Why is Jack Johnson rated so high...

[Willie Pep 229]

I don't know what you are talking about. Did I make a big deal about him using the word, "boy," or are you? I know I didn't, so what is the point of your message?


By the way, something I find funny. I remember you being on record saying that the reason he declined Jeannette was not because he was "colored." But now you seem to be on board with that being the reason. Funny how things change, huh?

I'm not on record saying that I'm on record saying it was a dirty trick and he had no obligation to take such a tough fight unprepared.

You do love to twist things. I am sure you will be able to take one of my sentences out of context and twist it because that's what you do.

In regards to the use of the term boy I was highlightening how deep the racial prejudice went.

It is unlikely Dempsey was thinking black when he say 'I'll fight . . .'

How do you parse John L.'s claim 'I can lick any son of a ***** in the house' - would you expect him to take a black man's challenge after saying that?

It is what it was, you just want to single out Dempsey; you can't bare the thought of someone calling Dempsey great.

Your obsession is kind of sad.

[travestyny]

I'm not on record saying that I'm on record saying it was a dirty trick and he had no obligation to take such a tough fight unprepared.

You do love to twist things. I am sure you will be able to take one of my sentences out of context and twist it because that's what you do.

In regards to the use of the term boy I was highlightening how deep the racial prejudice went.

It is unlikely Dempsey was thinking black when he say 'I'll fight . . .'

How do you parse John L.'s claim 'I can lick any son of a ***** in the house' - would you expect him to take a black man's challenge after saying that?

It is what it was, you just want to single out Dempsey; you can't bare the thought of someone calling Dempsey great.

Your obsession is kind of sad.

I have myself called Dempsey great, so why do you have to constantly lie?


Are you saying that you never said him pulling out of the Jeannette exhibition had nothing to do with race? You can make accusations against me all you like, but it's about proof. I'm pretty sure I can prove everything I say. Can you?

[Willie Pep 229]

I have myself called Dempsey great, so why do you have to constantly lie?


Are you saying that you never said him pulling out of the Jeannette exhibition had nothing to do with race? You can make accusations against me all you like, but it's about proof. I'm pretty sure I can prove everything I say. Can you?

Eveyone who disagrees with you is a liar - Yes I'm a liar.

Iit's like arguing with a seven year old. - You win.

[travestyny]

Eveyone who disagrees with you is a liar - Yes I'm a liar.

Iit's like arguing with a seven year old. - You win.

If it can be proven that you're a liar, then you're a liar.

It's quite simple.

Did you ever state it wasn't about race, because i remember you doing just that. But now you are saying that it was about race. Right?


Pretty sure you are also on record saying that it was racial (and racist) when Harry Greb was in a similar situation with Joe Gans. You said it was a colorline decision and racist. But for Dempsey who said he didn't agree to face a colored boy, it wasn't? Feel free to explain.

[ShoulderRoll]

Apart from Wills which other black fighters during Dempsey's title reign would have been considered leading contenders and worthy of a title shot?

Besides Wills he refused to fight Jeannette and got booed by the NYC crowd for it.

[Ivich]

Besides Wills he refused to fight Jeannette and got booed by the NYC crowd for it.

That was an exhibition for the war charity Dempsey was not yet champion and Jeannette was nearly 40 years old.Try again.

[ShoulderRoll]

That was an exhibition for the war charity Dempsey was not yet champion and Jeannette was nearly 40 years old.Try again.

Cool.

But ultimately it was a chance to fight a dangerous (although old) black fighter and it didn't happen.

[GhostofDempsey]

Please produce these side bets?You do know it was common practice for fighters to provide post fight cash bonds as evidence of good faith don't you? Because your statement implies you are unaware of this. Do you think Johnson ever had the equivalent of $145,000 to beat with?lol
He fought Jim Johnson without any guarantee an unusual occurrence for him . It was a poor turnout and the receipts were meagre. Given that Langford and Jeannette faced each other for the French Federation's version of the title the next night,I'd say most fight fans opted to pay for the Langford v Jeannette bout wouldn't you?I certainly would have.
Given Johnson's unpopularity with the white public and the authorities,2hy would you suppose he would be the beneficiary of shady decision's? Do you mean like the time he was robbed against Marvin Hart but in reverse?LOL

Johnson was making $ 1,200 a night on the stage at the Folies Bergeres in La Revue Chemise in August 1913 does that answer your question why he didn't fight more?Source New York Age August17th 1913


What other sources of income other than boxing did Jeannette,Langford ,and McVey have to supplement their earnings?

I've already told you he insisted on a $5K side bet to fight Cotton. That's in the book The Sundowners; The History of the Black Prizefighter 1870 - 1930, by Kevin R. Smith. Page 288. If a fighter was more successful he'd move the goal post and insist on more, knowing full well they couldn't come up with that money, yet he made a huge exception for Battling Johnson making far less than $5K. You don't see the conflict because your agenda is to defend Johnson at all costs.

"Today I have deposited with the New York American, $5,000 for a deposit of a side bet of $10,000 to fight any man in the world" ~ Jack Johnson, April 3rd 1909.

Unforgiveable Blackness.

The year before he fought Jim Johnson, he was offered $20K to fight Jeannette. He turned it down insisting on his rate of $30K, yet a year later he is fighting Battling Johnson for far less than $5K.

[travestyny]

you can't bare the thought of someone calling Dempsey great.

Proof that you lied, liar.

LMAO. You are the one that seems upset.

What happened with the Montreal offer in 1923 that Rickard apparently wanted but Dempsey claimed he couldn't get in shape in time. You guys just don't want to accept this. It doesn't change how great of a champion Dempsey was, but he ducked the man. I never said it was because he was afraid of Wills per se.

You can keep telling lies about me. It's sad that the truth hurts your feelings so much that you have to tell lies not only about great boxers (like how you tried to blame Dempsey not fighting Wills on Wills himself) but also about other posters. Sad sad troll.

[travestyny]

I've already told you he insisted on a $5K side bet to fight Cotton. That's in the book The Sundowners; The History of the Black Prizefighter 1870 - 1930, by Kevin R. Smith. Page 288. If a fighter was more successful he'd move the goal post and insist on more, knowing full well they couldn't come up with that money, yet he made a huge exception for Battling Johnson making far less than $5K. You don't see the conflict because your agenda is to defend Johnson at all costs.

"Today I have deposited with the New York American, $5,000 for a deposit of a side bet of $10,000 to fight any man in the world" ~ Jack Johnson, April 3rd 1909.

Unforgiveable Blackness.

The year before he fought Jim Johnson, he was offered $20K to fight Jeannette. He turned it down insisting on his rate of $30K, yet a year later he is fighting Battling Johnson for far less than $5K.

More like a year later he was fighting Moran for $30,000 or more. The Jim Johnson fight was an afterthought and a way to sc**** up some more money. Told you this over and over but since it doesn't fit the obvious agenda you have against the man, you ignore it.

Why do you hate Jack Johnson so much? What did he do to you that you would continue to tell these lies about him? You still won't admit he agreed to fight Jeannette for the title in New York. Why?