johnson vs. holyfield

[billeau2]

How great was Johnson? He was a polarizing figure then as he is a polarizing figure now.

[Willie Pep 229]

I'm sure the fight was obviously made a long one to the detriment of Jack Johnson. It's not that Willard didn't have to go through the same thing, but Willard was thought of as the man with the stamina to make it through other than being chinned by Johnson, and Johnson was thought of as the man who would have trouble making it to the finish line. There were various articles written around the fight that spoke of this. It didn't seem to be a secret. I remember reading an article in which Willard stated it plainly before the fight.

OK but did the same hold for Johnson-Jeffries in the desert?

[Willie Pep 229]

How great was Johnson? He was a polarizing figure then as he is a polarizing figure now.

Well 'great' is when half the people love you, half the people hate you, then you're a star. JJ was a star.

Ali, Dempsey, FDR, Trump, . . .

[travestyny]

OK but did the same hold for Johnson-Jeffries in the desert?

Possibly. It didn't really matter though since Johnson toyed with him from beginning 'til end.

[QueensburyRules]

You're talking nonsense. Why would he have to "duck" tommy Burns,.or Langford. they were n where NEARLY as good enough to go more than a few REAL Rounds with him.

You bring up something so obscure that even I have never heard of them. Likely there was no one who'd put up the money for such mismatches, or Johnson was being barred by the authorities of those areas . There are 50 different reasons, assuming that such things were ever thought of, apart from being in your mind . Please provide links for these reports as I would like to know about them. This is a genuine request.

- - Either scattered or addled response. Have no idea how to translate such a stream of unconciosness.

[Willie Pep 229]

Possibly. It didn't really matter though since Johnson toyed with him from beginning 'til end.

Whether JJ dominated Jeffries is an irrelevant distraction to the argument.

You said, the other guy said, (you said) the contemporary newspaper accounts said, that they made JJ go 45 rounds to give the younger Willard an advantage.

So then can we conclude that they made old man Jeffries go 45 rounds in the desert for the same reason?

The fact that the Jeffries fight, the Flynn fight, and the Willard fight were set all for 45 rounds (along with many MW and LW bouts as well) should lead us to conclude that . . .

It was the accepted American promoted fight standard for Championship fights and at the time the decision was made not to give any fighter an advantage.

It is too common to paint JJ as a victim. As always, I realize and willingly state, that JJ was treated unfairly but that doesn't mean EVERYTHING that happened was a conspiracy.

That the Havana fight was scheduled for 45 rounds to punish JJ is IMO tinfoil hat thinking.

Or better described: an excuse.

[travestyny]

Whether JJ dominated Jeffries is an irrelevant distraction to the argument.

You said, the other guy said, (you said) the contemporary newspaper accounts said, that they made JJ go 45 rounds to give the younger Willard an advantage.

So then can we conclude that they made old man Jeffries go 45 rounds in the desert for the same reason?

The fact that the Jeffries fight, the Flynn fight, and the Willard fight were set all for 45 rounds (along with many MW and LW bouts as well) should lead us to conclude that . . .

It was the accepted American promoted fight standard for Championship fights and at the time the decision was made not to give any fighter an advantage.

It is too common to paint JJ as a victim. As always, I realize and willingly state, that JJ was treated unfairly but that doesn't mean EVERYTHING that happened was a conspiracy.

That the Havana fight was scheduled for 45 rounds to punish JJ is IMO tinfoil hat thinking.

Or better described: an excuse.

No it's not. I answered your question specifically. I said perhaps that was indeed the reason for it. I don't know what else you want.


I didn't say anything about a conspiracy theory. What I'm saying is that there was no secret that the longer the fight was set for, the more it was in JJ's disadvantage.

[edgarg]

- - Either scattered or addled response. Have no idea how to translate such a stream of unconciosness.

Your lack of objective education is not my concern it is your alone...and that of whoeve brought you up. They should have made sure that you were not missing school for weeks on end.

[QueensburyRules]

No it's not. I answered your question specifically. I said perhaps that was indeed the reason for it. I don't know what else you want.


I didn't say anything about a conspiracy theory. What I'm saying is that there was no secret that the longer the fight was set for, the more it was in JJ's disadvantage.

- - JJ vs JJ in full pomp 1905, and who U got in a finish fight?

[QueensburyRules]

Your lack of objective education is not my concern it is your alone...and that of whoeve brought you up. They should have made sure that you were not missing school for weeks on end.

- - Ah, an angered, nay insulted, hurt response is better than a scattered response that bears all the markings of someone who was hatched, not born.

Growing up is it for U? Twas I who schooled my teachers since I could read and write before I ever graced the public schools to prevent my parents from being thrown in jail, the way it twas.