History of the Heavyweights part 6 (Jack Johnson)

[butterfly1964]

Why do you say that?

Let me guess the answer...you'd much rather stick to your ways of simply making **** up in your mind, rather than spending some time looking that info up for yourself, yes?

that didn't mean that i wouldn't do it.

[Yogi]

that didn't mean that i wouldn't do it.

Ok, good to hear that you're willing to do your own research and since you said that, I could at least help you out just a little with your previous questions;

Al McCoy: - "National Boxing Association's 8th ranked heavyweight" at the time of the fight with Louis.

Red Burman - 3rd ranked contender in Ring Magazine's 1940 annual ratings in the Heavyweight division (Louis/Burman fight took place in Jan of 1941).

I've covered two of the guys you mentioned, now it's up to you to check up on the third guy, whomever that was.

[SuzieQ49]

u are correct yogi...........


as for jack roper, He was one of 5 fighters louis faced in his 25 title defenses who WEREN'T ranked in the top 10 at the time.

however roper was no bum. far from it. he was a highly experienced fringe contender who knew all the tricks of the trade. He wasn't much of a skillful fighter at all, but one thing roper could do was ****. ask joe louis if he hit hard. in the first round, roper nearly floored the brown bomber with a thunderous left hook which shook the champion all the way down to the knees. Of course once louis shook the affects of that punch off, roper had found doing that to louis was like waking a grizzly bear from a deep sleep. louis then tore into roper knocking the 204lb veteran out cold.

[smasher]

as for jack roper, He was one of 5 fighters louis faced in his 25 title defenses who WEREN'T ranked in the top 10 at the time.

however roper was no bum. far from it. he was a highly experienced fringe contender who knew all the tricks of the trade. He wasn't much of a skillful fighter at all, but one thing roper could do was ****. ask joe louis if he hit hard. in the first round, roper nearly floored the brown bomber with a thunderous left hook which shook the champion all the way down to the knees. Of course once louis shook the affects of that punch off, roper had found doing that to louis was like waking a grizzly bear from a deep sleep. louis then tore into roper knocking the 204lb veteran out cold.

Are you serious? Roper was 39 years old when he fought Louis and had a 54-40-9 record and had been KO'd 13 times, 11 times for the 10 count. He retired with only 28 KO's in 109 fights, some ****ER.

The California Athletic State Commision was criticized for sanctioning this fight and Roper's title shot came under investigation by the state legislative commitee. When called to task on sanctioning this fight the Commission representative rationalized Roper getting the title fight by stating he thought Roper was getting better with age!

After getting clobbered by Louis he lost 3 out of his next 5 before retiring. Roper was probably the worst fighter Louis ever defended against.

[SuzieQ49]

i never said roper was a good fighter, but he was no bum. he was an highly experienced veteran who knew the tricks of the trade, though he wasnt a top 10 contender nor a good fighter, he most certainly could ****. Roper knocked out some pretty good contenders during his career and louis himself testafied roper could hit.

[SuzieQ49]

Roper was also 35 years old, not 39 like you proclaimed.

as for the good contenders he knocked out during his career


pasty perroni
art lasky

both top 10 contenders and he defeated the underated unkown avoided black fighter Seal Harris(joe louis sparring partner). throw seal harris' record out the window. harris was involved in a lot of staged fights.

[smasher]

Roper was also 35 years old, not 39 like you proclaimed.

as for the good contenders he knocked out during his career


pasty perroni
art lasky

both top 10 contenders and he defeated the underated unkown avoided black fighter Seal Harris(joe louis sparring partner). throw seal harris' record out the window. harris was involved in a lot of staged fights.

The 39 was a misprint, the rest was not. A whopping total of 2 contenders defeated in 109 fights and a state commision inquiry and investigation into the validity of Roper's title shot.

" A highly skilled veteran who knew the tricks of the trade". Nice generic comment and positive spin spin on a guy who barely won half of his 109 fights and was KO'd 15 times by the time he retired a year after the Louis annihilation.

How about calling this stiff "a weak chinned, powder punching, and often beaten fringe journeyman who was undeserving of a title fight".

If this guy "was no bum" then I'm curious if you would call ANYONE a bum who has contended for the heavyweight championship.

Who then do you think was the worst opponent Louis dfended against?

[SuzieQ49]

once again u did not read my post carefully,

I said roper was a "highly EXPERIENCED veteran, who knew the tricks of the trade." that is a very accurate assesment.



powder punching? ask joe louis if he was a powder puncher, because jack roper certainly was not!


i never said roper "deserved a title shot" but he was no bum. a bum is a guy who is not even good enough to be considered a journeyman. roper was a very good journeyman.





If I had to pick the worst fighter louis defended again, it would be jack roper or tony musto.

[Kid Achilles]

If Joe Louis said Jack Roper could punch, I'm sure he could punch. You talk as if anyone with a huge punch would have a winning record when there's guys even today who could knock out a horse but don't have the complete package to be successful in boxing. No one's saying that Roper was a good fighter, just that the guy could swat.

I don't know why you insist on arguing otherwise, what's the point? Do you want someone to concede that Roper couldn't hit worth a damn when that'd be a lie?

[Zab06]

Personally, I think fighters should be ranked on what they actually did in the ring during their respective eras, not what they may or may not be able to do with others of different times.

I totally agree with this. Fighters are better ranked on someone's list when they take accomplishments into consideration. If they beat the best that was offered to them then I feel that has a lot to do with it.