Tweet
Originally posted by Ivich
View Post
Get your aganda straight
-
He saw him in action up to 1905 when he died. i never clamied he saw him in Dec 1908. Siler worte in his book that Jackson was better than Jonson by long odds, and commetied on Jackson hittiing power.
Get your aganda straight -
AgreeOriginally posted by JAB5239 View Post
UK Heavyweights since 1973
Lennox Lewis
Tyson Fury
Anthony Joshua
Frank Bruno
Joe Bugner
Dillian Whyte
Joe Joyce
Daniel Dubois
Derrick Chisora
Hughie Fury
David Price
Herbie Hide
Danny Williams
Gary Mason
Richard Dunn
Audley Harrison
John L. Gardner
Horace Notice
Danny McAlinden
Fabio Wardley
Bunny Johnson
Glenn McCrory
Neville Meade
Sam Sexton
Martin Rogan
Nathan Gorman
Matt Skelton
Gordon Ferris
John McDermott
Colin Kenna
Billy Aird
David Adeleye
Gary Cornish
Michael Sprott
Chris Burton
Pele Reid
David Pearce
Hugroy Currie
Scott Welch
David Allen
Scott Gammer
Mark Krence
James Oyebola
Wayne Llewellyn
Julius Francis
Clifton Mitchell
Frazer Clarke
Les Stevens
Solomon Dacres
Adam Fogerty
Nick Webb
Terry O'Connor
David Dolan
Mike Holden
Kash Ali
Noel Quarless
Stewart Lithgo
Chris Billam-Smith
Paul Lister
Ishaq Hussein
Tom Dallas
Manny Burgo
Tommy McCarthy
David Howe
Neil Malpass
Tony Moore
Jon Lewis ****enson
Derek Williams
Terry Mintus
Paul Sykes
Steve Garber
Rocky Campbell
Jack Massey
Steve Robinson
George Scott
John Fury
Tommy Kiely
Dominic Akinlade
Denton Ruddock
Tony Blackburn
Gary McConnell
Nick Campbell
Stan McDermott
Johnny Fisher
Joe Awome
Andy Palmer
Sid Paddock
Bobby Hennessey
Tom Little
Chris Healy
Winston Allen
Tommy Welch
Dorian Darch
Daryll HallComment
-
QUOTE=Dr. Z;n31869098]
He saw him in action up to 1905 when he died. i never clamied he saw him in Dec 1908. Siler worte in his book that Jackson was better than Jonson by long odds, and commetied on Jackson hittiing power.
Get your aganda straight [/QUOTE]
No Siler actually discovered Johnson, but died in1908 before Johnson won the title from Burns .
To evaluate Johnson before he wont the title is absurd to put it into perspective it's like rating Ali up until he won the title,when his 2 previous performance were a far from dominant win over Doug Jones and a tko over Henry Cooper who knocked him down and had him woozy when the bell rang to end the round!
You knew Siler never saw Johnson when he was champion, I know you knew because I was the one who told you over on Classic, the forum you are barred from.
Bottom line by omission you made a dishonest post and I picked up on it.Simple as!
Now name another leading boxing expert who said Jackson was by long odds superior to Johnson as you stated?
Don't try and tell me what Siler said in his book I own it, and you do not! Judging from your post you are under the influence of something,I suggest you wait until you are sober or whatever you have taken is out of your system before attempting to reply.Comment
-
No Siler actually discovered Johnson, but died in1908 before Johnson won the title from Burns .Originally posted by Ivich View Post
To evaluate Johnson before he wont the title is absurd to put it into perspective it's like rating Ali up until he won the title,when his 2 previous performance were a far from dominant win over Doug Jones and a tko over Henry Cooper who knocked him down and had him woozy when the bell rang to end the round!
You knew Siler never saw Johnson when he was champion, I know you knew because I was the one who told you over on Classic, the forum you are barred from.
Bottom line by omission you made a dishonest post and I picked up on it.Simple as!
Now name another leading boxing expert who said Jackson was by long odds superior to Johnson as you stated?
Don't try and tell me what Siler said in his book I own it, and you do not! Judging from your post you are under the influence of something,I suggest you wait until you are sober or whatever you have taken is out of your system before attempting to reply.[/QUOTE]
>>> I SHOWED YOU THE LINK OF THE BOOK and the passage of it, remember? The book was published in 1905. I never said anything bout 1908. Old age must be a son a a bit@h! How you forget. Jackson died before 1908 anyway.
Now haivng corrected you, name one historian or ring expert who said Johnson was better than Jackson who saw them saw both in aciton from 1897 - 1905! I'll be waiting, until then you are down usual as I named Siler as one for Jackson, you named zilch. No qucikly switch the topic or mention something else that has nothing to do with what I'm talking about. It is your MO.
Maybe I'll play you game your game. How you like them apples?Last edited by Dr. Z; 05-24-2023, 04:08 PM.Comment
-
>>> I SHOWED YOU THE LINK OF THE BOOK and the passage of it, remember? The book was published in 1905. I never said anything bout 1908. Old age must be a son a a bit@h! How you forget. Jackson died before 1908 anyway.Originally posted by Dr. Z View Post
Now haivng corrected you, name one historian or ring expert who said Johnson was better than Jackson who saw them saw both in aciton from 1897 - 1905! I'll be waiting, until then you are down usual as I named Siler as one for Jackson, you named zilch. No qucikly switch the topic or mention something else that has nothing to do with what I'm talking about. It is your MO.
Maybe I'll play you game your game. How you like them apples?[/QUOTE]
You've corrected nothing,you stated Siler died in1905,he didn't, he died in1908.
Here is your post.
"He saw him in action up to 1905 when he died. "
You down loaded a free excerpt from Siler's book you didn't show it to me and why would I want you to, I own the book?
You stated those who saw both Jackson and Johnson said Jackson was the better by long odds.
Here is your post.
Those who saw him and Jack Jonson said Jackson was the better of the two by long oddh.
"Those "is plural which indicates more than one, I asked you to name another historian who held that view , you haven't done so and you won't.
You made a claim I exposed it as you playing fast and loose with the truth.I made no claims and therefore it is not up to me to provide names for a claim I did not make.
You made a claim I challenged it and you have not replied with another name and we both know you won't.
Not only are you just barely semi literate ,you are also supremely ******.
What exactly is the stimulant you are taking that causes you to type such mindless,contradictory garbage?Last edited by Ivich; 05-24-2023, 05:31 PM.Comment
-
You've corrected nothing,you stated Siler died in1905,he didn't, he died in1908.Originally posted by Ivich View Post
Here is your post.
"He saw him in action up to 1905 when he died. "
You down loaded a free excerpt from Siler's book you didn't show it to me and why would I want you to, I own the book?
You stated those who saw both Jackson and Johnson said Jackson was the better by long odds.
Here is your post.
Those who saw him and Jack Jonson said Jackson was the better of the two by long oddh.
"Those "is plural which indicates more than one, I asked you to name another historian who held that view , you haven't done so and you won't.
You made a claim I exposed it as you playing fast and loose with the truth.I made no claims and therefore it is not up to me to provide names for a claim I did not make.
You made a claim I challenged it and you have not replied with another name and we both know you won't.
Not only are you just barely semi literate ,you are also supremely ******.
What exactly is the stimulant you are taking that causes you to type such mindless,contradictory garbage?[/QUOTE]
>>> You are playing games with the dates to suit your agenda and have no names of histroains who saw both Jackson and Johsnon and said Johnson was better. I do. Siler was the referee for both men in the ring and said Jackson was better by long odds! I showed you the quote here. Who cares if you calim to own the book? You didn't bring up the point previously.
I challenge you to show me a name that said Johnson was bettter than Jackson who saw them both live. Game on. You're down 1-0.Last edited by Dr. Z; 05-25-2023, 05:09 AM.Comment
-
You forgot to mention the legenday pub fighter Joe Savage.Originally posted by Willow The Wisp View Post
Comment
-
>>> You are playing games with the dates to suit your agenda and have no names of histroains who saw both Jackson and Johsnon and said Johnson was better. I do. Siler was the referee for both men in the ring and said Jackson was better by long odds! I showed you the quote here. Who cares if you calim to own the book? You didn't bring up the point previously.Originally posted by Dr. Z View Post
I challenge you to show me a name that said Johnson was bettter than Jackson who saw them both live. Game on. You're down 1-0.[/QUOTE]
Can you not grasp that I have never made any claims that historians rated Johnson above Jackson?Therefore there is no obligation for me to provide names? You stated and I copied your post,that "those who saw them" this was a deliberate misleading of the facts there was never any," those"!
There was one man Siler who passed away in1908,not 1905 as you stated,he died before Johnson's dominating victory over Burns and he never saw any of Johnson's subsequent victories because he was DEAD!
If that does not put a question mark on the validity of his opinion,I don't know what would!
As I said I have no obligation to provide names of experts that rank Johnson above Jackson but I will refer you to some, just to shut your ****** mouth up.
"My three top heavyweights are,in no order,Johnson,Louis ,Ali."Eddie Futch.
The On Line Magazine Ranker.
1.Ali
2.Louis
3.Tyson
5.Holmes
6. Foreman
7. Frazier
8.Liston
9Holyfield.
10.Johnson
Ranker rates the top 25 heavyweights of all time Jackson is not on that list.
The Top 25 Greatest Heavyweight Champions of All Time (ranker.com)
Some older experts.
Nat Fleischer.
1.Jack Johnson
2,Jim Jeffries
3.Fitzsimmons
4.Dempsey
5.Corbett
7.Langford
8.Tunney
9.Schmeling
10.Marciano
Charley Rose
1.Langford
2.Johnson.
3 . Dempsey
4.Louis
5.Jeffries
6.Tunney
7.McVey
8.Marciano.
9.Corbett
10.Baer
Now without any undue research I could provide a dozen or more lists including the up dated Ring Magazine one compiled by experts and fighters Jackson does not feature on any of these lists whereas Johnson is on ALL OF THEM!
If you wish to challenge my statement all you have to do is produce a list compiled by an expert who is not Siler who rates Jackson above Johnson, it's as simple as that!
We both know you will not do so because no such list exists.
What you will do is respond with your typical misspelt ,illogical meandering, bluster, and bull ****.
What happened here is you got caught, by me,trying to say some experts who saw them both rated Jackson above Johnson.I pointed out Siler is the only man who held that view and went into print with it and his own opinion ,must be tempered with the fact that he never saw Johnson when he was the champion.There are no other experts who held that view which is what you implied in your usual dishonest manner. Now
1. Produce a list compiled by an acknowledged expert who rates Jackson aboveJohnson?
2.Produce a list, compiled by an expert which includes Jackson in its top ten all time heavyweights?
The clock has started ticking.
Last edited by Ivich; 05-25-2023, 06:51 AM.Comment
-
- - Easy $$$ by the trilogy that the Mob needed now that the lot is restricted internationally.Originally posted by Willow The Wisp View PostComment
max baer
Comment