How about a list of draws from fighters?

[QueensburyRules]

If you follow the timeline, when they fought and weights, there is no great disparity. They fought at the beginning of 1901. Seems pretty obvious.

- - The Duh of U is as obvious as U thick noggin in a bag of Glue.

Choynski at best was near the same size as Ketchel when he knocked down JJohnson...

[JAB5239]

- - The Duh of U is as obvious as U thick noggin in a bag of Glue.

Choynski at best was near the same size as Ketchel when he knocked down JJohnson...

Right, and johnson who was not at his best yet was very close to the same size. Wow, you're a genius Queenie!!!

[Mr Mitts]

absolute excellent analogy... YES!!! Musky makes me think they are reincarnates... Guys who buy great ideas and repackage them into medoicre, self serving BS. Edison was great figuring out how to get people to pay for something that is all around us and part of the natural world. If Tesla and others had been allowed to work We would not have electrical bills.

Musk IMO is on his best day about as smart as Edison on his worse, both in the toilet compared to the likes of Darwin (who did get a lot of help from prevailing theories), Einstein, who likewise could not touch Bohr, Galileo and Devinci... With Newton perhaps at the proverbial top of the heap! Just my all star line up...

I love these thoughts. I would like a separate thread about it. Wrong section though. Some pairs:

Aristotle/Plato
Darwin/Wallace
Locke/Hobbs
Edison/Tesla
Freud/Jung
Newton/Leibniz
Bolyai/Lobachevsky
Schopenhauer/Hegel

[billeau2]

I love these thoughts. I would like a separate thread about it. Wrong section though. Some pairs:

Aristotle/Plato
Darwin/Wallace
Locke/Hobbs
Edison/Tesla
Freud/Jung
Newton/Leibniz
Bolyai/Lobachevsky
Schopenhauer/Hegel

Those are excellent pairings. You could take the Plato: Aristotle and Even extend it to St. Augustine: st Thomas Aquinas.

Hegal almost destroyed philosophy subjugating it to history and was so popular his classroom was standing room only. Meanwhile Arthur schopenhauer who was quite a decent philosopher could get no students. Really shameful.

It's always nice to meet another philosophy guy. It is my first love, I studied it for quite some time in school. And people just don't look at the great things anymore. I really liked Martin Heidegger. I also thought Carl Jung was way past his time in history. Just a wonderful thinker. Of course I also really like Freud for different reasons entirely.

[Mr Mitts]

Those are excellent pairings. You could take the Plato: Aristotle and Even extend it to St. Augustine: st Thomas Aquinas.

Hegal almost destroyed philosophy subjugating it to history and was so popular his classroom was standing room only. Meanwhile Arthur schopenhauer who was quite a decent philosopher could get no students. Really shameful.

It's always nice to meet another philosophy guy. It is my first love, I studied it for quite some time in school. And people just don't look at the great things anymore. I really liked Martin Heidegger. I also thought Carl Jung was way past his time in history. Just a wonderful thinker. Of course I also really like Freud for different reasons entirely.

I do not have any special expertise in philosophy. I like abstract thinking though. It is a long way from just Kant to Sartre and I harvested only bits and pieces here and there. But also I am addicted to making lists, which helps. Different standards: for math, level of difficulty and/or volume; for science, level of difficulty and experimental verification; for philosophy (you might want to help me out here), making sense, breaking barriers, expanding consciousness and providing an historical view of human abstract thinking at its highest levels.

[billeau2]

I do not have any special expertise in philosophy. I like abstract thinking though. It is a long way from just Kant to Sartre and I harvested only bits and pieces here and there. But also I am addicted to making lists, which helps. Different standards: for math, level of difficulty and/or volume; for science, level of difficulty and experimental verification; for philosophy (you might want to help me out here), making sense, breaking barriers, expanding consciousness and providing an historical view of human abstract thinking at its highest levels.

More power to you. That's the best because when people really have an interest it all comes alive. I wish more people would take an interest like you have done. When you read philosophy you just get a good sense for the big picture.

[Marchegiano]

Does a great fighter draw so often? I think Jack was lucky on some draws.
​​

Is that all this tussle is over?

Bro, you need to be talking about some sharp records for draws to be a deficit. I mean, it can be a tie breaker where all else is equal but that's about it.


Yes great fighters wrack up draws, especially when the articles are stipulating things like if X gets Y down he wins but if Y gets anything but a KO it's a draw kind of bull. Double when it's backed by **** all but "AI"





Me:

How many Draws are on Jack Johnson's record?



The most powerful AI bots' responses:


Microsoft Copilot:

Jack Johnson, the legendary boxer, had a total of 10 draws in his professional boxing career2. His career was marked by significant achievements and challenges, making him one of the most influential figures in boxing history.

Is there anything specific you'd like to know about his career or any other boxing legends?



Meta Llama:

Jack Johnson, the American professional boxer, has 6 draws on his record.



Hangzhou DeepSeek:

Jack Johnson, the former heavyweight boxing champion, had a memorable career with a record that includes a small number of draws. While the exact number is a bit uncertain due to the nature of boxing statistics from that era, it is estimated that he had between 0 and 5 draws throughout his career. His record was marked by more wins than losses, reflecting his championship status.


OpenAI GPT:

As of my last update in October 2023, Jack Johnson, the former heavyweight boxing champion, had a professional record that included 27 wins, 8 losses, and 10 draws. However, records can change over time, so it's always a good idea to check the latest statistics from a reliable sports database or boxing organization for the most current information.





Me: What is your source for this?


Copilot: My source for Jack Johnson's boxing record is Wikipedia. According to the information available, he had a total of 10 draws in his professional boxing career.
If you have any more questions about boxing history or anything else, feel free to ask!


Llama: I don't have a specific source to confirm the exact number of draws on Jack Johnson's record. My previous response was an error. For accurate information, I recommend checking a reliable source such as BoxRec or other reputable boxing databases.


DeepSeek: My response was based on general historical knowledge of Jack Johnson's career and the challenges of sourcing accurate statistics from the early 20th century boxing era. Boxing records from that time were often inconsistent, incomplete, or undocumented, making precise numbers difficult to confirm.

Jack Johnson, as the first African American heavyweight champion, is a notable figure in boxing history, but his career statistics are not as well-documented as those of modern boxers. For more precise and authoritative information, I recommend consulting historical boxing databases or reputable sources that specialize in boxing history, such as the Boxing Hall of Fame or biographies of Jack Johnson.

If you're looking for exact numbers, those resources would be the best place to verify his record.


GPT: My response is based on general knowledge and historical records of Jack Johnson's boxing career up to October 2023. For the most accurate and up-to-date statistics, I recommend checking reputable sports databases, boxing record websites, or historical sports archives. These sources typically provide detailed records of boxers' careers, including wins, losses, and draws.








Given Dr.Z is withholding exactly which chat bot he uses to not do research and spread AI driven misinformation I decided I'd expose this tool using the biggest, most powerful AI bots produced and accessible to the public.


Are ANY of them right? Any of them even using a source worth mention? Is "general knowledge" a source? Wiki, I made it up, and general knowledge might explain why 4 AIs came back with 10, 6, 5, and 10.


Okay, whatever, let's look at Wikipedia given that ios the ONLY source actually given to me by 4 of the world's best AI bots.

94 fights 54 wins 11 losse


So Wiki actually claims 11 ... not 10 ...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Johnson_(boxer)



Where is the 10?



Oh your super impressive AI only read the tiny window to the right under the picture for the quick stats and did not even scroll down to realize 2/3 times it was typed 11, the record breakdown shows 11, it's more likely the wiki author meant 11 given most of the page claims 11 and your fancy AI that is using a poor source didn't even notice the majority of that source claims 11 so it reports 10.




That's a spanking bro. Stop using AI, you are a better poster without it. Maybe draws should matter to us, I dunno, I'm distracted by the piss poor AI info.


Boxrec has 11.

[QueensburyRules]

- - Got a library of 2000 books and 2000 more magazines and been collecting the local rag for over 2 decades now as part of the historical record of my locale, so I ain't gonna splice baloney on a boxing forum when I can stick to boxing...yeah!!!

[JAB5239]

Johnson 6-1-0 v Klon***e 19-5-0. Klon***e had fought,Goddard.Martin,Childsx4,Quinn

Johnson 5-1-1 v Scanlan 27-3-4. Scanlan had fought,Creedon x2 ,Stift,Hall,Quinn,Root x2,Byers,Ryan.

Johnson 5-2-2 v Stift 22-10-8 .Stift had fought,Creedon,McCormick,McCoy,Smithx2

Johnson 5-2-3 v Everett 27-14-0. Everett had fought Childsx2,Sharkey,Choynski,Russellx2,Jackson,Jeffri es, Armstrong,Griffin,Kennedy,Martin.

Johnson 5-3-4 v Griffin 24-3-6 Griffin had fought, Jeffries,Kennedy,Martin x2

The beatings shall continue until morale improves!!

Can we put this thread to bed now? It's been proven beyond a shadow of a doubt what the OP was trying to do with Johnson's recored, and he's failed miserably. I will say a lot of other good stuff came out of this thread though.

[Marchegiano]

The beatings shall continue until morale improves!!

Can we put this thread to bed now? It's been proven beyond a shadow of a doubt what the OP was trying to do with Johnson's recored, and he's failed miserably. I will say a lot of other good stuff came out of this thread though.

Yes, I see no reason to continue,some excellent contributions from posters,that absolutely demolished the OP's agenda,enough now.

Okay but hear me out.


subjects like why some newspaper sources are admissible into official records and others are not and the era of the 4 rounder both leading to inordinate numbers of draws on records from the period were good topics.

We can just stop picking on Z and continue to talk about draws. I'm still kind of curious who has the most.


If NSW-D's are real fights what makes NSW-Ws and Ls less real, legit, official? I still don't get that one. Either way, I had assumed I could find a boxer with a healthy mix of both that was in the hundreds. 4 rounder draws and NSW draws. I didn't though. I mean, I did, but they only go to the 60s.