Langford says he floored Jack Johnson, and Johnson avoid purse offers

[Dr. Z]

Jim Jeffries says "I could never have whipped Johnson at my best. I couldn't have hit him. No, I couldn't have reached him in 1,000 years."

Got the transcript of that one? Any sources? Who was the reporter who quoted this?

Some boxing stores have no account. I prefer to list the ones are clear.

Johnson doesn't agree, and in his auto bio he called Jeffries the greatest and list him #2, behind Fitzsimmons who I think he placed #1 as pound for pound type.

[ShoulderRoll]

Got the transcript of that one? Any sources? Who was the reporter who quoted this?

Some boxing stores have no account. I prefer to list the ones are clear.

Johnson doesn't agree, and in his auto bio he called Jeffries the greatest and list him #2, behind Fitzsimmons who I think he placed #1 as pound for pound type.

It's a widely reported quote. There are plenty of sources that mention it.

https://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/...biggest-fight/

[Willie Pep 229]

It's a widely reported quote. There are plenty of sources that mention it.

https://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/...biggest-fight/

One can interpret that quote to read that the "best" Jeffries is referring to being at his best that day, referring back to his statement that he was suffering from dysentery. IMO it does not imply that Jeffries believed he couldn't beat Johnson when at his prime. But I guess one can see what one wants in the quote.

[travestyny]

One can interpret that quote to read that the "best" Jeffries is referring to being at his best that day, referring back to his statement that he was suffering from dysentery. IMO it does not imply that Jeffries believed he couldn't beat Johnson when at his prime. But I guess one can see what one wants in the quote.

What???? LMAO. I think you need to read that quotation again.

[Willie Pep 229]

What???? LMAO. I think you need to read that quotation again.

I am not going to write insulting things about you like LMAO and use multiple questions mark's because I am a gentleman but I think maybe you need to read the entire quote again. The conversation is about THAT FIGHT Jeffries states that he was sick before the fight - the narrator then interrupts the quote by pointing out that 25 years earlier Jeffries didnt make such an excuse, and then the narrative returns to the Jeffries quote in which Jeffries then says that even at his best (not sick) he couldn't have beaten Johnson (that day). You cut the quote in half cherry picking out the line that fits your political agenda.The quote is relevant to that fight, that day, it needs to be interpreted in its entirety not separated for convenience.

[HOUDINI563]

Jeffries stated after the bout the “snap” of his blows was no longer there.

I have no doubt a bout between both men in their prime would have been more competitive. I also have no doubt Johnson had the skill set to completely nullify prime Jeffries offense. Johnson, as was Dempsey, Louis and Ali were unique talents with highest level skills.

[HOUDINI563]

Interestingly Rickard disqualified Jeffries once his seconds helped him back into the ring after the second knockdown.

https://chroniclingamerica.loc.gov/s...archType=basic

[travestyny]

I am not going to write insulting things about you like LMAO and use multiple questions mark's because I am a gentleman but I think maybe you need to read the entire quote again. The conversation is about THAT FIGHT Jeffries states that he was sick before the fight - the narrator then interrupts the quote by pointing out that 25 years earlier Jeffries didnt make such an excuse, and then the narrative returns to the Jeffries quote in which Jeffries then says that even at his best (not sick) he couldn't have beaten Johnson (that day). You cut the quote in half cherry picking out the line that fits your political agenda.The quote is relevant to that fight, that day, it needs to be interpreted in its entirety not separated for convenience.

I wasn't trying to insult you, but that is in no way how that quotation should be interpreted. He said he would have never been able to beat Johnson AT HIS BEST...COULDN'T HAVE HIT HIM... and NOT IN 1000 YEARS. How you interpret that to mean him somehow not meaning at his all-time best is beyond me.

The proof that you're wrong is that you've got the dates mixed up. The narrator says that Jeffries stated 25 years later that he was sick. But BACK THEN, Jeffries stated that he couldn't have beaten Johnson at his best, without mentioning anything about being sick.

I have proof that the quotation about not being able to beat him is from circa July 14th, 1910.

I accept your apology for claiming I cherry picked to fit my agenda. (which I don't even know why you've accused me of this because I didn't bring up this quotation, but I certainly interpreted it the proper way).



So we are clear on what he meant now, right?

[Willie Pep 229]

I wasn't trying to insult you, but that is in no way how that quotation should be interpreted. He said he would have never been able to beat Johnson AT HIS BEST...COULDN'T HAVE HIT HIM... and NOT IN 1000 YEARS. How you interpret that to mean him somehow not meaning at his all-time best is beyond me.

The proof that you're wrong is that you've got the dates mixed up. The narrator says that Jeffries stated 25 years later that he was sick. But BACK THEN, Jeffries stated that he couldn't have beaten Johnson at his best, without mentioning anything about being sick.

I have proof that the quotation about not being able to beat him is from circa July 14th, 1910.

I accept your apology for claiming I cherry picked to fit my agenda. (which I don't even know why you've accused me of this because I didn't bring up this quotation, but I certainly interpreted it the proper way).



So we are clear on what he meant now, right?

No - that is not the same source - in fact that newspaper did exacutally what you did - it only took the second sentence if the quote and omitted the first line about the dysentery.

The quote I was working with is from the Saterday Evening Post (SEP) which is linked about by Shoukder Roll.

Also the SEP quote says that Jeffries made the statement some time after the fight - the paper you posted makes it sound as though he said it leaving the ring.

But either way look at the link Shoulder Roll posted (The SEP) - The second line is connected to the first line IMO -

As far as my apology goes yes I am sorry you used an incomplete source when Shoulder Roll went to all that trouble to get you the complete quote.

Sounds to me like you quoted some bias rag that already took the line out of context.

Read the SEP article.

[travestyny]

No - that is not the same source - in fact that newspaper did exacutally what you did - it only took the second sentence if the quote and omitted the first line about the dysentery.

The quote I was working with is from the Saterday Evening Post (SEP) which is linked about by Shoukder Roll.

Also the SEP quote says that Jeffries made the statement some time after the fight - the paper you posted makes it sound as though he said it leaving the ring.

But either way look at the link Shoulder Roll posted (The SEP) - The second line is connected to the first line IMO -

As far as my apology goes yes I am sorry you used an incomplete source when Shoulder Roll went to all that trouble to get you the complete quote.

Sounds to me like you quoted some bias rag that already took the line out of context.

Read the SEP article.

I looked at what Shoulder posted. You are interpreting it the wrong way.

Twenty-five years later, in an article from the August 3, 1935, issue of the Post, Jeffries said he trained intensively for a year-and-a-half before the match. He got back into shape and dropped his weight from 285 to 220. But just days before the match, he caught a severe case of dysentery that kept him from putting up his best fight. But there was no talk of illness in the days following the match. Then, Jeffries said, “I could never have whipped Johnson at my best. I couldn’t have hit him. No, I couldn’t have reached him in 1,000 years.”

It's clearly stating that he talked of dysentery in 1935, but not in "the days following the match."

It goes on to say, "THEN," meaning BACK THEN...as in "the days following the match," Jeffries said that he couldn't have beat Johnson at his best. He doesn't mean a continuation of Jeffries speaking in 1935 when he talked about dysentery, as you are interpreting it.


You clearly have this wrong, and yet you are still somehow trying to blame me. I've never omitted anything. I have no idea why you keep accusing me of things I haven't done.