jack johnson vs rocky marciano

[travestyny]

According the the IBRO a group of living historians, Charles rates #13 all time pound for pound, Johnson #19th. So here ya go, he's rated 6 spots ahead of Johnson.

https://www.ibroresearch.com/2020/03/pound-for-pound-2/

Charles also rates ahead of Johnson by Ring Magazine. In 2002, Charles was ranked #13 on The Ring magazine's list of the 80 Best Fighters of the Last 80 Years.

Your retort?

As you said lol.

On film, Charles is far more skilled, it's not hard to see.

Thank to the mod for cleaning up a baseless post about a family member.

My retort is that you used a list that had Charles at 27 and Johnson at #8. I didn't say every list would do the same. I thought it was dumb on your part.

Do I need to find lists that have Johnson ahead of Charles. That won't be hard.

Jack Johnson is #7 here. 6-1 is certainly not Charles. Sooo.....?

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/1436191-the-top-50-pound-for-pound-boxers-of-all-time

[travestyny]

Charles also rates ahead of Johnson by Ring Magazine. In 2002, Charles was ranked #13 on The Ring magazine's list of the 80 Best Fighters of the Last 80 Years.

This is also dumb. Why would Johnson be on this list when his last major fight was in 1915?

[billeau2]

Seems a mod edited the post because Dr. Z believes that Houdini is saying JJohnson hit Z's wife instead of his own

I thought I was on a ward with a few mental cases...

[travestyny]

I thought I was on a ward with a few mental cases...

LMAO.

I mean.... how he couldn't figure out what was being said is beyond me. But with his recent posting, I'm not too surprised. He doesn't hit me as the sharpest tool in the shed.

[Dr. Z]

This is also dumb. Why would Johnson be on this list when his last major fight was in 1915?

What would Charles be on this list when his last fight was over 60 years ago. It's not dumb, it's a historical list. Talk about not being the sharpest tool in the shed

[Dr. Z]

My retort is that you used a list that had Charles at 27 and Johnson at #8. I didn't say every list would do the same. I thought it was dumb on your part.

Do I need to find lists that have Johnson ahead of Charles. That won't be hard.

Jack Johnson is #7 here. 6-1 is certainly not Charles. Sooo.....?


https://bleacherreport.com/articles/...rs-of-all-time

Okay, you use the bleacher report, I'll use what modern boxing historians are saying. Several of them as a collective group.

Maybe one day you'll get one right.

[Dr. Z]

I thought I was on a ward with a few mental cases...

That guy said what he said, and he meant it. Anyway a mod deleted that part. Posts about another person's family have no business here.

[travestyny]

What would Charles be on this list when his last fight was over 60 years ago. It's not dumb, it's a historical list. Talk about not being the sharpest tool in the shed

It's talking about the best boxers of the last 80 years dumbass

[travestyny]

Okay, you use the bleacher report, I'll use what modern boxing historians are saying. Several of them as a collective group.

Maybe one day you'll get one right.

Maybe you should use the list that you already used...the one that had Charles 27 and Johnson 8th


Blame yourself, dumbo.

[Dr. Z]

Maybe you should use the list that you already used...the one that had Charles 27 and Johnson 8th


Blame yourself, dumbo.

Keep using bleacher report, I plan too sticking to primary sources and boxing historians.

Got it " Travesty "