Jeffries vs Foreman

[QueensburyRules]

Thanks for proving it! lol

- - Yer welcome

[Dr. Z]

It is a fact Jeffries never defended the heavyweight championship against a black man. Also a fact the he said he would never do so. Please don't try to use the Griffin fight. That was not for the heavyweight championship and more of an professional 4 round exhibition.

Hey, he fought Griffin as lineal champion and Johsnon as lineal champion. He won't fight a black man you say for the title? That is false. No charge.

[JAB5239]

Hey, he fought Griffin as lineal champion and Johsnon as lineal champion. He won't fight a black man you say for the title? That is false. No charge.

The Griffin fight was not a world championship fight, and he didn't DEFEND against Johnson. He would not put his belt up against a black man ever, as he stated he wouldnt. And looking more closely, Jeffries was no longer the lineal champion when he fought Johnson. He gave that title up when he retired.

[Dr. Z]

The Griffin fight was not a world championship fight, and he didn't DEFEND against Johnson. He would not put his belt up against a black man ever, as he stated he wouldnt.

He defended his lineal championship in both. Much like the Dallas Cowyboys, you are done this year.

[JAB5239]

He defended his lineal championship in both. Much like the Dallas Cowyboys, you are done this year.

He wasn't lineal vs Johnson. Johnson was the lineal champion. And the Griffin fight was a four round exhibition. There was NO title at stake just as there wasn't in Jeff's next fight.

[BKM-]

Regarding one of the chief tangents; contemporary people frequently miss queues when imposing modern ethics & standards on historical events. My grandfather; a fighter and lifelong follower of boxing, was born in 1890. With just one degree of separation, "we" knew people who were alive in, say, 1840; when Slavery was accepted, legal and common; and the folks alive then, largely accepted (without nessisarily endorsing) the institution; it being part of their society. I can't realistically "blame" all those folks my grandfather knew for a thankfully outmoded norm.
The same holds true for Sullivan through Braddock. Avoiding the black contenders was NOT their stand! It was strictly a societal code; and one that was as deeply ingrained as it was evil.
But then, so too would it be abnormal for a Gentile to trust a ***ish man, or a Protestant to do any business with a Catholic; or a woman to vote; and so on.
At least boxing got it together long long before other sports did.

As to the question raised on this ancient thread from 2006; I think that TS K-DOGG nailed in on the first page.

I think that Jeffries had all of the things to make it a hard assignment for miracle George. A carefully aggressive style, limitless stamina, and iron chin, decent size, very good power top notch athleticism and physical strength to match Foreman's (an extraordinary rare commodity amongst people who can move and punch fast enough to box and last 3 rounds).
If it was was a grueling 15 rounder; Jeff is one of the worst match-ups that you could find in history for George Foreman.
He could handle the abuse, while so few could, and Foreman was not going to be outboxing Jeffries in the 2nd half of the fight by any means.
..as always, just guessing, and always humble.

I made some posts in this thread in 2006, usually I cringe at my 16 year old self but it wasn't too bad. Thinking Foreman beats a boxer from the early 20th century doesn't sound too crazy.

But today I feel differently and I agree with you, this might actually be one of the toughest matchups for the bull that was prime George Foreman. People always say a swarmer dies against Big George, anybody who can only fight going forward would go down against Foreman etc.

But what if somebody managed to put him on the backfoot? What would happen? We know it's possible, Sonny Liston did it when they sparred.

2006 was a tremendous year for boxing btw I just had to put this out there.

[Willie Pep 229]

He wasn't lineal vs Johnson. Johnson was the lineal champion. And the Griffin fight was a four round exhibition. There was NO title at stake just as there wasn't in Jeff's next fight.

I have to disagree. If Jeffries was not the lineal champion then we can't say Johnson was done dirty. And JJ was done dirty.

Johnson chased Burns around the world, literally, and won the title. The moment he won the title White men suddenly decided Burns wasn't actually champion and until Johnson beat Jeffries they wouldn't acknowledge JJ's claim.

The dirty they did, was make Johnson win the title twice.

So Jeffries in the eyes of White men was in fact defending his title.

But none of this really matters to us, just them, back then.

[JAB5239]

I made some posts in this thread in 2006, usually I cringe at my 16 year old self but it wasn't too bad. Thinking Foreman beats a boxer from the early 20th century doesn't sound too crazy.

But today I feel differently and I agree with you, this might actually be one of the toughest matchups for the bull that was prime George Foreman. People always say a swarmer dies against Big George, anybody who can only fight going forward would go down against Foreman etc.

But what if somebody managed to put him on the backfoot? What would happen? We know it's possible, Sonny Liston did it when they sparred.

2006 was a tremendous year for boxing btw I just had to put this out there.

You make good points, but my biggest reservation is Fitzsimmons at 168 was able to push Jeff back and was getting the better of him. If he could do that I think George walks him down. Not saying it would be easy because Jeffries was tough and skilled, I just don't think he's seen anyone like Foreman.

[JAB5239]

I have to disagree. If Jeffries was not the lineal champion then we can't say Johnson was done dirty. And JJ was done dirty.

Johnson chased Burns around the world, literally, and won the title. The moment he won the title White men suddenly decided Burns wasn't actually champion and until Johnson beat Jeffries they wouldn't acknowledge JJ's claim.

The dirty they did, was make Johnson win the title twice.

So Jeffries in the eyes of White men was in fact defending his title.

But none of this really matters to us, just them, back then.

In the eyes of the white man they wanted Jeffries to win back the tile to prove racial superiority. When that didn't happen riots ensued.

[BKM-]

You make good points, but my biggest reservation is Fitzsimmons at 168 was able to push Jeff back and was getting the better of him. If he could do that I think George walks him down. Not saying it would be easy because Jeffries was tough and skilled, I just don't think he's seen anyone like Foreman.

I would agree he has never seen a specimen like Foreman, but I think he has dealt with Foreman's type of style a lot. it can easily be forgotten that Foreman despite fighting in a modern era actually was taught skills that go back since the start or even before the Marques of Queensberry rules. The Greco Roman grappling, the pushing/manipulation of the opponent's arms, shoulders, angles etc. in order to land his blows while they were in a vulnerable position.

That stuff comes from Jeffries' era, and he would know exactly how to counter those moves but of course, it's always easier said than done.

George Foreman to me is just a marvel of pugilism. To have a fighter who combined truly old school BK boxing techniques with a modern style and was highly successful at it in the 70s and 90s era's is something amazing that doesn't get enough credit.