Bob Fitzsimmions vs Peter jackson

[Benny The Kid]

I have been on a binge reading the brooklyn eagle post online in the 1890's.
This is my 2nd installment of real fight's that should have happened. (burns vs ketchel was the 1st). This i would have liked to happened in 1892, which would be perfect. Peter jackson is hard to judge, because he only had a 2 year window really where his reputation was really born. 1890-1892. He was covered little in the american papers, his bout with corbett makes the papers. and there is a reference to the fact that the public was stunned that the challeger in waiting, one frank slavin, actually got beat by jackson. Leaveing people stunned. Slavin at the time was on a terrible tear, and looked the real deal. Peter jackson toyed with him and made him, in his prime look like a fraud. Jackson is stated as a man who lacked in finishing opponents off.
after this groundbreaking win, he faded into retirement unable to find an opponent.
This triangle should have been made between, corbett, fitz, & jackson.
In the fall of 1892 i envision this taking place.
jackson's last(real) fight was 11-28-1892.
It is when.. he's gonna meet fitz.
Fitsimmions 5 11 1/2
167 pounds
71 3/4 reach.
age 29
Jackson 6 1 1/2
192 pounds
77 1/2 reach
age 31
Can fitz do what corbett coundn't do?
This Bout would most likely be set for 25 rounds.
This would be just prior to fitz's bout with jim hall, and before sharkey.
Certainly a very tough task for ruby robert, he was very young, certainly in his real prime and coming off a butt whooping ,he put on a prime-time joe choyski.
he would certainly be ready, but would he be biting off too much of an opponent?
I do feel Fitzsimmions would have beaten John l.sullivan, like corbett did.
and also, i feel peter jackson would have wore down and beaten sullivan and won in a forty round bout or so.
I see something like this
Fitz/Jackson
then corbett.
then sullivan.
Who would win this legentary clash, do you think?
Incedently after Fitz creamed jack dempsey, the press stated the next day that sullivan would really have a hard time against fitz, even despite the weight, difference. Fitz was a more natural big opponent as compared to the charlie mitchells and jake kilrains of the world. As the paper leans on the fact that fitz just might kick the ring king's ass, if they were to meet.
people were stunned at that point of just how easily he smashed a living legent, around the ring. Dempsey was far more covered in the papers than even sullivan was, from my reseach. He was the 1st real media darling of boxing, sullivan was much more of crude boxer, though he was huge in his own right. Through the year of 1887 when they were prime time, the media wrot about dempsey at least once a week, spending 8 or 9 articles just covering a meaningless exhibition. When fitz won, people were completely stunned. Not that he had just won the fight, but the fact that he smacked him around like "little boy".
In that day was born the instant legent of Ruby robert.
The mere next day, he was already pondered to kick a prime john L's butt.
It wasn't that he won, IT WAS HOW, HE WON.
Peter jackson, would be tossed around like a little boy, thats for sure.

[Benny The Kid]

Sorry, I mean't to Peter Jackson wouldn't be tossed around.
A freudean slip.

[Roberto Aqui]

In 1892 Fitz was starting to enter his prime and Jackson was starting to leave his. Jackson was at least as good as Corbett who outboxed Fitz with flurries and movement. I suspect Jackson was more of a proper Brit type of upright fighter with a better jab and right hand than Corbett, so it'd be a different style of fight.

Could Fitz KO Jackson? Jackson seems to be at least as durable as Corbett, so maybe, but conversely I suspect Jackson hit harder than Corbett, so it would've been a good, maybe great fight. A dangerous punching boxer against one of the most powerful p4p fighters in history.

Probably if I was the bookmaker I'd make Jackson a slight favorite, but the match is a tossup.

[bobbydobbs]

a skilled heavyweight versus a skilled lightheavy? im taking Jackson in a land slide.

[Mr E]

Their 2 fights w/ Corbett show that they are all 3 in the same league. Sounds to me like pre-prime Corbett had slightly the better of in-prime Jackson. Certainly, he did no worse than even. So, my guess is that, prime-to-prime, Corbett beats Jackson more often than not.

Corbett was likely a shade rusty when he lost to Fitz, who had been fighting regularly and was razor-sharp. Not sure Fitz beats the Corbett of the Mitchell fight, but either way it's close. Prime-to-prime, I make Corbett-Fitz a toss up. I bet they'd each win 5 times in any 10 fights.

Fitz v. Jackson, also, strikes me as a very close fight, but I think I favor Fitz. For one thing, most of their contemporaries seemed to regard Fitzsimmons more highly and, since we don't have any film of Jackson -- and we don't have much film of Fitzsimmons -- eye-witnesses opinion means a lot. From descriptions, it sounds to me like Jackson was vulnerable to the body and that's an unfortunate weakness to have against a guy like Fitzsimmons. Close call.

Against this, Tracy Callis, who knows more about fighters of this era than any 10 other guys I know put together, has told me that he would favor Jackson in this fight, and that means a great deal.

[vic_roc_13]

based on the tons of footage I've researched .(I wish!) My gut has to go with the larger man.reading vintage articles over the years seems both tough as nails pugs were incredibly durable and had the wiskers of legend , Jackson via late KO (rd 25).

[vic_roc_13]

based on the tons of footage I've researched .(I wish!) My gut has to go with the larger man.reading vintage articles over the years seems both tough as nails pugs were incredibly durable and had the wiskers of legend , Jackson via late KO (rd 25).

[Surf-Bat]

My gut has to go with the larger man.Jackson via late KO (rd 25).

Fair enough, but don't forget that Fitz made a career out of knocking larger men stiff. Many people make the mistake of thinking Jackson a Corbett-esque boxer but with a stiffer punch. He wasn't. True, he had stellar skills but was not the elusive defensive master Corbett was and tended to mix it up more.

Other than the prime, indestructible Jeffries(who still paid dearly for it), nobody mixed with a prime Fitz and survived to tell the tale. The man had the most complete fistic arsenal of the 1800s. Even boxing masters like Joe Gans and Kid McCoy acknowledged Fitz as THE master, especially at finding or creating openings and exploiting them to deadly effect.

Fitz would whack Jackson's body. Jackson would mix with him. Fitz would find or make the openings and knock Peter kicking, imo.

[mrbig1]

a skilled heavyweight versus a skilled lightheavy? im taking Jackson in a land slide.

Fitz may have been a lightheavy but he punch like a HW.

[sr71ko]

Would have been interesting. There was a reason that John L. Sullivan dodged Peter Jackson, and it more about Peter's skill than his race. Both of these guys made a career out of knocking out bigger men. Fitz was a triple division champ, and Peter was an uncrowned heavyweight champ. Jackson held Corbett to a draw despite a badly sprained ankle(or so I have read).... Corbett would not give Jackson a rematch(I wonder why?). My best guest when you have 2 equally great fighters is that the bigger and stronger guy wins.... I think Peter Jackson would not only have beaten Fitz, but also John L. Sullivan which is why he dodged the hell out of Jackson. I know that Jefferies beat an old Jackson, but a prime one would be much tougher. Others may disagree, but I think that Peter Jackson, Sam Langford, and Harry Wills were a lot tougher than they get credit for. That also applies to the Godfrey, Jeannette, and Sam McVey.