The great HW men who wouldn't quit.

[JAB5239]

I also E Mailed both Roberts and Ward 2 days ago, asking for their sources on this subject , and asking in the,light of Pollack's book quoting 4 sources,do they think Johnson quit? I have had no reply so far.

I'm not calling either man a liar. Maybe they were misguided, I don't know. But when writing a biography is it not common practice to reveal the sources you've used to remain transparent? I don't know what the guidelines to journalistic integrity. I would hope one of us hears back to clear the air.

[Bronson66]

I'm not calling either man a liar. Maybe they were misguided, I don't know. But when writing a biography is it not common practice to reveal the sources you've used to remain transparent? I don't know what the guidelines to journalistic integrity. I would hope one of us hears back to clear the air.

I'm not calling them liars either,just authors who did not do the necessary research to reach definitive conclusions.
Something that cannot be said about Pollack!

[Dr Z]

What i understand is that you cannot give a primary source from either book. I also understand you don't know any of those guys besides the occasion run in on a boxing website.

Are you trying to tell me one of the most consummate historians alive would share Pollacks stuff because he likes him? That is almost laughable that you would even suggest that.

What's really telling right now is Roberts hasn't gotten back to me about his sources. I wonder why?

You can say what you want about Pollack being a fanboy, but the fact is he's a meticulous researcher and this has been proven. Most notably on this particular topic which he took you to school on over at ESB.

I do not have all of their primary sources, nor do you. I take them at thier word that Jonshon quit. Do you doubt them both? Well, do you?

I do know and converse with high level IBRO people. Cucco, Cox, Callis ( who may be the best boxing historian living in my opinion ) to name a few. Who the heck do you know? Names please cowboy. None of these guys I know post on the web anymore as they are too many ignorant types who love to troll.

But this thread is not about who I know. Most boxing historians are not familiar with one 1899 fight of Johnson's, which you asked them about.

Johsnon quit. End of. So says Ward, Roberts, and AI. 3 sources There is more...

The guys you mention besides the fanboy are not familiar with the fight. Cox is ( a high level IBRO gut ) and he writes Johnson QUIT! So that's 4.


https://coxscorner.tripod.com/Johnson_Not_As_Great.html

NO Charge. ^^ This link deserves its own post. ^^


Again I seldom post at EBS, but I do post every now and then. That is the end of that. By the way, I communicated with Pollack 10+ years ago and asked him how he came to that conclusion with contradicting sources, to which I got no answer. Big surprise.

[Dr Z]

I've just posted Ward's quotes,I have the book! Ward as I have now said 5 times quotes only one source,The Chicago Tribune and it does not mention Johnson quitting.

You do not post on ESB you are banned for life.

I posted on there yesterday I am a VIP Member ie I do not have to put up with adverts.

Back on this Freemason obsession?

What does Freemasonry have to do with this or any other boxing thread?

You have several times stated Freemasons are,*****philes,and devil worshippers.

You aren't right in the head,and it isn't a secret!LOL

You were challaged to quote in full context Ward's detailing how Johnson quit . I think we know you don't want to type that out! Prove me wrong and list it word for word. You won't, but it is mildly fun to ask.As usual you will silk away.


Johsnon was a freemason, a law breaker, a wife beater and a POS human being like yourself. Perhaps you treat women badly, but I do not care to know you find out. You did mention you give money to a ********* org , and like to hunt rabbits and shoot their defenseless head off. You are really a de****able person, Tony Mcvey . A.K.A. Tonto 62, Ivich. Bronson and all the rest of you cover names that you have used in the past because you have been Banned, .

But you asked me why and I metioned Johnson's feemasonry, and being a pimp, a wife beater and law breaker. Your kind of guy, right? This are reasons why you like him.

[Bronson66]

You were challaged to quote in full context Ward's detailing how Johnson quit . I think we know you don't want to type that out! Prove me wrong and list it word for word. You won't, but it is mildly fun to ask.As usual you will silk away.


Johsnon was a freemason, a law breaker, a wife beater and a POS human being like yourself. Perhaps you treat women badly, but I do not care to know you find out. You did mention you give money to a ********* org , and like to hunt rabbits and shoot their defenseless head off. You are really a de****able person, Tony Mcvey . A.K.A. Tonto 62, Ivich. Bronson and all the rest of you cover names that you have used in the past because you have been Banned, .

But you asked me why and I shoot their defenseless head off. and being a pimp, a wife beater and law breaker. Your kind of guy, right? This are reasons why you like him.

.


I posted Ward's only sourced quote and gave the chapter,it's in, and page it is on,I can't do any more than that.
If you think I left anything out ,post it yourself !

Oh that's right , you can't.Because you don't actually have the book,nor have your read it! lol
challaged, silk,johsnon,feemasonry,I do not care to know to find out, shoot their defenseless head off.johsnon.

Christ you are rabid!


I hope sincerely hope everyone on this forum reads your post,it's a sad, pathetic litany of , phobic, poisonous,obsessional sewage.

For my part I shall re- post it from time to time, so that everyone can see you are not a rational human being.

You need to get some help because you are definitely, to quote Freddie Mercury,"knitting with only one needle"," driving on only three wheels these days,","missing one final screw","one wave short of a shipwreck," "one card short of a full deck,""not quite the shilling" and you ,"think you're a banana tree ."

Thank you for demonstrating in your post,just what a ,ludicrous , illiterate , half wit you are!
I couldn't have done a better job on you myself!LOL

[Bronson66]

I do not have all of their primary sources, nor do you. I take them at thier word that Jonshon quit. Do you doubt them both? Well, do you?

I do know and converse with high level IBRO people. Cucco, Cox, Callis ( who may be the best boxing historian living in my opinion ) to name a few. Who the heck do you know? Names please cowboy. None of these guys I know post on the web anymore as they are too many ignorant types who love to troll.

But this thread is not about who I know. Most boxing historians are not familiar with one 1899 fight of Johnson's, which you asked them about.

Johsnon quit. End of. So says Ward, Roberts, and AI. 3 sources There is more...

The guys you mention besides the fanboy are not familiar with the fight. Cox is ( a high level IBRO gut ) and he writes Johnson QUIT! So that's 4.


https://coxscorner.tripod.com/Johnson_Not_As_Great.html

NO Charge. ^^ This link deserves its own post. ^^


Again I seldom post at EBS, but I do post every now and then. That is the end of that. By the way, I communicated with Pollack 10+ years ago and asked him how he came to that conclusion with contradicting sources, to which I got no answer. Big surprise.

You do not post on ESB,you are permanently banned. Prove me wrong post one of your responses ? It's that easy to do!


MendozaHrgovic = Next Heavyweight champion of the world.banned





"Callis ( who may be the best boxing historian living in my opinion ) "
Above are your words.
Below are Callis' on Jack Johnson.


"Jack Johnson was the first black Heavyweight Champion and, as such, was the hero of his race. His ability in the ring is unquestioned, possibly unequalled. He could do it all, do it well, and do it with ease.
His personal conduct outside the ring (and many times within it) is a different matter. Modesty and humility were no part of this man. He was extremely arrogant and fun-loving and lived life at a reckless, carefree, helter-skelter, “get out of my way”, breakneck speed and manner. His behavior has been described as a public scandal and an irritant to white America. As a result, he was easily the most hated champion.
The effort to dethrone him brought about the search for the “Great White Hope” during his 1908-1915 reign and produced an array of talent that has rarely been matched in any other period. But, even they could not touch Johnson in his prime.
Johnson began a fight extremely cautious, quiet, and on the defensive (unless forced otherwise). As he slowly and surely turned the tide of battle his way, he became more aggressive and destructive in his style of fighting and abusive with his tongue. He preferred to “punish” his man rather than knock him out.
Jack gave the impression of holding back during a fight, never going all out, and never pushing to the limit. “Dumb” Dan Morgan said, “I had the feeling he could demolish an opponent any time he chose.”
Yes, he could get rough if he wanted. He cracked “Fireman” Jim Flynn’s jaw, broke Stanley Ketchel’s teeth off at the gum, and flattened Bob Fitzsimmons and left him glassy eyed and mumbling to himself. He “beat up” Sam Langford, breaking his nose in the process, and left an old Jim Jeffries in a battered heap.

He knocked Marvin Hart out of the ring, and knocked Tommy Burns down twice in the first two rounds, broke his nose, and then taunted him for the next twelve rounds before he got bored and finished him off."

Do you agree with them?

[JAB5239]

I do not have all of their primary sources, nor do you. I take them at thier word that Jonshon quit. Do you doubt them both? Well, do you?

I do know and converse with high level IBRO people. Cucco, Cox, Callis ( who may be the best boxing historian living in my opinion ) to name a few. Who the heck do you know? Names please cowboy. None of these guys I know post on the web anymore as they are too many ignorant types who love to troll.

But this thread is not about who I know. Most boxing historians are not familiar with one 1899 fight of Johnson's, which you asked them about.

Johsnon quit. End of. So says Ward, Roberts, and AI. 3 sources There is more...

The guys you mention besides the fanboy are not familiar with the fight. Cox is ( a high level IBRO gut ) and he writes Johnson QUIT! So that's 4.


https://coxscorner.tripod.com/Johnson_Not_As_Great.html

NO Charge. ^^ This link deserves its own post. ^^


Again I seldom post at EBS, but I do post every now and then. That is the end of that. By the way, I communicated with Pollack 10+ years ago and asked him how he came to that conclusion with contradicting sources, to which I got no answer. Big surprise.

Lmao....I read that article years ago. First question. Do you ever stop making things up? Second question. Can you highlight and copy the part where he talks about Johnson quitting against Haynes? And lastly, that video is about Johnsons fighting style and how he may have fared against other all time greats. Maybe you didn't notice, but Cox still rates Johnson in the top 10 all time. Pollack revealed his primary sources, something your two authors have not. Know when you're beaten Mendoza.

[Bronson66]

I do not have all of their primary sources, nor do you. I take them at thier word that Jonshon quit. Do you doubt them both? Well, do you?

I do know and converse with high level IBRO people. Cucco, Cox, Callis ( who may be the best boxing historian living in my opinion ) to name a few. Who the heck do you know? Names please cowboy. None of these guys I know post on the web anymore as they are too many ignorant types who love to troll.

But this thread is not about who I know. Most boxing historians are not familiar with one 1899 fight of Johnson's, which you asked them about.

Johsnon quit. End of. So says Ward, Roberts, and AI. 3 sources There is more...

The guys you mention besides the fanboy are not familiar with the fight. Cox is ( a high level IBRO gut ) and he writes Johnson QUIT! So that's 4.


https://coxscorner.tripod.com/Johnson_Not_As_Great.html

NO Charge. ^^ This link deserves its own post. ^^


Again I seldom post at EBS, but I do post every now and then. That is the end of that. By the way, I communicated with Pollack 10+ years ago and asked him how he came to that conclusion with [NB]contradicting[/B] sources, to which I got no answer. Big surprise.

You do not have .
ANY PRIMARY SOURCES!

You seldom post on EBS?

Here is an old example of you lying.Klompton made list of fights that do not exist
Among them are
Fitzsimons v Ruhlin
Langford v Hague
You replied

"If you ask the right people, you might be able to see one of the above fights in green."

You said the Ruhlin v Fitz fight was filmed and bet me,it wasn't.

I spoke to Pollack about it ,he confirmed what Gilbert Odd ,and Klompton had said , the projector failed to work.

You then said you had an assurance fromTed Spoon that the fight was filmed,I contacted Ted and he stated he had said no such thing.
A fake re-enactment of the fight was made by Lubin,and you said that counted as the real fight being filmed and reneged on our bet.


You said you had seen Langford v Hague.You haven't.

Klompton then replied tearing you a new anus,telling you no film of the fight exists.

I have a report of the fight,and two incidents standout,one in the ring, before the fight started and one during the fight,I asked you to describe either. you did not reply.

1. 
   MENDOZA
   You are literally the only poster that consistently prefers secondary to primary sources on a regular basis. The ONLY one.
   
   Indeed, those men don't post here. For every single other member of the forum that is cause to prioritise primary sources.
   
   But not for you.
   
   This is due to your embarrassing inherent biases that define you completely and the specific reason that serious posters regard you as a joke.

   Without video or a more detailed account, its hard to say exactly what happened

   
   
   
   
   Correct.
   
   This makes your biased presumptions even more ridiculous.
   
   
   
   
   McGrain, Jul 28, 2012Report
   #55Like+ QuoteReply
2. MendozaHrgovic = Next Heavyweight champion of the world.bannedFull Member

ADAM POLLACK

1. Ward discusses the Klon***e-Johnson fight on page 28. His only primary source citation to the bout is the Chicago Tribune, May 6, 1899. Actually the Tribune report came out on May 7, not May 6. The bout took place the night before, on May 6. Hence the next day report. But he does quote the Tribune's May 7 report, which is quite limited.
   
   The Chicago Tribune said the local Chicago boxer, Klon***e, defeated Jack Johnson of Springfield, Illinois in the heavyweight class, but it did not say what the specific result was or even how many rounds the bout lasted.

As you were on ESB ,you have been comprehensively owned on this,now STFU, and let us get back to the original subject!

[JAB5239]

You do not have .

ANY PRIMARY SOURCES!

Here is an old example of you lying.Klompton made list of fights that do not exist
Among them are
Fitzsimons v Ruhlin
Langford v Hague
You replied

"If you ask the right people, you might be able to see one of the above fights in green."

Klompton then replied tearing you a new anus.

1. MENDOZA
   You are literally the only poster that consistently prefers secondary to primary sources on a regular basis. The ONLY one.
   
   Indeed, those men don't post here. For every single other member of the forum that is cause to prioritise primary sources.
   
   But not for you.
   
   This is due to your embarrassing inherent biases that define you completely and the specific reason that serious posters regard you as a joke.

   Without video or a more detailed account, its hard to say exactly what happened

   
   
   
   Correct.
   
   This makes your biased presumptions even more ridiculous.
   
   
   
   McGrain, Jul 28, 2012Report
   #55Like+ QuoteReply
2. MendozaHrgovic = Next Heavyweight champion of the world.bannedFull Member

ADAM POLLACK

1. Ward discusses the Klon***e-Johnson fight on page 28. His only primary source citation to the bout is the Chicago Tribune, May 6, 1899. Actually the Tribune report came out on May 7, not May 6. The bout took place the night before, on May 6. Hence the next day report. But he does quote the Tribune's May 7 report, which is quite limited.
   
   The Chicago Tribune said the local Chicago boxer, Klon***e, defeated Jack Johnson of Springfield, Illinois in the heavyweight class, but it did not say what the specific result was or even how many rounds the bout lasted.

I think we all need to realize Z is a wind up merchant, not a boxing fan. This is a guy who claimed he saw Tyson vs Botha and Tyson was up on all the cards when he finally landed the knockout. He posted the score of the fight which he misread, and never even bothered reading the synopsis of the fight let alone have watched it. How can we expect him to know anything or do ANY real research on a fight that happened more the 125 years ago? I honestly feel bad for him at this point.

[Bronson66]

I think we all need to realize Z is a wind up merchant, not a boxing fan. This is a guy who claimed he saw Tyson vs Botha and Tyson was up on all the cards when he finally landed the knockout. He posted the score of the fight which he misread, and never even bothered reading the synopsis of the fight let alone have watched it. How can we expect him to know anything or do ANY real research on a fight that happened more the 125 years ago? I honestly feel bad for him at this point.

Here is a post he made telling Adam Pollack how good he was.

Followed by him,trying to spin sources that fly directly against his narrative,he actually posts sources that contradict his opinion!

1. Adam,
   
   Thank you for posting what you have. I view you as a pragmatic and well informed poster. Unlike McVey you do not use double standard or selective parts of newspapers or prints to make your point without examining the other side of the coin. As I said before, sometimes primary sources vary! These reports offer false information and sometimes contradict each other. It will be tough to make a definitive conclusion here.
   
   
   
   The local Daily Inter Ocean said Klon***e won the fight in the 6th round, when Referee Hogan stopped the bout at the request of a police lieutenant who was close to the ropes.
   
   "It was stopped more on account of Johnson holding on than because of any rough milling. Johnson is about 6 feet 2 or 3 inches, and has a punch in either hand that would fell an ox. He could not land it fair on Klon***e, although a punch in the head in the second round sent Klon***e to the floor. He arose immediately. After the third round Johnson tired rapidly and clung to his man at every opportunity."
   
   
   
   >>Johnson had a punch like an ox, and is about 6’2 or 6’3”. Wrong on both counts. This report indicates a TKO stoppage.
   
   
   
   The Chicago Times-Herald said “John Johnson, the discovery of George Siler, proved to be a husky fighter of enormous height but of insufficient skill to win from ‘Klon***e,’ the latter getting the decision in the fifth round after lieutenant O’Connor had called it off on account of the clinching tactics of the loser.”
   
   
   
   >>This one says it was stopped in round five due to excessive clinching, which would equate to a modern TKO. Once again, “ Enormous height for Johnson who was just a shade over 6 feet tall? “ A bit of an exaggeration, even by the standards of 1900.
   
   The Chicago Tribune said the local Chicago boxer, Klon***e, defeated Jack Johnson of Springfield, Illinois in the heavyweight class, but it did not say what the specific result was or even how many rounds the bout lasted. “Johnson, a long rangy colored man from Springfield, looking something like Fitzsimmons in black, showed up well at the start, but weakened under the steady but ponderous attack of Klon***e.”
   
   
   
   >>>No conclusion here…"
   
   
   
   Summary: Excessive clinching to force a stoppage can be viewed as a form of quitting. Today this fight would be viewed as a TKO loss with tons of boos from the crowd. Imagine what Larry Merchant might say if he witnesses crap like this?! It seems clear that Johnson adapted this tactic because he could not take Klon***e’s blows . What is unclear is if this fight had anything to do with Johnson’s alleged Yellow streak. A man’s character in the ring is seldom tested when things go his way, but here under adversity, Johnson was. The results were telling. Since Siler “ Discovered “ Johnson in Battle Royal’s, it is fair to speculate he would make try to put a positive spin on this one, calming Johnson wasn’t well feed. This would be impossible to prove either way.
   
   
   
   
   
   Mendoza, Jul 26, 2012
   #38
2. McGrainDiamond DogStaff Member
   
   McGrain Mar 21, 2007
   What a terrible post, even by your low standards.
   
   
   
   All this has been done and dusted on ESB years ago when Mendoza/Z was owned by all the forum.
   Here is a reply by McGrain boxing writer,and historian.

   Mendoza said: ↑

   If you don't think excessive clinching to opt out of a fight is a form of quitting, you are mistaken.

   
   
   
   McGrain. And at what point, exactly, did I say I thought that?

   You are very quick to completely discount two very popular book on Johnson, and rally behind four fight reports, which really don't say much and have incorrect information and word description in them.

   
   
   
   I'd rather be quick to discount these books form a position of neutrality than quick to dismiss primary sources from a position of fierce bias, as you are. It's pathetic.

   Mendoza . Finally, I think the promoter not wanting to pay Johnson is very telling here.

   
   
   
   McGrain.Of course you do. Your bias denotes that you do. The possibility that it is bull**** or that the promoter is a ****ing crook would never enter your distorted little mind.

   
   
   
   McGrain, Jul 28, 2012

   Mendoza, what the **** are you on?

   
   
   McGrain, Jul 30, 2012
   
   
   
   Z is totally obsessed with hatred for Jack Johnson he has had this obsession since he first appeared on ESB, in June 2007 he is totally unhinged on the subject.