would like you to think.
Dorsi, back to you. Ali was 38 with brain damage from 164 fights (counting pro and amateur) when he fought Holmes. Holmes was 31 and at his peak. Ali was 39 with brain damage from 165 fights when he fought Berbick. Berbick was 27 and at his peak. When Johnson fought Jeffries, Jim was 33, Jack was 30. Jim had 20 fights Jack had 65. Jim took a lay off, but that was his fault. No one forced him to be a quitter, and no one forced him to come back.
@ernhutch187 Jefferies was out of boxing almost 6 years and had to lose almost 100 pounds. Johnson himself said this was his best fight ever and took it serious. Jefferies never had a tune-up fight and was forced by a racist society to come back to fight. I do not know why Jeffries came back, but the fact is he did and lost to the 3rd best fighter ever in his absolute peak. Jeffries lasted (almost) 15 rounds in much heat.
@ernhutch187 If your calling Jeffries a quitter (which he is not) , what was Ali than against Holmes ??? And Ali had on eof the biggest hearts ever, yet he was a shell of himself as Jeffries was. Also, you have the ages wrong for Jeffries and Johnson. In addition, Jeffries fought a ton of exhibitions and when you gain 100 pounds, and lose it, your body is in shock and Jeffries was not the same man which is a fact.
@ernhutch187 Jeffries made a mistake in fighting Johnson just as Ali should have stopped fighting after Spinks or even after the 3rd Frazoer fight. I will say that I wish Jeffries kept fighting as he still was not at his peak. I suppose at the time, his wife wanted him to retire, he had alot of money (but lost alot later on) and at that time,. he made the most defenses and there was nobody else to fight.
Dorsi my final thoughts on Ali and Norton are this. Ali's style made it impossible for Norton to decisively dominate an in-shape Ali. Norton's style made it impossible for Ali to dominate an in-shape Norton. If Norton says he won all three fights, OK. But the Judges make the decisions, not the fighters. In 3, neither man was KO'd or KD'd or even took a rest between rds. Both get their shots in. Ali got the decision. It was how it was.
@ernhutch187 Hi again, we are on the same page as your being objective now. Yes, the judges gave two fights to Ali, but its well known that Norton won 2 of the 3 and possibly 3 of 3. When you say that Ali is inarguably the greatest ever, this is an exmaple of some doubt as we both know that Norton's style was not the only style of boxer that Ali would have trouble with.
ernhutch187 Sure, there are tough guys and soft guys in each group but overall, blacks come from a lower socio-economic group and have that greater drive to overcome obstacles and take the blows in order to accomplish it. So, yes, white guys back then were tougher than white guys today.
@jhs1958 if being from a lower socio-economic group makes you tough, then black guys from the 1800's must all have been SUPERMEN! Do you know anything about history? Slavery, Jim Crow, the Ku Klux Klan, the 3/5 Compromise, The Middle Passage, The Betrayal Compromise, vagrant laws, any ot this ringing a bell? If white guys have gotten softer due to improved circumstances, 2000's black guys vs the 1800's black guys must be cannon balls vs cotton balls.
Jeffries ducked jack johnson while champion and then only fought him when the (white) public begged him to return the title to its rightful owners... Johnson destroyed him and Jeffiries admitted that he could never could have beaten johnson.
@doorwae101 - Nope, Jeffries did not duck Johnson. Johnson had lost to Griffin, Klondike and just a month before Jeffries retired, he lost to Hart. Why should Jeffries duck him? He just didn't see him as worthy at that time. Besides, he had always said he would not fight a black for the title - due to social pressure of the times.
@jhs1958 According to a newspaper journalist of the time, Jeffries said before his meeting with Johnson that he was not pleased he had to get up early, do all the training and the roadwork, lose the pounds etc, "just for this nigger." Clearly it wasn't merely "social pressures" that prevented him from giving a shot to a black contender.
@madmax8903 What does your comment mean above ??? That Jeffries should not have fought Johnson in 1910 ??? If so, that is correct as Jeffries was a shell of himself. If your talking about 1904 or 1905, Johnson did not merit a title shot at that time in relation to 3 to 5 other fighters at the time.
@doorwae101 - By the way, why don't you fellows point out that Johnson ducked other top black fighters as champion? He only fought Bat Johnson, a former sparring partner of his. How about Joe Louis fighting only one black during his first ten years as champ - a light-heavy at that, John Henry Lewis? What about Patterson ducking the real contender, Sonny Liston, all those years?
@jhs1958 Every black boxer he "ducked" he had already beaten more than once. There was no money in fighting those guys again. People wanted him to fight white people. Black people wanted it b/c they had nothing else and white people wanted him to lose to a white man. And business wise it was the difference between 5k and 100k to fight
@amensupremera Hi there, your comment in America is partially correct, but in England, France and Australia, Johnson was offered anywhere from $30,000 to $50,000 to fight Langford. Also, how many fights do you think Johnson made $100,000 ? When Johnson was wrongfully exiled from the US, he continued to avoid the top contenders. There is zero excuse for Johnson not to fight Langford. He beat Langford once when Langford was 3 years from his prime. Most of your comments made above have no merit
@dorsi68 he only needed a few 100k fights. But he had beaten langford already so why fight him again. And there was something about fighting and beating white men in America that made a statement that fighting langford would not make. And with everything Johnson had to out up with I'm sure he really enjoyed making that statement. Theres merit in that but feel free to disagree
@amensupremera Hi there, I am not 100% certain, but almost 100% certain that the only $100,000 on a fight he made was against Jeffries. If Johnson fought Langford in the US, he would have made about $50,000 and possibly more in France (and elsewhere) in which France was fair to all fighters in the money they paid out in relation to the US. Johnson fought Willard as he was broke and thought Willard was an easy fighter and wanted an easy pay day.
ernhutch187 Lower socio-economic groups have always dominated boxing and most sports. (It's still true.) As the white society acquired more and more material wealth, whites became softer and softer. As this happened over the past 120 years, blacks began to dominate boxing.
More for you Dorsi. Spinks was ranked as the number one contender in 1978. Just look it up. Don't blame me, I was not a member of any of the boxing commissions that made the rankings. Don't blame Ali, he did not make the rankings either. It is not my opinion, it is a fact that Leon Spinks was ranked as the number 1 contender when he fought Muhammed Ali. Further he gave Ali more trouble than Foreman ever did.
@ernhutch187 Hi again, we both know Don King was pulling the strings. I know Spinks was ranked #1, but part of the title was divided when Norton fought Holmes as King and Ali wanted to make $3 million to beat an easy youngster like Spinks and they were wrong. Its true Spinks fought Ali better than Foreman, but I give Spinks credit to give Ali a rematch unlike Ali as based on your logic about Foreman, Ali was less deserving than Foreman was at that moment.
Dorsi68, More answers for you. I have no idea if Foreman said that about Quarry, and I don't care. But if he feared Quarry he must have wanted to piss his trunks in the ring with Ali. Ali split Quarry's head to the bone. Also, only Ali knows when his Jaw was broken, but no matter what, he was incredibly tough, not to have fallen down, and to have kept fighting. I doubt it was the 2nd.
@ernhutch187 If you are a Foreman fan (as you said you loved him), you must know about his comments about Quarry and Shavers. Its obvious Foreman made those comments as you can not always believe what fighters say ... you should know that. In addition, why would Foreman fear Ali ... Quarry was at best a 2nd rater and cut easily and did not have the heart although he had a good punch. Ali jaw was broken in the last or secoind last round ... yet he said it was the 2nd round.
@ernhutch187 So who are your 5 best heavyweights ever ... unlike yourself, I will not make biased and pre-mature comment as you did with myself when you asked me.
Dorsi68 You asked a lot of questions. First I didn't say Ali Foreman was the greatest fight ever. I said the citizens of Zaire (which I believe has a new name now), call it "The Greatest Fight Ever". That is their nickname for the fight like ours is "The Rumble in the Jungle". It is a great fight, but not its not my favorite and i never said it was.
White guys from the past were much tougher than white guys of today and quite able to handle black guys. Society has made those who "have" - more complacent and less able, not as "hungry" either. The poor are more willing to scratch, claw and fight in order to survive and have. Whites in the old days did that too just like the blacks.
@jhs1958 A lot of white guys scratch to survive now. A lot of black guys live pampered lives now. A lot of white guys are tough as nails now. A lot of black guys are big sissies now. Further, you could flip any of these statements, and make them vice-versa. But you cannot flip this one. Jack Johnson whipped Jim Jeffries.
@ernhutch187 But saying Johnson whipped Jeffries is like saying Holmes whipped (way more) Ali ... why make that comment whne you know both were a shell of themselves ??? Why are you being one-sided here ???
@jhs1958 Further, the way white guys "handled" black guys back then was to gang up on them and commit violent acts, and to make laws and policies to exclude blacks from any desirable activities. They did this because they were ignorant, spiritually corrupt, and they outnumbered blacks. But in the ring, 1 on 1, Johnson, the black champion showed Jeffries and everyone, that under fair circumstances, they were not tougher or stronger.
ernhutch187 Most of Ali's opponents were big and ponderous, for the most part, who followed Ali around the ring in a "straight" line, not cutting off the ring. Rarely did they crouch - and were a perfect target for a jabber. Those who did cut off the ring, crouch and knew some defense gave him one hell of a fight - Frazier, Norton, Young, Bugner, Cooper (above average fighter), Jones (above average), Blin (average), Sonny Banks (average, floored Ali) and Mildenberger (average).
ernhutch187 - The best fighters of all-time could fight with each other - that includes Jeffries and Marciano. Rocky was no more overrated than Ali. Ali was a "man of his times" - a loudmouth in an era of loudmouths. Hence, his following and appeal. He was, is and probably always will be overrated. The youth of today has been fed a dose of hype by HBO, ESPN and sportswriters selling their product - and they believe it.
@jhs1958 Sports writers sold Jeffries, Marciano, Corbett, and Fitzpatrick just like Ali. The sales pitches just didn't work as well, because they are inferior products. His speeches do account for a lot of the love he got from the fans, but how do you explain the respect that he gets from the ONLY people who really KNOW boxing. Other pro boxers. Even boxing greats call Ali the greatest.
Jeffries is overrated. His record was 20-1-2. When he fought Fitzsimmons, Bob was 167, Jim was 206 (1st time). 2nd time Bob was 172, Jim was 219. Jim was 12 years younger. Corbett was 188, Jim was 218 (1st match). Jim was 210, Corbett was 183 (2nd match). Jeff was 9 years younger. Jackson was14 years older. Choynski 167 Jim between 217 and 230. Chynski drew with Jim.
@ernhutch187 Jeffries fought Corbett and Fitzsimmons in a very large ring, something like 22 by 22. I don't believe Liston, Foreman, Frazier, Shavers, etc., would catch either one of these guys in a ring that size. Yet, Jeffries did. It appears that Jeffries was stronger than any of these guys too (Liston, Foreman, Frazier, etc.). Definitely, his footspeed, stamina and chin were better. So, it doesn't seem that he was overrated at all.
@ernhutch187 Fitz was one of teh 5 greatest p4p fighters ever. What were your thoughts on Jimmy Ellis. Eliis could not make it as a middlewight yet apprantely had the greatest success with by your account with the greastest by far heavyweights ever. Ali had a tough time with an injured Ellis. Read into this. You are also being biased about Jefferies early on with limited fight experince. Ali's fight with Doug Joines was a gift.
Marciano was overrated. His biggest wins were Walcott (9 years older than Rocky), Louis (9 years older than Rocky), Moore (10 years older than Rocky) and Ezzard Charles (fair fight, but Charles was best as a light heavy and he had lost 6 matches prior to Rocky). For these victories, many people consider him the best HW ever. Thats overrated.
@ernhutch187 How about 49-0 with 43 KOs. Is that overrated? Following their "computer" match filming, Ali complained about sore muscles and sides for a couple of weeks - and Rocky was pulling his punches during the filming. IS that overrated?
@jhs1958 Yeah, he's overrated. Who cares how many matches you won against guys who either A. were not that good B. were over the hill when you fought them or C. both. And who cares about the movie they filmed together. Thats a movie. Marciano knew he couldn't compete against Ali in a real match. Where did the ALi quotes about soreness come from?
@ernhutch187 Where do you think Ali's comments came from? --> Ali. Research it, kid. (Why do you young guys think you're inventing the wheel? It's been around a long time.) Oldtimers know some stuff too - and we research one hell of a lot better than youngsters. Stop believing all the hype. Jurgen Blin popped Ali in the head all evening long. Had that been Dempsey, Ali would be on his back - like he was against Cooper.
@ernhutch187 Many people who saw both Marciano and Ali fight say Marcinao would win. Walcott was on eof the best pure boxers ever as a heavyweight, Charles and Moore are amung the top 5 light-heavies ever and Marciano fought everyone with the posisble exception of Patterson, but that fight had little interest
Calling Ali overrated is pointless. By many people, he is overrated. Many people view him as the god of boxing. Citizens of Zaire, don't call his match against Foreman the Rumble in the Jungle. They call it "the greatest fight ever". No man can live up to the legend that surrounds Ali. But despite not being the 2nd coming, he's still the most amazing heavyweight champion ever.
@ernhutch187 - Ali talked a good game and was the best of his time. His time period was good too. But, he lost five bouts officially and should have lost more - truth be known - Young, Norton (all bouts), Frazier #2 (probably) and against Cooper #1, he was knocked cuckoo and floored but saved by the bell. Younger fans have been fed a diet of HYPE by HBO, ESPN and the press - all wanting to sell their "product" which was ALI.
@ernhutch187 You are very biased my friend. What legitimate boxing body does it say that the "Rumble in the Jungle" calls Ali the greatest fighter ever ??? You know Foreman was not 100%. I know this is not an excuse, but had they fought again, it would have been different. Why did Ali not fight Foreman again ??? yet Norton and Frazier fought Ali when they won the first fight ???
@ernhutch187 Sorry, I mean who actually says "Rumble in the Jungel" was the greatest fight ever ... its not even top 10. Saying that is very biased my friend. The Thrilla in manialla was one of the greatest fights ever, but watrch the Ali-Foreman fight again ... there are plenty of better fights. Even the 2nd Frazier fight (which Frazier won) was a better fight.
ernhutch187 - your own remark ->... how much less competetive boxing was back then. No boxer would be able to compete as a professional without first competing as an amateur now, let alone in the 1960's or 70's. Futher, by your logic, Leon Spinks would be the best boxing champion ever. He won the belt in less than ten fights. --- HMMM, Spinks became champ in less than ten fights. So, where's the modern competitiveness? Your own analysis defeats your argument.
@jhs1958 Spinks had an amateur career buddy. He was an olympic gold medalist. Also, he won the belt from a ring weary and unmotivated Ali who was in the early stages of developing a disease which hinders his motor skills. Further, he couldn't keep the belt. Ali got in shape, came back, whipped up on him, and he never saw the HW crown again.
@jhs1958 The Spinks that beat and got beat by Ali was a respectable number one contender, and he was 12 years Ali's junior. He had 192 fights, 184 wins, 1 draw, 7 losses, and 133 KO's at the time when he faced Ali. The reason he was able to rise so fast as a pro was that he spent years getting experience as an amateur. People who don't really know boxing don't know that though. Later he developed a drug addiction which ruined him for boxing, but hey some stories have sad endings.
@ernhutch187 - Spinks NEVER was a true top contender. He was accepted as such by those who really didn't know boxing. Leon would never have beaten the truly great champions such as Jeffries, Dempsey, Louis, Marciano - not on his best day and their worst. But, he beat Ali. For Ali to be considered the greatest heavyweight of all time - means he IS overrated.
@ernhutch187 Spinks was not a good fighter. Are you honestly telling me in 1978, Spinks was the best fighter out there ??? He was not even top 5 and maybe 8th or 9th at best in 1978.
I take all into account when evaluating Jeff, eyewitness, written, film, expert opinion, I guess Iget more out of the films than most viewers seem to. Jeff to me is one of the top five in history.
ernhutch187 - The opinions of boxing people must count for something. These guys saw fighters year after year. Long after Jeffries stopped fighting, up until the 1950s, he was #1 in the polls. What was written about oldtime fighters matches up pretty good with what is seen on films that exist. I have no reason to believe otherwise about Jeffries, especially after watching the poor quality of modern fighters - and their mistakes - including Ali, the "GREATEST OVERRATED" one !!!
jhs,if you are an expert on Jeffries, you must have some of his whole fights. Further, in order for you to say that he was an incredible boxer, you must have some fights where he boxes incredibly. I've seen the Johnson and Sharkey fights. He fights terribly in both of these matches. If he's so great, tell us where we can watch a match where he fights great. Otherwise just admit that you like him, even though his style is outdated and he couldn't compete with the true great boxers of history.
@ernhutch187 Hi emhutch187, you seem to know minimal about boxing. Up until the 1950's, Jefferies was regarded as the greatest heavyweight by boxing experts (although Johnson was also touted as the best as well) and Dempsey won the first half centrury poll due to his popularity. The fight films do not due justice and we need to rely on what was documented in the past.
@dorsi68 By saying the films don't do justice, and we should rely on documentation from the past, you are saying it is more important to accept the opinions of other people who watched boxers fight than to actually watch boxers fight. Don't be ridiculous.
@ernhutch187 - I'm like dorsi68. I'll take the word of boxing guys who saw all the fighters over the years and rank Jeffries, Dempsey, etc., highly - instead of the judgement of a 25 year old who has been fed hype all of his years. Sorry, pal.
@ernhutch187 Are we on the same conversation ??? You understand that when Jefferies was fighting, the film industry was in its infancy stage, thus there is minimal film on Jefferies and the fiulm is not the greatest quaility. Its a fact that Jefferies was alot stronger and had better endurance than Ali (as in running).
@ernhutch187 The people that followed fighters for a 50 year period all agreed that Jefferies was the greatest fighter they say. Why is there opinion being disregarded but yours is not ??? Leonardo da Vinci for example is considered as the greatest Renaissance man yet we have maybe 10 of his original works. We rely on reliable history data to make this point just as we make this point on Jefferies.
@ernhutch187 In regards to baseball, probbaly the 2nd greatest player ever behind Ruth was Cool Papa Bell (look him up). He was not allowed to play in the Makors becuase of his color, but should we dismiss this like many experts do ???? and the way many people like yourself dismiss Jefferies ???
@ernhutch187 Jefferies was like a bigger Marciano and Frazier. Ali in a 15 round to 20 round fight in a normal ring would be TKO'd. Jefferies fought when he was injured (like the second Sharkey fight), yet made no excuses like Ali did when he fought Norton for the first time. I presume you also realize that when you fight a 25 round fight, you fight differently than a 12 round fight, so you can not truly comment on his style.
Big, strong, great endurance, vicious body puncher, Tex Rickard said jeff was better and hit harder than Dempsey. Jim Jeffries in his prime would have fared well against any heavy in history, and destroyed the present crop of heavys.
Fitzsimmons was 38 years old when he lost the title to Jeffries. Broke most of the bones of his right hand on Jeffries head. Jeffries said Fitzsimmons was the greatest fighter he ever faced. Promoter Tex Rickard said Jeffries was the best he ever saw. That spans up to Tunney's reign. It's said he was a great athlete. Complete fighter. Boxer and great wrestler, catch man. Sound like MMA?
Funny thing, but maybe you haven't lived long enough to see it yet. All these do- gooders badmouthing those "prejudiced" people - yet do nothing themselves to help. Many times, the "prejudiced" people end up helping the needy more than the do-gooders. So, who's worse ?
I want all of you guys to watch a video called "Muhammed Ali Jack Dempsey is a joke". This video shows Muhammed Ali analyzing the boxing skills of Jack Dempsey. Dempsey is often compared to Jeffries, but is generally regarded as a superior boxer. Also, they fought in the same generation, and were analyzed by the same critics. Muhammed ali knows more about boxing than any of us. Try to listen to his opinion of Dempsey's skills. Fighters back then could not compete now. Watch for yourself.
ernhutch187 - Ali made plenty of mistakes as a boxer. Only his quickness avoided disaster. Besides, he lost 5 fights "officially" and should have lost 4 others (in my view) - Young, the other two Norton fights and Frazier #2. So, don't lean on what he says too much. It's his quckness not his knowledge that made him good.
ernhutch187 - incidentally, Ali got wins where he should have had losses. Jeffries got draws where he should have had wins. It's the way it was done in each man's time period. Things weren't given away as easily in the old days.
Speed is the first attribute of a fighter to deteriorate. Ali's career spanned 18 years. He was a champion when he was young, strong and fast, and when he was older and had to rely on toughness and the skills that only master boxers have. Think of the competition a boxer faces to win a gold medal at the olympic games. Ali did this long before his talent even began to peak. Jeffries NEVER faced that kind of opposition EVER. Just watch some footage and compare their skills. Its inarguable.
I think legs go first. Ali is overrated. Leon Spinks beat him. How great is that? Truth be known, Ali lost nine fights. Let's NOT talk about him. Let's talk about THE GREATEST - Jeffries.
Ali was past his prime when he fought Spinks much as Jeffries was against Johnson. True he was a speed fighter which is tough to maintain the whole career, but no doubt he fought and beat the best that were around, Not overrated at all.
@romienomie Hi there, do you truly believe Ali beat Norton 2 of 3x ??? At best, Ali won one fight at best. Ali is a great fighter, but not a top 5 fighter.
@dorsi68 Even Norton admits Ali beat him in the second fight. The only fight of question to me is the third in Yankee Stadium 1976. But he did not "clobber" Ali either. Norton was a championship caliber fighter in his prime.
@romienomie Hi there, I would say Ali won the 2nd fight and that is why I said at best, Ali won 1 of 3 fights. Some boxing experts including Foreman said Norton won all three fights. The fights were close, but Norton was not a top 40 all-time heavyweight.
@romienomie 2 of 2: Again, Ali was a very good fighter, but was far from the best. Jefferies beat the best pure heavyweight boxer ever in Corbett in a large ring. The way Ali fights and the syle he would use for Jefferies would make this an easy fight for Jefferies as he would hurt Ali. Jefferies is a large Marciano and Frazier except quicker, stronger and hits harder.
@romienomie Hi there, keep dreaming in regards to what ??? That Ali won one fight in the Norton-Ali 3 fight series or that Ali is not in the top 5 of all time for heavyweights ???
@dorsi68 I think you already know what I mean, Jeffries couldn't beat Ali period. And yes, Ali beat Norton in two of three fights. Ali would handle any heavyweight in his prime anywhere anytime. You know it. Just won't admit it. That's my opinion it won;'t change. Jeffries was good for his time. I would even put Dempsey ahead of him. and what about Gene Tunney, Ali himself said Tunney was best of the old time fighters.
@romienomie Hi there, I needed clarification as your comments could ahve meant anything. In Ali's prime, he certainly would not beat Jefferies, Johnson and Louis in there primes. Ali would have a very difficult time and may lose to Corbett, Langford, Dempsey, Tunney, Marciano, Foreman (the fight in Zaire, Foreman was not at his best), Holmes and Lewis.
@dorsi68 You are biased against Ali. The fact that you said he could not beat a prime George Foreman, even after he knocked out a prime George Foreman shows that you are not thinking in a rational manner. Watch Lewis v Tua. Foreman commentates. He says when he fought Ali, the better man won, and he admits that all things said to the contrary of this fact by himself and his fans were just excuses. He also calls Ali the greatest fighter he ever faced in the documentary "Facing Ali".
@ernhutch187 Ali beat a prime Foreman, but Foreman's mind and health was not there that night. See my comments above as all fighters can lose there first fight like Johnson, Dempsey, Louis, Ali (2x) and still show that they were off that night. How am I biased ??? If they fought again, it would ahve been different. Foreman is a humble man.
@ernhutch187 Ali beat a prime Foreman, but Foreman's mind and health was not there that night. All fighters can lose there first fight like Johnson, Dempsey, Louis, Ali (3x) and still show that they were off that night. How am I biased do you say ??? If Ali fought fought Foreman again, it would have been different, but Ali preffered to fight 3rd and 4th raters 80% of the time.
@ernhutch187 Part 2: Foreman is a humble man. It is known that Foreman believes Norton won all three fights. What are your thoughts on that ??? Who do you think Foreman said the greatest heavyweight ever was ??? It was not Ali. Ali was a very good fighter and the most charismatic fighter ever, but he is very overrated and is not in the top 5 of all-time.
@dorsi68 So who are the top five of all time? A bunch of white guys from the 1800's who we don't even have any footage of? Seriously, lets hear it who are your top five?
@ernhutch187 I (1) Jefferies (2) Louis (3) Johnson (4) Dempsey (5) Langford These are based on the fighters 5 prime years. For example, Dempsey was a great fighter, but was he a great champion after 1923 ??? He became too Hollywood. Jefferies for example kept getting better and never did hit his prime.
@ernhutch187 What are your thoughts about Foreman saying he was afraid and ducked Quarry ??? Do you believe Foreman menat what he said ??? There is always some truth to one's comments, but I know if Ali fought Foreman again instead of fighting 3rd and 4th raters like Wepner (4th rater), Bugner (2nd rater), Coopman (4th rater) and Dunn (4th rater), Foreman would havbe won just as Foreman would have beat Quarry.
@dorsi68 Ali didn't fight Foreman again because after the Ali fight, Foreman was so devestated, he took 2 years off. Then he started working his way back to a title shot, but he lost to Jimmy Young. After that, he took ten years off. Ali is 7 years older than Foreman, and by the time he returned, Ali was retired.
@ernhutch187 So you and some people say ... Foreman deserved a fight against Ali no matter what you say. Foreman lost before the Young fight and you know that
@dorsi68 I love Foreman. He is one of my favorite boxers. But Foreman was too dumb and too slow to beat Ali in the seventies. Ali would have whipped him ten times out of ten.
@ernhutch187 You are very wrong on this. Sometimes a loss puts things into perspective and the one fact is ... you can not say that as Ali never gave Foreman a rematch
@romienomie The Norton fights were very close and many boxing people believe he won zero fights, but I know Ali won the secoind fight, but the 1sta nd 3rd fight ... I do not think so. The second Frazier fight was very close and I am not too sure if Ali won that fight. Where did Ali say Tunney was the best of the old-time fighters as Ali said he was the 3rd best fighter behiond Johnson and Louis.
@romienomie I doubt he said Tunney was the best of the old-time fighters ... maybe the best pure boxer ???, but that would go to Corbett who was probbaly the best boxer of all heavyweights.
Jeffries won the professional heavyweight title in how many fights? Was it 12? Ali took 20, wasn't it?. You're right, Jeffries didn't fight amateur fights.
@jhs1958 This comment helps to show how much less competetive boxing was back then. No boxer would be able to compete as a professional without first competing as an amateur now, let alone in the 1960's or 70's. Futher, by your logic, Leon Spinks would be the best boxing champion ever. He won the belt in less than ten fights.
@ernhutch187 Spinks was given the opportunity to fight Ali as Ali did not want to fight Norton and Spinks was thought to be an easy fight. Is this not true ??? Guys like Norton, Holmes, Shavers, Cooney, Goetzee, Lyle, Young and a few others probably.
@dorsi68 No its not true. How on earth can you accuse Ali of ducking Norton. He fought him 3 times and he won 2 out of 3. This is a fact. Further, Norton has tons of respect for Ali, and he accepted his losses.
@ernhutch187 Watch one of the documenteries on Ali. Norton thought he won all fight. I know Norton won the last fight and Ali knew it too. Many people thought this, that is why they wanted Norton to fight Ali again. You should know that Norton tried bullying Spinks to a fight after he beat Ali, but Spinks went for the bigger pay day and the easier fight. Spinks was baely a top 10 fighter at best in his prime ... you know that
@dorsi68 Styles make fights. No one can deny that Norton's style gave Ali mountains of trouble. I think Norton was Awesome. Ali was better than him though because Ali's style worked effectively against more opponents than Norton's style did. Ken could have got the decision in #3 for sure. It was razor close. He didn't though. Lucky for Ali. Unlucky for him. But Norton would whip all those old chumps you like with one hand stuffed down his shorts.
@ernhutch187 I presume you know Eddie Futch who was probably the greatest boxing traimner ever and worked with Norton. He is on record saying Norton could never beat a big puncher. Are you certain Norton would beat Jeffries (who would KO Norton within 4 rounds) and Sharkey (who would KO Norton within 4 rounds) and Fitzsimmons (who would KO Norton within 10 rounds) ???
@ernhutch187 Corbett and Tunney are much quicker and better boxers than Norton, so Ali might not even beat them if he was not 100% at his best. If you can honestly say Ali won the 3rd fight with Norton, you must really love Ali as it was not "razor close". The first and third fights were inarguably Norton while the 2nd fight was razor close and could ahve gone either way. Your biased statement about beating the fighters from 70 years earlier with one hand is sad comentary.
@ernhutch187 Although I answered all of your questions .. you ahve not answered mine. Who are your top 5 heavyweighst ever, did Foreman not say he avoided and feared Quarry, did Norton not say he thought he won all three fights (and yes, I know Norton respects Ali very much), did Foreman not say he thought Ali would be easy pickings in the first fight as he thought Norton (like everyone did) won the 2 fights with Ali
@ernhutch187 ... and are you serious that The Rumble in the Jungle was the greatest fight ever ??? You might want to retract that statement. Yes, Ali was the most inetresting and charismatic fighter in the past 100 years. Yes, Ali was very interesting, but he also said some negative things to Frazier which was wrong and he also lied ... aka ... do you seriously believe Ali broke his jaw in round 2 of the Norton fight like he said ??
@jhs1958 Aside from how much less competitive boxing was back in Jefries era,
this comment emphasizes Jeffries lack of longevity. Ali fought 105 amateur fights and 61 pro fights, and he still had what it took to beat the champion after 164 fights. Jeffries was finished as a competitor after just 20 fights. In the 21st he was already totally pathetic. Jack Johnson beat him while smiling and laughing.
@ernhutch187 So what is your point ??? This is not consructive as its like me saying look at Ali against Holmes or Berbick ... why say something when you know the fighter was shot ??? Its biased to be like that my friend
@dorsi68 In 1974, Foreman was 25, he had fought 40 fights (37 KOs 3 UD's) and he was at the height of his dominance as a boxer. How is this anything like the 38 year old Ali with brain damage from 59 awesome fights coming out of retirement and losing to the 31 year old Holmes (who by the way Ali taught how to box), or the 39 year old Ali with the same problem losing by spit decision to a 27 year old Berbick?
@ernhutch187 I do not understand your point as I clearly said we should not judge Ali on his last two fights, please re-read. Foreman was not himself that fight. I am glad Frazier, Norton and Spinks gave Ali a chance again though :)
@dorsi68 Foreman was exactly himself that fight. He did exactly what Ali predicted he would do. And Ali beat him for exactly the reasons he said he would. Ali said he would beat Foreman, because Foreman was too slow, his punches were too wide, and his stamina was suspect. That is precisely what happened. Why did Foreman automatically deserve a rematch, after a 2 year layoff, if the Zaire fight wasn't even close? K.O in round 8.
Jeffries wasn't a racist. Unlike many white people of his time he counted several black men as his friends - his best friend was a pure native American. Besides, we should never judge people of the past by the social/cultural norms of today.
SHEBAMENDES 8 months ago
Langford was the greatest p4p ever. In my opinion, Johnson was the 3rd greatest heavyweight ever behind Louis and Jeffries and would have beaten Langford in a tough 15 or 20 round fight due to his size. Johnson did avoid after 1910 even the top white fighters as he did everything on his own terms and hand-picked his oponents. If you study his opponenets as champion other than Jeffries who was way past his prime, Johnson fought maybe 2 or 3 good heavyweights (including Ketchel).
dorsi68 9 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Once he was taken to the ground by a brazilian jujitsu artist or a wrestler, he wouldn't know what to do. Not to mention that most UFC fighters are crossed trained in boxing, kick boxing, jujitsu, wrestling, etc. All Jeffries could do is throw hay makers! Please educate yourself about fighting and watch a George St. Pierre fight and see how far fighting has come.
PoutinePete 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Jim Jeffries might last 1 round in the UFC..then sadly he would be either knocked out or he'd tap out. The reason for this is that fighting/boxing has evolved big time since Jeffrie's day. But the number one reason he wouldn't do so well nowadays is that he would be about 130 years old!
PoutinePete 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I've seen all the Jim Jeffries videos and there's no way you can judge his skill/talent from some old grainy films from 100 years ago. Anything you read in sports history books about him will have been exaggerated. In 100 years from now books will say he was stronger then 10 men. It's human nature to exaggerate about a sports heroes physical abilities. I think it's time that you find a new modern day hero....like George St. Pierre for example!
PoutinePete 1 year ago
Jeffries would have destroyed Johnson if they fought in their primes, no doubt Johnson would have jumped over the ropes after a couple rounds with Jeffries
jimmymcneece 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@jimmymcneece - Howdy, did you check out my comment I left on your g.g. vid ?
1899sharkey 1 year ago
"He defeated Bob Armstrong the big fast-moving sharp-jabbing black." lmao
joeclemm15 1 year ago
0:44 - Isn't that the reason why he was considered to be in his prime?
ContactKofi 1 year ago
Dorsi, here are the five fighters I'd put money on to give anyone trouble. Ali, Foreman, Lennox Lewis, Vitali K., and Larry Holmes. You'll probably think Vitali and Lewis stink since they're not from the good old days, but watch Dempsey vs Willard and then honestly ask yourself how he would beat either one of them.
ernhutch187 1 year ago
@ernhutch187 Wow ... I must say, I am not surprised. Lewis would be KO'd by Dempsey as he had no chin. I would put Lewis around the top 30. Vitali ... not in the top 50 as he has no endurance (unless its a 6 round fight). Holmes is around 15th to 19th best fighter. Ali and Foreman are top 10. If you watched Dempsey and Willard ... how can you posisbly say Lewis and Vitali would have a chance ???
dorsi68 1 year ago
@dorsi68 You're crazy pal. The Dempsey Willard fight is embarrassing. I've seen better boxing by two drunks in an alley. Dempsey throws no recognizable punches and Willard fights like his IQ ranks lower than zero. Boxing has evolved whether you've noticed or not.
ernhutch187 1 year ago
@ernhutch187 I am sorry you think that way. Dempsey's punching power and speed was devasting. When you have a jaw or two broken, your ear is pounded, bones are broken, it shows heart how Willard fought on. I know Lewis and Vitali would not have gone on.
dorsi68 1 year ago
@ernhutch187 Also, read commnetary on the Dempsey-Willard fight and see what experts think of the fight. For the record, Ali rated Dempsey and Tunney in the top 10 for heavyweights. Dempsey was a beast and saying Lewis or Vitali would ahve a chance is very wrong.
dorsi68 1 year ago
@dorsi68 Ali called Jack Dempsey a joke. If you want to see, just search for the video on this site called Muhammed Ali, Jack Dempsey is a joke.
ernhutch187 1 year ago
@ernhutch187 Yes, emhutch187, Ali said that on the Dempsey - Willard fight. Read his book on boxing and see who is rates as great fighters. Your man said alot of things ... do you belive it all ... and do you not think Ali was malicious at times in the 1970's. Take care
dorsi68 1 year ago
@dorsi68 Hey pal, me and you will never agree on the greats of boxing. But I respect your opinions and I've had a great time arguing with you. You take it easy out there. JHS, thanks for making the page. You're a good man. A racist, old, wind bag, but a good man. No more posts for me guys I've had enough of ol' Jimmy J.
ernhutch187 1 year ago
Comment removed
1899sharkey 1 year ago
@ernhutch187 -- Who cares what the overrated ego-oriented braggart says ?
jhs1958 1 year ago
@ernhutch187 Your man ... Don King ruined boxing and it no longre has credibility. How much do most boxers make now ??? Less than they did 30+ years ago even without factoring inflation. Why do you think MMA is big ?? Why do no fighters fight the best anymore ??? Boxing has been decling over the past 35 years and contimues to get worst. Yes, there are some very good fighters here and there, but the depth is weak and the best no longer box
dorsi68 1 year ago
@dorsi68 Don King didn't ruin boxing. It was the NFL the NBA and the prison industrial complex. They suck up all the good athletes these days. Guys like Ali and Foreman would be on the football field today. Jimmy Young would be shooting hoops, and Sonny Liston would be doing life under the 3 strikes law. Why is King "my man"? I dislike greedy people.
ernhutch187 1 year ago
@ernhutch187 Don King was the main person who ruined boxing. The valid point you have is that football, basball, basketball and hocley are taking the best athletes, but when you have a monoply unfortunately, it ruins the sport. Don King is a virus and boxing is a disgrace with his presence.
dorsi68 1 year ago
@ernhutch187 Even though you are biased, not having Louis and Johnson on that list discredits it. Holmes is much better than Lewis and Vitali, but he lost to Michael Spinks (although he won the second fight). Michael Spinks is not a top 10 light-heavy of all-time. Lewis was KO'd twice by two 2nd rate fighters and never beat Holyfield as that was an injustice as well in the 2nd fight.
dorsi68 1 year ago
@dorsi68 Not sharing your opinion makes me biased, huh? Holmes was old and tired when he lost to Spinks. First time he was 36, Spinks was 29, second time he was 37, Spinks was 30 (he still gave Spinks a little bit of a beating in that one). Also, Holmes has the 2nd most consecutive title defenses ever (Louis has most) Lewis got revenge on Mcall and on Rahman, both times with KO's. Everyone has bad fights. He beat Holy, boring or not.
ernhutch187 1 year ago
@ernhutch187 No, its important to have your opinion, but you tend to atke perosnal shots and use points that benefit you and not look at both sides as I do, thus your biased. Holmes fought good to bad fighters in his reign and there are at leats 20 fighters who would have beaten all the fighters Holmes did plus Spinks both times. You know Mccall had a nervous breakdown in the ring in the 2nd fight ... do you not ???
dorsi68 1 year ago
@ernhutch187 McCall had Lewis's number and if it were not for his mental issues, would ahve beaten Lewis again. The 2nd fight was a win, but many people thought Holyfield won and I tend to agree. Holyfield was a natural light-heavy and cruserweight fighter.
dorsi68 1 year ago
@ernhutch187 Vitali, I can not even comment on that as that is saying New Kids on the Block are a top 10 band ever ??? Please do some research. Frazier would have beaten Holmes, Lewis (KO within 8 rounds) and Vitali ... and those Liston would even do more damage in his prime. I apologize if I sound critical, but learn and research before you make comments in the future
dorsi68 1 year ago
@dorsi68 Vitali has won 94.% of his matches by KO. That is a higher percentage than any other heavyweight champion. Also, he is incredibly rangy and has good stamina and movement (awkward movement yes, but good movement). Frazier is my man, but he takes too much damage to gets inside. A 6'5" Lewis's left would hold him off and his right hand would crush him.
ernhutch187 1 year ago
@ernhutch187 I seen him fight and he is a tough fighter and game, but he is in the same league as Canera.
dorsi68 1 year ago
@ernhutch187 Also, you can not look at stats (you said this with Marciano), but opposition. Other than Lewis (whom he lost to), I do not know if he ever fought a first rater (I could be wrong, but boxing is so pathetic now). Lewis could not hold off Frazier and his body punches and left hook would take its toll on Lewis who had a greta punch, but was weak inside (see McCall).
dorsi68 1 year ago
ernhutch187 We're on the Jeffries board but guys like you bring up Ali and other jokes. Then, you ask why we talk about Ali. Heck, with your logic, you probably voted for Obama.
jhs1958 1 year ago 4
@jhs1958 Buddy. Look back a few pages to when I first started commenting on this page. I spoke only about Jeffries and his opponents. YOU brought up Joe Louis and Muhammed Ali. Not me. Look back and see for yourself. Also, I am much too informed about what is really going on in the world to ever vote for a democrat or a republican.
ernhutch187 1 year ago
@jhs1958 You are great. I am very Republican and James Jeffries is my great uncle.
BLICKSTEINHUGHES 7 months ago
@jhs1958 Do you think Jeffries had many more fights than his record says? And that the articles about all these fights were lost in time? I think the small amount of fights on his record is a main reason why he's so overlooked.
crowley0312 3 months ago in playlist More videos from jhs1958
Now Dorsi, I have a question for you. Why is it that here we are on the message board for a Jim Jeffries clip, but you keep talking to me about guys like Ali, Foreman, and Norton? If Ali is no big deal, and Jeffries is so great, why aren't we talking about Jeffries? Two reasons: 1. there isn't enough footage of him to conclusively study him 2. what footage there is, is not very impressive.
ernhutch187 1 year ago
@ernhutch187 Hi emhutch187, unlike yourslef, I am coutesy to answer your questions and not avoid them. I have commented on Ali the most, Jeffries the 2nd most and Norton/Foreman the last for the record. I am clearly doubting your comments about Ali as being inarguably the greatest fighter ever. Ali is overrated. Even though Ali is in the top 10 of all-time, many people like you state that Ali is in a league of his own, and he clearly is not.
dorsi68 1 year ago
I never said Ali is the greatest fighter ever. Theres no one man who could just beat everyone. Styles make fights. Ali is the greatest HW champ because he kept everyone entertained and on the edge of their seats for so many years and he was beating other guys just as good as him. He always stepped up to the plate in his big fights and gave it his all. I believe in the any given Sunday theory. But win or lose, Ali was the embodiment of a HW champ.
ernhutch187 1 year ago
@ernhutch187 You did say Ali was the greatest heavyweight ever, so do not deny this. Maybe Ali was the most entairtaining and contreversoly fighter ever, but he was not in the top 5. This is my point to you.
dorsi68 1 year ago
@ernhutch187 The fact about Jeffries was many boxing people and the greatest p4p fighter ever (Langford) said Jeffries was the greatest. But that was 60+ years ago. Its like basketball, who puts Bill Russell in the top 5 anymore ... very few people although he is probaly the 3rd greatest basketball player behind Johnson and Jordan. Jim Hines was the 2nd greatest 100 m sprinter behind Bolt, yet gets no mention. The list goes on. Jeffries is very under-rated
dorsi68 1 year ago
@ernhutch187 So your telling me with Jeffries running about a 10.8 100 m, benching almost twice his weight, high jump over 6 feet, running 10 miles in around 55 minutes etc. is not impressive ??? Comments from Nat Fleisher, Johnson, Langford, Dempsey and many other people should be discounted ??? How is that being objective ???
dorsi68 1 year ago
More on Jeffries for you Dorsi. Jeffries had 21 fights of which many were against much older, much smaller opponents. Despite this, he only had 14 KO's. He weighed between 217 and 230 when he fought a 165 Joe Choynski. The match was a draw. What facts do you have that support your opinion that Jim was such a big puncher? Ali had 17 KO's in his first 21 pro matches. He was hence, heavier handed that Jeffries ever was. I am objective.
ernhutch187 1 year ago
@ernhutch187 The 8 greatest fighters to never win a belt in chronological order were Jackson, Choynski, Sharkey, Langford, McVea, Jeannette, Wills and Burley. You do know that Choynski as a light-heavy is in the top 5 ever and KO'd Johnson and taught Johnson how to fight better. Jeffries fought much better fighters than Ali did in there first 21 fights ... you can not even argue that.
dorsi68 1 year ago
@ernhutch187 Please do some reasearch on Jeffries as opposed (from my estimation) looking at Boxrec as your source. Jeffries's endurance was probbaly better than Ali's, there heart was about the same, Ali was faster and had better leg-work, Jeffries was alot stronger and agile and Jeffries had an awkard style for Ali to move around for 15 rounds. Also, who are your top 5 ever as I want to hear it
dorsi68 1 year ago
@dorsi68 Buddy, I have seen him fight. There is no research to do better than that. If you want to research a boxer, you watch his fights. Jeffries clinches every 5 seconds. His foot work is slow. He's got no jab. He's got no cross. I don't care what anyone says. I've seen Jeffries fight. I've seen his record. He's nothing. He'd be a bum today.
ernhutch187 1 year ago
@ernhutch187 Than if that is your opinion, so be it. Lets agree to disagree and move on. Take care and bes wishes :)
dorsi68 1 year ago
@ernhutch187 well ,y friend thats because they only have loke five of his fights on film and there not the whole fights either
herradaaustin 1 year ago
I agree with you, Jeffries was certainly not very fast with his hands. But you are incorrect in saying he had no jab. He was in fact a natural left hander who fought in a conventional stance. He was known for doing serious damage with his left. Check out the details of the first Fitzsimmons fight, the second Corbett fight. The key to his success was his left. He would have excelled in any era. No bum, just not the greatest as the poster of this of this video would like you to think.
andrewr62 1 year ago
ernhutch187- just for the record jeff was 35 and johnson 32 at their fight in reno.
1899sharkey 1 year ago
Dorsi, back to you. Ali was 38 with brain damage from 164 fights (counting pro and amateur) when he fought Holmes. Holmes was 31 and at his peak. Ali was 39 with brain damage from 165 fights when he fought Berbick. Berbick was 27 and at his peak. When Johnson fought Jeffries, Jim was 33, Jack was 30. Jim had 20 fights Jack had 65. Jim took a lay off, but that was his fault. No one forced him to be a quitter, and no one forced him to come back.
ernhutch187 1 year ago
@ernhutch187 Jefferies was out of boxing almost 6 years and had to lose almost 100 pounds. Johnson himself said this was his best fight ever and took it serious. Jefferies never had a tune-up fight and was forced by a racist society to come back to fight. I do not know why Jeffries came back, but the fact is he did and lost to the 3rd best fighter ever in his absolute peak. Jeffries lasted (almost) 15 rounds in much heat.
dorsi68 1 year ago
@ernhutch187 If your calling Jeffries a quitter (which he is not) , what was Ali than against Holmes ??? And Ali had on eof the biggest hearts ever, yet he was a shell of himself as Jeffries was. Also, you have the ages wrong for Jeffries and Johnson. In addition, Jeffries fought a ton of exhibitions and when you gain 100 pounds, and lose it, your body is in shock and Jeffries was not the same man which is a fact.
dorsi68 1 year ago
@ernhutch187 Jeffries made a mistake in fighting Johnson just as Ali should have stopped fighting after Spinks or even after the 3rd Frazoer fight. I will say that I wish Jeffries kept fighting as he still was not at his peak. I suppose at the time, his wife wanted him to retire, he had alot of money (but lost alot later on) and at that time,. he made the most defenses and there was nobody else to fight.
dorsi68 1 year ago
Dorsi my final thoughts on Ali and Norton are this. Ali's style made it impossible for Norton to decisively dominate an in-shape Ali. Norton's style made it impossible for Ali to dominate an in-shape Norton. If Norton says he won all three fights, OK. But the Judges make the decisions, not the fighters. In 3, neither man was KO'd or KD'd or even took a rest between rds. Both get their shots in. Ali got the decision. It was how it was.
ernhutch187 1 year ago
@ernhutch187 Hi again, we are on the same page as your being objective now. Yes, the judges gave two fights to Ali, but its well known that Norton won 2 of the 3 and possibly 3 of 3. When you say that Ali is inarguably the greatest ever, this is an exmaple of some doubt as we both know that Norton's style was not the only style of boxer that Ali would have trouble with.
dorsi68 1 year ago
ernhutch187 Sure, there are tough guys and soft guys in each group but overall, blacks come from a lower socio-economic group and have that greater drive to overcome obstacles and take the blows in order to accomplish it. So, yes, white guys back then were tougher than white guys today.
jhs1958 1 year ago
@jhs1958 if being from a lower socio-economic group makes you tough, then black guys from the 1800's must all have been SUPERMEN! Do you know anything about history? Slavery, Jim Crow, the Ku Klux Klan, the 3/5 Compromise, The Middle Passage, The Betrayal Compromise, vagrant laws, any ot this ringing a bell? If white guys have gotten softer due to improved circumstances, 2000's black guys vs the 1800's black guys must be cannon balls vs cotton balls.
ernhutch187 1 year ago
@jhs1958
Jeffries ducked jack johnson while champion and then only fought him when the (white) public begged him to return the title to its rightful owners... Johnson destroyed him and Jeffiries admitted that he could never could have beaten johnson.
doorwae101 1 year ago
@doorwae101 - Nope, Jeffries did not duck Johnson. Johnson had lost to Griffin, Klondike and just a month before Jeffries retired, he lost to Hart. Why should Jeffries duck him? He just didn't see him as worthy at that time. Besides, he had always said he would not fight a black for the title - due to social pressure of the times.
jhs1958 1 year ago
@jhs1958 According to a newspaper journalist of the time, Jeffries said before his meeting with Johnson that he was not pleased he had to get up early, do all the training and the roadwork, lose the pounds etc, "just for this nigger." Clearly it wasn't merely "social pressures" that prevented him from giving a shot to a black contender.
madmax8903 1 year ago
@madmax8903 What does your comment mean above ??? That Jeffries should not have fought Johnson in 1910 ??? If so, that is correct as Jeffries was a shell of himself. If your talking about 1904 or 1905, Johnson did not merit a title shot at that time in relation to 3 to 5 other fighters at the time.
dorsi68 9 months ago
@madmax8903 -- So ?
jhs1958 3 weeks ago
@doorwae101 - By the way, why don't you fellows point out that Johnson ducked other top black fighters as champion? He only fought Bat Johnson, a former sparring partner of his. How about Joe Louis fighting only one black during his first ten years as champ - a light-heavy at that, John Henry Lewis? What about Patterson ducking the real contender, Sonny Liston, all those years?
jhs1958 1 year ago
@jhs1958 Every black boxer he "ducked" he had already beaten more than once. There was no money in fighting those guys again. People wanted him to fight white people. Black people wanted it b/c they had nothing else and white people wanted him to lose to a white man. And business wise it was the difference between 5k and 100k to fight
amensupremera 11 months ago 2
@amensupremera Hi there, your comment in America is partially correct, but in England, France and Australia, Johnson was offered anywhere from $30,000 to $50,000 to fight Langford. Also, how many fights do you think Johnson made $100,000 ? When Johnson was wrongfully exiled from the US, he continued to avoid the top contenders. There is zero excuse for Johnson not to fight Langford. He beat Langford once when Langford was 3 years from his prime. Most of your comments made above have no merit
dorsi68 9 months ago
@dorsi68 he only needed a few 100k fights. But he had beaten langford already so why fight him again. And there was something about fighting and beating white men in America that made a statement that fighting langford would not make. And with everything Johnson had to out up with I'm sure he really enjoyed making that statement. Theres merit in that but feel free to disagree
amensupremera 9 months ago
@amensupremera Hi there, I am not 100% certain, but almost 100% certain that the only $100,000 on a fight he made was against Jeffries. If Johnson fought Langford in the US, he would have made about $50,000 and possibly more in France (and elsewhere) in which France was fair to all fighters in the money they paid out in relation to the US. Johnson fought Willard as he was broke and thought Willard was an easy fighter and wanted an easy pay day.
dorsi68 9 months ago
ernhutch187 Lower socio-economic groups have always dominated boxing and most sports. (It's still true.) As the white society acquired more and more material wealth, whites became softer and softer. As this happened over the past 120 years, blacks began to dominate boxing.
jhs1958 1 year ago
More for you Dorsi. Spinks was ranked as the number one contender in 1978. Just look it up. Don't blame me, I was not a member of any of the boxing commissions that made the rankings. Don't blame Ali, he did not make the rankings either. It is not my opinion, it is a fact that Leon Spinks was ranked as the number 1 contender when he fought Muhammed Ali. Further he gave Ali more trouble than Foreman ever did.
ernhutch187 1 year ago
@ernhutch187 Hi again, we both know Don King was pulling the strings. I know Spinks was ranked #1, but part of the title was divided when Norton fought Holmes as King and Ali wanted to make $3 million to beat an easy youngster like Spinks and they were wrong. Its true Spinks fought Ali better than Foreman, but I give Spinks credit to give Ali a rematch unlike Ali as based on your logic about Foreman, Ali was less deserving than Foreman was at that moment.
dorsi68 1 year ago
Dorsi68, More answers for you. I have no idea if Foreman said that about Quarry, and I don't care. But if he feared Quarry he must have wanted to piss his trunks in the ring with Ali. Ali split Quarry's head to the bone. Also, only Ali knows when his Jaw was broken, but no matter what, he was incredibly tough, not to have fallen down, and to have kept fighting. I doubt it was the 2nd.
ernhutch187 1 year ago
@ernhutch187 If you are a Foreman fan (as you said you loved him), you must know about his comments about Quarry and Shavers. Its obvious Foreman made those comments as you can not always believe what fighters say ... you should know that. In addition, why would Foreman fear Ali ... Quarry was at best a 2nd rater and cut easily and did not have the heart although he had a good punch. Ali jaw was broken in the last or secoind last round ... yet he said it was the 2nd round.
dorsi68 1 year ago
@ernhutch187 So who are your 5 best heavyweights ever ... unlike yourself, I will not make biased and pre-mature comment as you did with myself when you asked me.
dorsi68 1 year ago
Dorsi68 You asked a lot of questions. First I didn't say Ali Foreman was the greatest fight ever. I said the citizens of Zaire (which I believe has a new name now), call it "The Greatest Fight Ever". That is their nickname for the fight like ours is "The Rumble in the Jungle". It is a great fight, but not its not my favorite and i never said it was.
ernhutch187 1 year ago
White guys from the past were much tougher than white guys of today and quite able to handle black guys. Society has made those who "have" - more complacent and less able, not as "hungry" either. The poor are more willing to scratch, claw and fight in order to survive and have. Whites in the old days did that too just like the blacks.
jhs1958 1 year ago
@jhs1958 A lot of white guys scratch to survive now. A lot of black guys live pampered lives now. A lot of white guys are tough as nails now. A lot of black guys are big sissies now. Further, you could flip any of these statements, and make them vice-versa. But you cannot flip this one. Jack Johnson whipped Jim Jeffries.
ernhutch187 1 year ago
@ernhutch187 But saying Johnson whipped Jeffries is like saying Holmes whipped (way more) Ali ... why make that comment whne you know both were a shell of themselves ??? Why are you being one-sided here ???
dorsi68 1 year ago
@jhs1958 Further, the way white guys "handled" black guys back then was to gang up on them and commit violent acts, and to make laws and policies to exclude blacks from any desirable activities. They did this because they were ignorant, spiritually corrupt, and they outnumbered blacks. But in the ring, 1 on 1, Johnson, the black champion showed Jeffries and everyone, that under fair circumstances, they were not tougher or stronger.
ernhutch187 1 year ago
ernhutch187 Ali build his reputation by beating an old Sonny Liston and Foreman who had no stamina.
jhs1958 1 year ago
ernhutch187 Most of Ali's opponents were big and ponderous, for the most part, who followed Ali around the ring in a "straight" line, not cutting off the ring. Rarely did they crouch - and were a perfect target for a jabber. Those who did cut off the ring, crouch and knew some defense gave him one hell of a fight - Frazier, Norton, Young, Bugner, Cooper (above average fighter), Jones (above average), Blin (average), Sonny Banks (average, floored Ali) and Mildenberger (average).
jhs1958 1 year ago
ernhutch187 - The best fighters of all-time could fight with each other - that includes Jeffries and Marciano. Rocky was no more overrated than Ali. Ali was a "man of his times" - a loudmouth in an era of loudmouths. Hence, his following and appeal. He was, is and probably always will be overrated. The youth of today has been fed a dose of hype by HBO, ESPN and sportswriters selling their product - and they believe it.
jhs1958 1 year ago
@jhs1958 Sports writers sold Jeffries, Marciano, Corbett, and Fitzpatrick just like Ali. The sales pitches just didn't work as well, because they are inferior products. His speeches do account for a lot of the love he got from the fans, but how do you explain the respect that he gets from the ONLY people who really KNOW boxing. Other pro boxers. Even boxing greats call Ali the greatest.
ernhutch187 1 year ago
@ernhutch187 -Oldtimer fighters did not sell as well because people in those days were less likely to swallow B.S. like they do today.
jhs1958 1 year ago
Jeffries is overrated. His record was 20-1-2. When he fought Fitzsimmons, Bob was 167, Jim was 206 (1st time). 2nd time Bob was 172, Jim was 219. Jim was 12 years younger. Corbett was 188, Jim was 218 (1st match). Jim was 210, Corbett was 183 (2nd match). Jeff was 9 years younger. Jackson was14 years older. Choynski 167 Jim between 217 and 230. Chynski drew with Jim.
ernhutch187 1 year ago
@ernhutch187 Jeffries fought Corbett and Fitzsimmons in a very large ring, something like 22 by 22. I don't believe Liston, Foreman, Frazier, Shavers, etc., would catch either one of these guys in a ring that size. Yet, Jeffries did. It appears that Jeffries was stronger than any of these guys too (Liston, Foreman, Frazier, etc.). Definitely, his footspeed, stamina and chin were better. So, it doesn't seem that he was overrated at all.
jhs1958 1 year ago
@ernhutch187 Fitz was one of teh 5 greatest p4p fighters ever. What were your thoughts on Jimmy Ellis. Eliis could not make it as a middlewight yet apprantely had the greatest success with by your account with the greastest by far heavyweights ever. Ali had a tough time with an injured Ellis. Read into this. You are also being biased about Jefferies early on with limited fight experince. Ali's fight with Doug Joines was a gift.
dorsi68 1 year ago
Marciano was overrated. His biggest wins were Walcott (9 years older than Rocky), Louis (9 years older than Rocky), Moore (10 years older than Rocky) and Ezzard Charles (fair fight, but Charles was best as a light heavy and he had lost 6 matches prior to Rocky). For these victories, many people consider him the best HW ever. Thats overrated.
ernhutch187 1 year ago
@ernhutch187 How about 49-0 with 43 KOs. Is that overrated? Following their "computer" match filming, Ali complained about sore muscles and sides for a couple of weeks - and Rocky was pulling his punches during the filming. IS that overrated?
jhs1958 1 year ago
@jhs1958 Yeah, he's overrated. Who cares how many matches you won against guys who either A. were not that good B. were over the hill when you fought them or C. both. And who cares about the movie they filmed together. Thats a movie. Marciano knew he couldn't compete against Ali in a real match. Where did the ALi quotes about soreness come from?
ernhutch187 1 year ago
@ernhutch187 Where do you think Ali's comments came from? --> Ali. Research it, kid. (Why do you young guys think you're inventing the wheel? It's been around a long time.) Oldtimers know some stuff too - and we research one hell of a lot better than youngsters. Stop believing all the hype. Jurgen Blin popped Ali in the head all evening long. Had that been Dempsey, Ali would be on his back - like he was against Cooper.
jhs1958 1 year ago
@ernhutch187 Many people who saw both Marciano and Ali fight say Marcinao would win. Walcott was on eof the best pure boxers ever as a heavyweight, Charles and Moore are amung the top 5 light-heavies ever and Marciano fought everyone with the posisble exception of Patterson, but that fight had little interest
dorsi68 1 year ago
Calling Ali overrated is pointless. By many people, he is overrated. Many people view him as the god of boxing. Citizens of Zaire, don't call his match against Foreman the Rumble in the Jungle. They call it "the greatest fight ever". No man can live up to the legend that surrounds Ali. But despite not being the 2nd coming, he's still the most amazing heavyweight champion ever.
ernhutch187 1 year ago
@ernhutch187 - Ali talked a good game and was the best of his time. His time period was good too. But, he lost five bouts officially and should have lost more - truth be known - Young, Norton (all bouts), Frazier #2 (probably) and against Cooper #1, he was knocked cuckoo and floored but saved by the bell. Younger fans have been fed a diet of HYPE by HBO, ESPN and the press - all wanting to sell their "product" which was ALI.
jhs1958 1 year ago
@ernhutch187 You are very biased my friend. What legitimate boxing body does it say that the "Rumble in the Jungle" calls Ali the greatest fighter ever ??? You know Foreman was not 100%. I know this is not an excuse, but had they fought again, it would have been different. Why did Ali not fight Foreman again ??? yet Norton and Frazier fought Ali when they won the first fight ???
dorsi68 1 year ago
@ernhutch187 Sorry, I mean who actually says "Rumble in the Jungel" was the greatest fight ever ... its not even top 10. Saying that is very biased my friend. The Thrilla in manialla was one of the greatest fights ever, but watrch the Ali-Foreman fight again ... there are plenty of better fights. Even the 2nd Frazier fight (which Frazier won) was a better fight.
dorsi68 1 year ago
ernhutch187 - your own remark ->... how much less competetive boxing was back then. No boxer would be able to compete as a professional without first competing as an amateur now, let alone in the 1960's or 70's. Futher, by your logic, Leon Spinks would be the best boxing champion ever. He won the belt in less than ten fights. --- HMMM, Spinks became champ in less than ten fights. So, where's the modern competitiveness? Your own analysis defeats your argument.
jhs1958 1 year ago
@jhs1958 Spinks had an amateur career buddy. He was an olympic gold medalist. Also, he won the belt from a ring weary and unmotivated Ali who was in the early stages of developing a disease which hinders his motor skills. Further, he couldn't keep the belt. Ali got in shape, came back, whipped up on him, and he never saw the HW crown again.
ernhutch187 1 year ago
@ernhutch187 Spinks ranks among the worst to ever win a hevayweight title - and who did he beat - the OVERRATED ONE !!!
jhs1958 1 year ago
@jhs1958 The Spinks that beat and got beat by Ali was a respectable number one contender, and he was 12 years Ali's junior. He had 192 fights, 184 wins, 1 draw, 7 losses, and 133 KO's at the time when he faced Ali. The reason he was able to rise so fast as a pro was that he spent years getting experience as an amateur. People who don't really know boxing don't know that though. Later he developed a drug addiction which ruined him for boxing, but hey some stories have sad endings.
ernhutch187 1 year ago
@ernhutch187 - Spinks NEVER was a true top contender. He was accepted as such by those who really didn't know boxing. Leon would never have beaten the truly great champions such as Jeffries, Dempsey, Louis, Marciano - not on his best day and their worst. But, he beat Ali. For Ali to be considered the greatest heavyweight of all time - means he IS overrated.
jhs1958 1 year ago
@ernhutch187 Spinks was not a good fighter. Are you honestly telling me in 1978, Spinks was the best fighter out there ??? He was not even top 5 and maybe 8th or 9th at best in 1978.
dorsi68 1 year ago
I take all into account when evaluating Jeff, eyewitness, written, film, expert opinion, I guess Iget more out of the films than most viewers seem to. Jeff to me is one of the top five in history.
1899sharkey 1 year ago
ernhutch187 - The opinions of boxing people must count for something. These guys saw fighters year after year. Long after Jeffries stopped fighting, up until the 1950s, he was #1 in the polls. What was written about oldtime fighters matches up pretty good with what is seen on films that exist. I have no reason to believe otherwise about Jeffries, especially after watching the poor quality of modern fighters - and their mistakes - including Ali, the "GREATEST OVERRATED" one !!!
jhs1958 1 year ago
jhs,if you are an expert on Jeffries, you must have some of his whole fights. Further, in order for you to say that he was an incredible boxer, you must have some fights where he boxes incredibly. I've seen the Johnson and Sharkey fights. He fights terribly in both of these matches. If he's so great, tell us where we can watch a match where he fights great. Otherwise just admit that you like him, even though his style is outdated and he couldn't compete with the true great boxers of history.
ernhutch187 1 year ago
@ernhutch187 Hi emhutch187, you seem to know minimal about boxing. Up until the 1950's, Jefferies was regarded as the greatest heavyweight by boxing experts (although Johnson was also touted as the best as well) and Dempsey won the first half centrury poll due to his popularity. The fight films do not due justice and we need to rely on what was documented in the past.
dorsi68 1 year ago
@dorsi68 You can't even spell Jeffries.
ernhutch187 1 year ago
@ernhutch187 I am typing fast and I am sure you can see other typos ... so what is your point ???
dorsi68 1 year ago
@dorsi68 By saying the films don't do justice, and we should rely on documentation from the past, you are saying it is more important to accept the opinions of other people who watched boxers fight than to actually watch boxers fight. Don't be ridiculous.
ernhutch187 1 year ago
@ernhutch187 - I'm like dorsi68. I'll take the word of boxing guys who saw all the fighters over the years and rank Jeffries, Dempsey, etc., highly - instead of the judgement of a 25 year old who has been fed hype all of his years. Sorry, pal.
jhs1958 1 year ago
@ernhutch187 Are we on the same conversation ??? You understand that when Jefferies was fighting, the film industry was in its infancy stage, thus there is minimal film on Jefferies and the fiulm is not the greatest quaility. Its a fact that Jefferies was alot stronger and had better endurance than Ali (as in running).
dorsi68 1 year ago
@ernhutch187 The people that followed fighters for a 50 year period all agreed that Jefferies was the greatest fighter they say. Why is there opinion being disregarded but yours is not ??? Leonardo da Vinci for example is considered as the greatest Renaissance man yet we have maybe 10 of his original works. We rely on reliable history data to make this point just as we make this point on Jefferies.
dorsi68 1 year ago
@ernhutch187 In regards to baseball, probbaly the 2nd greatest player ever behind Ruth was Cool Papa Bell (look him up). He was not allowed to play in the Makors becuase of his color, but should we dismiss this like many experts do ???? and the way many people like yourself dismiss Jefferies ???
dorsi68 1 year ago
@ernhutch187 Jefferies was like a bigger Marciano and Frazier. Ali in a 15 round to 20 round fight in a normal ring would be TKO'd. Jefferies fought when he was injured (like the second Sharkey fight), yet made no excuses like Ali did when he fought Norton for the first time. I presume you also realize that when you fight a 25 round fight, you fight differently than a 12 round fight, so you can not truly comment on his style.
dorsi68 1 year ago
Big, strong, great endurance, vicious body puncher, Tex Rickard said jeff was better and hit harder than Dempsey. Jim Jeffries in his prime would have fared well against any heavy in history, and destroyed the present crop of heavys.
1899sharkey 1 year ago
Fitzsimmons was 38 years old when he lost the title to Jeffries. Broke most of the bones of his right hand on Jeffries head. Jeffries said Fitzsimmons was the greatest fighter he ever faced. Promoter Tex Rickard said Jeffries was the best he ever saw. That spans up to Tunney's reign. It's said he was a great athlete. Complete fighter. Boxer and great wrestler, catch man. Sound like MMA?
faltagh 1 year ago
Jeffries greatest attribute was his unbelievable stamina, this is why he would have beat foreman and liston too
TheRichmich 2 years ago
Foreman and Liston never fought anyone who could hit them as hard as they hit others. Jeffries' power, chin nd stamina would win out.
jhs1958 2 years ago
Not if they landed just right. I do admire his stamina and strength which was legendary in his prime.Great fighter for sure.
romienomie 2 years ago
Funny thing, but maybe you haven't lived long enough to see it yet. All these do- gooders badmouthing those "prejudiced" people - yet do nothing themselves to help. Many times, the "prejudiced" people end up helping the needy more than the do-gooders. So, who's worse ?
jhs1958 2 years ago
I want all of you guys to watch a video called "Muhammed Ali Jack Dempsey is a joke". This video shows Muhammed Ali analyzing the boxing skills of Jack Dempsey. Dempsey is often compared to Jeffries, but is generally regarded as a superior boxer. Also, they fought in the same generation, and were analyzed by the same critics. Muhammed ali knows more about boxing than any of us. Try to listen to his opinion of Dempsey's skills. Fighters back then could not compete now. Watch for yourself.
ernhutch187 2 years ago
ernhutch187 - Ali made plenty of mistakes as a boxer. Only his quickness avoided disaster. Besides, he lost 5 fights "officially" and should have lost 4 others (in my view) - Young, the other two Norton fights and Frazier #2. So, don't lean on what he says too much. It's his quckness not his knowledge that made him good.
jhs1958 2 years ago
ernhutch187 - incidentally, Ali got wins where he should have had losses. Jeffries got draws where he should have had wins. It's the way it was done in each man's time period. Things weren't given away as easily in the old days.
jhs1958 2 years ago
Speed is the first attribute of a fighter to deteriorate. Ali's career spanned 18 years. He was a champion when he was young, strong and fast, and when he was older and had to rely on toughness and the skills that only master boxers have. Think of the competition a boxer faces to win a gold medal at the olympic games. Ali did this long before his talent even began to peak. Jeffries NEVER faced that kind of opposition EVER. Just watch some footage and compare their skills. Its inarguable.
ernhutch187 2 years ago
I think legs go first. Ali is overrated. Leon Spinks beat him. How great is that? Truth be known, Ali lost nine fights. Let's NOT talk about him. Let's talk about THE GREATEST - Jeffries.
jhs1958 2 years ago
Ali was past his prime when he fought Spinks much as Jeffries was against Johnson. True he was a speed fighter which is tough to maintain the whole career, but no doubt he fought and beat the best that were around, Not overrated at all.
romienomie 2 years ago
@romienomie Hi there, do you truly believe Ali beat Norton 2 of 3x ??? At best, Ali won one fight at best. Ali is a great fighter, but not a top 5 fighter.
dorsi68 1 year ago
@dorsi68 Even Norton admits Ali beat him in the second fight. The only fight of question to me is the third in Yankee Stadium 1976. But he did not "clobber" Ali either. Norton was a championship caliber fighter in his prime.
romienomie 1 year ago
@romienomie Hi there, I would say Ali won the 2nd fight and that is why I said at best, Ali won 1 of 3 fights. Some boxing experts including Foreman said Norton won all three fights. The fights were close, but Norton was not a top 40 all-time heavyweight.
dorsi68 1 year ago
@romienomie 2 of 2: Again, Ali was a very good fighter, but was far from the best. Jefferies beat the best pure heavyweight boxer ever in Corbett in a large ring. The way Ali fights and the syle he would use for Jefferies would make this an easy fight for Jefferies as he would hurt Ali. Jefferies is a large Marciano and Frazier except quicker, stronger and hits harder.
dorsi68 1 year ago
@dorsi68 whatever, keep dreaming.
romienomie 1 year ago
@romienomie Hi there, keep dreaming in regards to what ??? That Ali won one fight in the Norton-Ali 3 fight series or that Ali is not in the top 5 of all time for heavyweights ???
dorsi68 1 year ago
@dorsi68 I think you already know what I mean, Jeffries couldn't beat Ali period. And yes, Ali beat Norton in two of three fights. Ali would handle any heavyweight in his prime anywhere anytime. You know it. Just won't admit it. That's my opinion it won;'t change. Jeffries was good for his time. I would even put Dempsey ahead of him. and what about Gene Tunney, Ali himself said Tunney was best of the old time fighters.
romienomie 1 year ago
@romienomie Hi there, I needed clarification as your comments could ahve meant anything. In Ali's prime, he certainly would not beat Jefferies, Johnson and Louis in there primes. Ali would have a very difficult time and may lose to Corbett, Langford, Dempsey, Tunney, Marciano, Foreman (the fight in Zaire, Foreman was not at his best), Holmes and Lewis.
dorsi68 1 year ago
@dorsi68 You are biased against Ali. The fact that you said he could not beat a prime George Foreman, even after he knocked out a prime George Foreman shows that you are not thinking in a rational manner. Watch Lewis v Tua. Foreman commentates. He says when he fought Ali, the better man won, and he admits that all things said to the contrary of this fact by himself and his fans were just excuses. He also calls Ali the greatest fighter he ever faced in the documentary "Facing Ali".
ernhutch187 1 year ago
@ernhutch187 Ali beat a prime Foreman, but Foreman's mind and health was not there that night. See my comments above as all fighters can lose there first fight like Johnson, Dempsey, Louis, Ali (2x) and still show that they were off that night. How am I biased ??? If they fought again, it would ahve been different. Foreman is a humble man.
dorsi68 1 year ago
@ernhutch187 Ali beat a prime Foreman, but Foreman's mind and health was not there that night. All fighters can lose there first fight like Johnson, Dempsey, Louis, Ali (3x) and still show that they were off that night. How am I biased do you say ??? If Ali fought fought Foreman again, it would have been different, but Ali preffered to fight 3rd and 4th raters 80% of the time.
dorsi68 1 year ago
@ernhutch187 Part 2: Foreman is a humble man. It is known that Foreman believes Norton won all three fights. What are your thoughts on that ??? Who do you think Foreman said the greatest heavyweight ever was ??? It was not Ali. Ali was a very good fighter and the most charismatic fighter ever, but he is very overrated and is not in the top 5 of all-time.
dorsi68 1 year ago
@dorsi68 So who are the top five of all time? A bunch of white guys from the 1800's who we don't even have any footage of? Seriously, lets hear it who are your top five?
ernhutch187 1 year ago
@ernhutch187 Well, Ali is one of them (but not #1). The others are old-timers - Jeffries, Dempsey, Louis and Johnson.
jhs1958 1 year ago
@ernhutch187 I (1) Jefferies (2) Louis (3) Johnson (4) Dempsey (5) Langford These are based on the fighters 5 prime years. For example, Dempsey was a great fighter, but was he a great champion after 1923 ??? He became too Hollywood. Jefferies for example kept getting better and never did hit his prime.
dorsi68 1 year ago
@ernhutch187 I want to hear your top 5 my frined :)
dorsi68 1 year ago
@ernhutch187 What are your thoughts about Foreman saying he was afraid and ducked Quarry ??? Do you believe Foreman menat what he said ??? There is always some truth to one's comments, but I know if Ali fought Foreman again instead of fighting 3rd and 4th raters like Wepner (4th rater), Bugner (2nd rater), Coopman (4th rater) and Dunn (4th rater), Foreman would havbe won just as Foreman would have beat Quarry.
dorsi68 1 year ago
@dorsi68 Ali didn't fight Foreman again because after the Ali fight, Foreman was so devestated, he took 2 years off. Then he started working his way back to a title shot, but he lost to Jimmy Young. After that, he took ten years off. Ali is 7 years older than Foreman, and by the time he returned, Ali was retired.
ernhutch187 1 year ago
@ernhutch187 So you and some people say ... Foreman deserved a fight against Ali no matter what you say. Foreman lost before the Young fight and you know that
dorsi68 1 year ago
@dorsi68 I love Foreman. He is one of my favorite boxers. But Foreman was too dumb and too slow to beat Ali in the seventies. Ali would have whipped him ten times out of ten.
ernhutch187 1 year ago
@ernhutch187 You are very wrong on this. Sometimes a loss puts things into perspective and the one fact is ... you can not say that as Ali never gave Foreman a rematch
dorsi68 1 year ago
@romienomie The Norton fights were very close and many boxing people believe he won zero fights, but I know Ali won the secoind fight, but the 1sta nd 3rd fight ... I do not think so. The second Frazier fight was very close and I am not too sure if Ali won that fight. Where did Ali say Tunney was the best of the old-time fighters as Ali said he was the 3rd best fighter behiond Johnson and Louis.
dorsi68 1 year ago
@romienomie I doubt he said Tunney was the best of the old-time fighters ... maybe the best pure boxer ???, but that would go to Corbett who was probbaly the best boxer of all heavyweights.
dorsi68 1 year ago
Jeffries won the professional heavyweight title in how many fights? Was it 12? Ali took 20, wasn't it?. You're right, Jeffries didn't fight amateur fights.
jhs1958 2 years ago
@jhs1958 This comment helps to show how much less competetive boxing was back then. No boxer would be able to compete as a professional without first competing as an amateur now, let alone in the 1960's or 70's. Futher, by your logic, Leon Spinks would be the best boxing champion ever. He won the belt in less than ten fights.
ernhutch187 1 year ago
@ernhutch187 Spinks was given the opportunity to fight Ali as Ali did not want to fight Norton and Spinks was thought to be an easy fight. Is this not true ??? Guys like Norton, Holmes, Shavers, Cooney, Goetzee, Lyle, Young and a few others probably.
dorsi68 1 year ago
@dorsi68 No its not true. How on earth can you accuse Ali of ducking Norton. He fought him 3 times and he won 2 out of 3. This is a fact. Further, Norton has tons of respect for Ali, and he accepted his losses.
ernhutch187 1 year ago
@ernhutch187 Watch one of the documenteries on Ali. Norton thought he won all fight. I know Norton won the last fight and Ali knew it too. Many people thought this, that is why they wanted Norton to fight Ali again. You should know that Norton tried bullying Spinks to a fight after he beat Ali, but Spinks went for the bigger pay day and the easier fight. Spinks was baely a top 10 fighter at best in his prime ... you know that
dorsi68 1 year ago
@dorsi68 Styles make fights. No one can deny that Norton's style gave Ali mountains of trouble. I think Norton was Awesome. Ali was better than him though because Ali's style worked effectively against more opponents than Norton's style did. Ken could have got the decision in #3 for sure. It was razor close. He didn't though. Lucky for Ali. Unlucky for him. But Norton would whip all those old chumps you like with one hand stuffed down his shorts.
ernhutch187 1 year ago
@ernhutch187 I presume you know Eddie Futch who was probably the greatest boxing traimner ever and worked with Norton. He is on record saying Norton could never beat a big puncher. Are you certain Norton would beat Jeffries (who would KO Norton within 4 rounds) and Sharkey (who would KO Norton within 4 rounds) and Fitzsimmons (who would KO Norton within 10 rounds) ???
dorsi68 1 year ago
@ernhutch187 Corbett and Tunney are much quicker and better boxers than Norton, so Ali might not even beat them if he was not 100% at his best. If you can honestly say Ali won the 3rd fight with Norton, you must really love Ali as it was not "razor close". The first and third fights were inarguably Norton while the 2nd fight was razor close and could ahve gone either way. Your biased statement about beating the fighters from 70 years earlier with one hand is sad comentary.
dorsi68 1 year ago
@ernhutch187 Although I answered all of your questions .. you ahve not answered mine. Who are your top 5 heavyweighst ever, did Foreman not say he avoided and feared Quarry, did Norton not say he thought he won all three fights (and yes, I know Norton respects Ali very much), did Foreman not say he thought Ali would be easy pickings in the first fight as he thought Norton (like everyone did) won the 2 fights with Ali
dorsi68 1 year ago
@ernhutch187 ... and are you serious that The Rumble in the Jungle was the greatest fight ever ??? You might want to retract that statement. Yes, Ali was the most inetresting and charismatic fighter in the past 100 years. Yes, Ali was very interesting, but he also said some negative things to Frazier which was wrong and he also lied ... aka ... do you seriously believe Ali broke his jaw in round 2 of the Norton fight like he said ??
dorsi68 1 year ago
@jhs1958 Aside from how much less competitive boxing was back in Jefries era,
this comment emphasizes Jeffries lack of longevity. Ali fought 105 amateur fights and 61 pro fights, and he still had what it took to beat the champion after 164 fights. Jeffries was finished as a competitor after just 20 fights. In the 21st he was already totally pathetic. Jack Johnson beat him while smiling and laughing.
ernhutch187 1 year ago
@ernhutch187 So what is your point ??? This is not consructive as its like me saying look at Ali against Holmes or Berbick ... why say something when you know the fighter was shot ??? Its biased to be like that my friend
dorsi68 1 year ago
@dorsi68 In 1974, Foreman was 25, he had fought 40 fights (37 KOs 3 UD's) and he was at the height of his dominance as a boxer. How is this anything like the 38 year old Ali with brain damage from 59 awesome fights coming out of retirement and losing to the 31 year old Holmes (who by the way Ali taught how to box), or the 39 year old Ali with the same problem losing by spit decision to a 27 year old Berbick?
ernhutch187 1 year ago
@ernhutch187 I do not understand your point as I clearly said we should not judge Ali on his last two fights, please re-read. Foreman was not himself that fight. I am glad Frazier, Norton and Spinks gave Ali a chance again though :)
dorsi68 1 year ago
@dorsi68 Foreman was exactly himself that fight. He did exactly what Ali predicted he would do. And Ali beat him for exactly the reasons he said he would. Ali said he would beat Foreman, because Foreman was too slow, his punches were too wide, and his stamina was suspect. That is precisely what happened. Why did Foreman automatically deserve a rematch, after a 2 year layoff, if the Zaire fight wasn't even close? K.O in round 8.