Jack Johnson's Thoughts On Joe Louis.

[LondonRingRules]

You say Johnson had horrible punching technique. Johnson actually had great accuracy and timing. You probaly don't understand that Johnson came from a era of pre combination punching and and era of single blows and incessant clinching.

But we have to look at that era's style, and for Johnson's era his Technique was brillant.

When Joe Louis was about combinations punching had come around and techniques etc.

** My young friend, lets not limit the era to Johnson's dreary style.

Ketchel was a non stop punching machine, singles, doubles, quadruples, when and where he could, it didn't matter. McGovern can be seen throwing 3-4-5 punch combinations at Gans who even manages a couple in a beatdown.

Ad Wolgast was a freestyling switch hitter and let the punches flow as his juices dictated. I'm certain that Jackson and Corbett, both noted boxers threw combos.

Hell, my 3 yr old son ran out to block the front door of a bakery we were walking to to prevent my 4 yr old from entering first and threw a brilliant 20 punch combo in a flash, having never seen a boxing match or been trained in any martial art. Looked Like Ray Leonard Jr he did.

Combo punching is as instinctive as single punching. Johnson developed his style because he was so big and strong he could control the action better with a grapple. If he could throw a combo or single KO punch, you'd think a big lazy guy like him would've done so. He preferred a safety approach having been the victim of KOs and it worked for a while against soft comp.

[Southpaw16BF]

** My young friend, lets not limit the era to Johnson's dreary style.

Ketchel was a non stop punching machine, singles, doubles, quadruples, when and where he could, it didn't matter. McGovern can be seen throwing 3-4-5 punch combinations at Gans who even manages a couple in a beatdown.

Ad Wolgast was a freestyling switch hitter and let the punches flow as his juices dictated. I'm certain that Jackson and Corbett, both noted boxers threw combos.

Hell, my 3 yr old son ran out to block the front door of a bakery we were walking to to prevent my 4 yr old from entering first and threw a brilliant 20 punch combo in a flash, having never seen a boxing match or been trained in any martial art. Looked Like Ray Leonard Jr he did.

Combo punching is as instinctive as single punching. Johnson developed his style because he was so big and strong he could control the action better with a grapple. If he could throw a combo or single KO punch, you'd think a big lazy guy like him would've done so. He preferred a safety approach having been the victim of KOs and it worked for a while against soft comp.

But in Jack Johnson's era, he did fight in a era of clinch filled rounds, before combination punching was intergal part of the game.And over the next few era's combination punching did evolve.

Johnson did have great clinch control and at times could control fights with his clinching, but he didn't just soley win fights off clinching. Do you think Jim Jeffiries would of just quit of clinching? Johnson was a very effective puncher and did have great timing. Do you think the beating Sam Langford recieved at the hands of Johnson was just due to clinching? Langford claimed ''Johnson gave me the only beating i ever took''

As as i said in Johnson's era clinching was big part of the his era, he wasn't the only fighter doing it, but he used it more to his advantage as he was very good at it.

If you watch Stanley Ketchel vs Billy Papke IV you will see there is a lot of clinching between the two for the duration of the fight. And in the Papke and Johnson fights at times you could see that Ketchel didn't go above the limitations of his era, upright stance, slow feet, single punchers, and incessant clinching.

I'am not saying there was no combination punchers in Johnson's era, but they were far and few between.

[LondonRingRules]

As as i said in Johnson's era clinching was big part of the his era, he wasn't the only fighter doing it, but he used it more to his advantage as he was very good at it.

If you watch Stanley Ketchel vs Billy Papke IV you will see there is a lot of clinching between the two for the duration of the fight. And in the Papke and Johnson fights at times you could see that Ketchel didn't go above the limitations of his era, upright stance, slow feet, single punchers, and incessant clinching.

I'am not saying there was no combination punchers in Johnson's era, but they were far and few between.

** Yes, Johnson and Jeff's era was more grapple/clinch friendly and most all the greats were very good in their special facets of the inside game including clinching.

You do need to be more circumspect in what you are viewing however. Papke initiates all the clinches and Ketchel is mightily frustrated which is what Papke wanted since Ketchell was the better fighter who had KOed him last time out.

Johnson is making a big show of controlling little Ketchel. Of course Ketchel knew the tricks of clinching, but he won his fights on his ferocious power and wasn't worried about his chin as much as Johnson, but he's the one struggling to get loose and fight. I've no doubt Johnson could throw combos, but he figured out a style that suited his personality and that's what we see on film and in fight reports.

And yes, I'd say that combination punching was still in development just as single shots were also. We saw Winky clinch Williams' right hand the other night and then Williams reaches over with his long wingspan and pops Winky a few times around his clinched right with his left, something Merchant in all his years had never seen.

Fighters have developed some new wrinkles that suit them in modern regulations, yet have forgotten some of the tricks of yore.

[MarkScott]

He predicted exactly what would happen in the first Louis-Schmeling fight.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/078..._hashrec_03_03

[Kelly Robinson]

All I know is that Jack Johnson was a bad ass.

[StarshipTrooper]

Everything Jack Johnson said about Louis was 100% correct, so what is the problem here lads.

Funny how everyone just ignored this ignorant troll rather than dignify his inane post with a reply

Poet

[Slimey Limey]

Funny how everyone just ignored this ignorant troll rather than dignify his inane post with a reply

Poet

Everyone but YOU.

So what does that make you?

Dignifying my post with a reply. Thank you.

[j]

there definitely has to be made aware the different types of fighting styles in different eras were based on certain reasons.

gloves became increasingly more padded every 5 years almost for quite a time. some goals were - protecting the hands, which meant using body punches and led to more clinching. not far away from bareknuckle - wehidch including wrestling tactics as a valid part of western pugilism. conditioning - guys back then conditioned their body's to generally be "tougher" if i may say so. this meant making the fists very hard as you had less glove to pad a punch leading to easier KOs and also easier broken hands unless conditioned properly.

so, my point, is that fighting this way, back then, was more of a different game. different rules, different training, different standards, and different equipment.

[j]

and my personal view, as a guess, is that jack johnson could beat joe, and maybe perhaps the otherway around too. back then it was not uncommon for great fitghters to have over 5 losses anyways.

[JAB5239]

and my personal view, as a guess, is that jack johnson could beat joe, and maybe perhaps the otherway around too. back then it was not uncommon for great fitghters to have over 5 losses anyways.

Fighters had more losses because they fought more often and under harsher conditions than today. More often than not they had to take on the top fighters in their division any many times did so while injured because they needed the paycheck.