Why is Jack Johnson rated so high...

[Steak]

OK. This is phenomenon I've seen too many times here on Boxing Scene: The attitude that "if I never heard of his opposition then they must have ******". You simply are NOT going to get a lot of footage from that era so you need to READ about instead of complaining that opponents suck because they ain't on film.

The stategy of "lean(ing) on the smaller man until they were exhausted and then start beating them up." is used by most Heavyweights today, in part because they lack conditioning and want to wear their opponents down before they run out of gas themselves. In Johnson's day when you had 20+ round fights you couldn't just run out there and try to let it all hang out in the first 5 rounds because if your opponent didn't go then it was YOU who were in big trouble. More wrestling was involved as well because this wasn't far removed from when the London Ring Rules were in use and rounds ended when a fighter made contact with ropes. Simple strategy: You muscle your opponent to the ropes, the round ends and the ref separates you, you try and gain a tactical advantage from the separation. Fighters today use clinches to achieve the same thing: Mike Tyson was a past-master at using clinches to get a tactical avantage from the ref separating him and his opponent. As Archie Moore once said: "That's called good thinking."

Poet

yes, I have heard of Johnson's opposition. yes, I have read about them. whats one thing I noticed? all of Johnson's top wins are shared by Wills! no one seems to have a good answer to that.

as for clinching, yes it can be tactical. but I dont see much skill in a big man leaning on middleweights. smart move? sure. but that kind of thing wouldnt work nearly as well on guys the same size as him.

not even most boxing historians will even try to say that Johnson's title defences were impressive wins.

[Poet682006]

yes, I have heard of Johnson's opposition. yes, I have read about them. whats one thing I noticed? all of Johnson's top wins are shared by Wills! no one seems to have a good answer to that.

Misleading. You should check the fine print. There's a 15 odd year difference between Johnson's and Wills respective primes. If Jack Johnson fights Joe Jeanette prime on prime then Harry Wills fights a washed up version of Joe Jeannette. Simple.

as for clinching, yes it can be tactical. but I dont see much skill in a big man leaning on middleweights. smart move? sure. but that kind of thing wouldnt work nearly as well on guys the same size as him.

Do I really need to explain this again or are you being willfully truculant and disregarding what I wrote? Fighters do this sort of thing all the time today and it works quite well with fighters of equal size. You keep harping on Middleweights over and over again. Sam Langford, a WELTERWEIGHT routinely KOed Heavyweights and MIDDLEWEIGHT Bob Fitzsimmons won the Heavyweight title. Ruby Robert was, in fact, kicking the living **** out of the era's "monster" Jim Jeffries before breaking his hands on Jeffries face. Middleweight Jack Burns won the Heavyweight title by KOing yet another Heavyweight.

not even most boxing historians will even try to say that Johnson's title defences were impressive wins.

And you know this how? The fact of the matter is Johnson's most impressive wins came BEFORE he won the title.

Poet

[Steak]

Misleading. You should check the fine print. There's a 15 odd year difference between Johnson's and Wills respective primes. If Jack Johnson fights Joe Jeanette prime on prime then Harry Wills fights a washed up version of Joe Jeannette. Simple.

Jeanette Ill give you.
but McVea was 18 and 19 when Johnson beat him...hardly a prime age. Wills beat him when he was more experienced.
Johnson beat Langford when Langford only weighed 156lbs...while Wills beat him multiple times when Langford was a real heavyweight.

Do I really need to explain this again or are you being willfully truculant and disregarding what I wrote? Fighters do this sort of thing all the time today and it works quite well with fighters of equal size. You keep harping on Middleweights over and over again. Sam Langford, a WELTERWEIGHT routinely KOed Heavyweights and MIDDLEWEIGHT Bob Fitzsimmons won the Heavyweight title. Ruby Robert was, in fact, kicking the living **** out of the era's "monster" Jim Jeffries before breaking his hands on Jeffries face. Middleweight Jack Burns won the Heavyweight title by KOing yet another Heavyweight.

even if it was common practice back in the day, 170lb guys beating 200+ lb guys is not a very good sign. If that happened today, even against the smaller heavyweights like Chagaev or Ibragimov, they would get laughed at.

[j]

****, even Ali has jack in his top ten.

find any footage from anyone who saw jack fight, then challenge that opinion.


i am not even going to respond to this thread anymore. this is pure BS.

[j]

Jeanette Ill give you.
but McVea was 18 and 19 when Johnson beat him...hardly a prime age. Wills beat him when he was more experienced.
Johnson beat Langford when Langford only weighed 156lbs...while Wills beat him multiple times when Langford was a real heavyweight.
even if it was common practice back in the day, 170lb guys beating 200+ lb guys is not a very good sign. If that happened today, even against the smaller heavyweights like Chagaev or Ibragimov, they would get laughed at.

yeah, 'cause fighting back then was exactly like it is today.

[JulioCesaChavez]

Because of his unforgiveable blackness! he is a historic figure more than anything. When looking at past fighters compare them to what they acheived at the time rather than think what they could do V ATG's. Especially when you go that far back when not just boxing but society was primitive.

[Poet682006]

Because of his unforgiveable blackness! he is a historic figure more than anything. When looking at past fighters compare them to what they acheived at the time rather than think what they could do V ATG's. Especially when you go that far back when not just boxing but society was primitive.

I told you Junior to go back to your troll threads and leave the intellectual discussions to the people who are actually suited to hold them ie. NOT you.

Poet

[JulioCesaChavez]

Ignored For Gross ****sexuality And Being A Bore:
poet682006


Broken records are so 1950's, just like your ugly hero from Brockton Massacheusettes!

[slicksouthpaw16]

yes, I have heard of Johnson's opposition. yes, I have read about them. whats one thing I noticed? all of Johnson's top wins are shared by Wills! no one seems to have a good answer to that.

as for clinching, yes it can be tactical. but I dont see much skill in a big man leaning on middleweights. smart move? sure. but that kind of thing wouldnt work nearly as well on guys the same size as him.

not even most boxing historians will even try to say that Johnson's title defences were impressive wins.

*I remember when i explained to you about Johnson's greatness and about him becoming the first black heavyweight champion, and you basically ignored it and said that it meant nothing. *

I think you forget the fact that Johnson is one of the first to put offense and defense together and have a full arsenal of weapons. That was a point when boxing was still developing, and Johnson was so ahead of his time that he outclassed most of the champions back then and came up with his own craft. It seems to me like people just like to look at someone's losses, while totally ignoring their wins and the fact that they fought over 12 times a year. He holds wins over some of the best black boxers of that era, and beat Joe Jeanette about 9 times and 6 in one year if i am remembering correctly.

You have already stated in that thread that i was referring to, that you did not know that much about Johnson. Well why are you spewing things about him not being great and shouldn't be rated that high? No offense, but you should learn about him before coming to conclusions. Its easy to look on boxrec and see losses, but not know the circumstances. This is a sports website that was doing a top 10 great heavyweight's list, and i thought that their analysis of Johnson was spot on.

''Jack Johnson-- He was the first "modern" heavyweight champion. In Johnson's era, boxing began to move its venues from the alleys and backstreets, to more public areas. He was an excellent counter-puncher, and he often preferred not to knock his opponents out in order to continue his punishment. He did have power and could knock an adversary out if pushed. He held the heavyweight title for almost 7 years without a defeat. Of course, being a black heavyweight champion in America in the early 1900s was a challenge to say the least. He had to deal with shady judges and various "great white hopes" who came to challenge him at every turn. His love for white women and taunting white men only exacerbated his problems. He would make life much more difficult for African-American heavyweights who would come after him, as white America did not ever want another Jack Johnson. His ring legacy could not be denied and that is why he makes the list.''

[Poet682006]

Ignored For Gross ****sexuality And Being A Bore:
poet682006


Broken records are so 1950's, just like your ugly hero from Brockton Massacheusettes!

Naw! I wasn't getting under his skin was I? Of course after his next ban and new alt I'll know longer be ignored and can drive him ape-**** again

Poet