Jack Johnson v Wladimir Klitschko

[billeau2]

First off dufus, this thread is about Wladimir and Johnson, not Vitali.
Secondly, there's a reason this was not about Vitali because there is absolutely nothing that would even remotely indicate that Vitali would not completely pulverize a guy like Johnson inside 6 rounds. A great big fighter will always beat a great little fighter. Period.

Both Klitschko's are twice the boxers that Johnson was.

100 years of sports is a big gap there buddy.

Hey! you talking to me? Well well well I don't see no udder Dufus around here! I hope you are not some 16 year old or something.... Think about what people are asking. Its not even the point of view. Soul survivor disagreed with me, so did one of the mods....But when you aggressively go after an assertion you need a counter argument.

[SN!PER]

Wladimir would annihilate Jack Johnson. The fight would be like Kovalev fighting Broner.

Aside from the styles, differences in training, time period, and other factors, the size advantage curbs a lot at the higher weights. Most 215 lb. boxers could handle 245 lb. opponents much easier than a 145 could against a 175.

[mickey malone]

Vile fantasy matchup, that doesn't even bare thinking about, and whoever lands first is probably the answer

[New England]

i've done this one to death, but i'll do it once more.

at his peak, johnson was around or under 200 lbs, and just over 6'. he was called the galveston giant, because size like his was all but unheard of at the turn of the century. his style depended on, and was designed around being big. he fought at range, looking to parry and push away shots while using his legs. when that didn't work, he clinched.

sound familiar?

klitschko has 10X the jab, power, range, and is just too big for johnson to clinch, or work on the inside. when johnson gets close, wladimir would drape an arm over him and push his head down. on the outside, johnson gets thuroughly picked apart by a superior technician with a 50 lb weight advantage and nearly half a foot in height. over half a foot in extra reach, too.

[New England]

Aside from the styles, differences in training, time period, and other factors, the size advantage curbs a lot at the higher weights. Most 215 lb. boxers could handle 245 lb. opponents much easier than a 145 could against a 175.

that's obvious. it's the "big enough division."
an athletic man over 200 lbs can hurt a much larger man. a 150 lb man is different in that regard, especially with a gloved fist.

coming up 6 inches short with your punches is still coming up six inches short, doe. and being completely out of your league when a 250 lb man clinches on you for 12 rounds is also hugely significant.


the most important aspect of the matchup is the styles. johnson was largely defensive. he depended on his size when he was in his prime. he liked range when he could get it, and clinches when he could not.

[soul_survivor]

that's obvious. it's the "big enough division."
an athletic man over 200 lbs can hurt a much larger man. a 150 lb man is different in that regard, especially with a gloved fist.

coming up 6 inches short with your punches is still coming up six inches short, doe. and being completely out of your league when a 250 lb man clinches on you for 12 rounds is also hugely significant.


the most important aspect of the matchup is the styles. johnson was largely defensive. he depended on his size when he was in his prime. he liked range when he could get it, and clinches when he could not.

i've done this one to death, but i'll do it once more.

at his peak, johnson was around or under 200 lbs, and just over 6'. he was called the galveston giant, because size like his was all but unheard of at the turn of the century. his style depended on, and was designed around being big. he fought at range, looking to parry and push away shots while using his legs. when that didn't work, he clinched.

sound familiar?

klitschko has 10X the jab, power, range, and is just too big for johnson to clinch, or work on the inside. when johnson gets close, wladimir would drape an arm over him and push his head down. on the outside, johnson gets thuroughly picked apart by a superior technician with a 50 lb weight advantage and nearly half a foot in height. over half a foot in extra reach, too.

I think this is the first time, any of your posts have made any sense LOL

Good stuff, it's how I see the fight playing out, as long as Wlad doesn't get caught on the chin too often.

[soul_survivor]

Vile fantasy matchup, that doesn't even bare thinking about, and whoever lands first is probably the answer

Why vile? I can understand you thinking it's not a good fantasy match up (imo I think it's special cos you have two of the great heavyweights of their respect eras) but vile? Really?

[bklynboy]

i've done this one to death, but i'll do it once more.

at his peak, johnson was around or under 200 lbs, and just over 6'. he was called the galveston giant, because size like his was all but unheard of at the turn of the century. his style depended on, and was designed around being big. he fought at range, looking to parry and push away shots while using his legs. when that didn't work, he clinched.

sound familiar?

klitschko has 10X the jab, power, range, and is just too big for johnson to clinch, or work on the inside. when johnson gets close, wladimir would drape an arm over him and push his head down. on the outside, johnson gets thuroughly picked apart by a superior technician with a 50 lb weight advantage and nearly half a foot in height. over half a foot in extra reach, too.

Disagree completely. In earlier times (going much further back that 1900) there were periods of starvation and malnutrition. In bad times people were much smaller. In good times, when there was more protein, people were taller. If you were to graph people's average heights you would not see a straight line going up. You would see a wave going up and down coinciding to how much food was available.

Re Johnson being called a Giant because he was taller than the average person.

Here are the heights of champions before and after Johnson:

John L. Sullivan *5′ 10½″
James J. Corbett 6′ 1
Bob Fitzsimmons 5′ 11½
James J. Jeffries *6′ 0
Marvin Hart 5′ 11½
Tommy Burns 5′ 7
Jack Johnson 6′ 0½″*
Jess Willard *6′ 6½
Jack Dempsey 6′ 1

JJ wasn't tall compared to the others. I just went to BoxRec and looked up some of Jack Johnson's opponents.


Fred Russell 6′ 3″
Theodore Van Buskirk 6'0
Joe Kennedy 6′ 2
Klon***e Haynes 6′ 0
Jim Scanlan 5′ 11½″
Joe Choynski 5′ 11
Hank Griffin 6′ 1
Joe Kennedy 6′ 2
Hank Griffin 6′ 1
George Gardner 5′ 11½
Denver Ed Martin 6′ 3½
Sandy Ferguson 6′ 3
Joe Butler 6′ 0½
Black Bill 6′ 0
Jim Jeffords 6′ 4
Peter Felix 6′ 3

[New England]

Disagree completely. In earlier times (going much further back that 1900) there were periods of starvation and malnutrition. In bad times people were much smaller. In good times, when there was more protein, people were taller. If you were to graph people's average heights you would not see a straight line going up. You would see a wave going up and down coinciding to how much food was available.

Re Johnson being called a Giant because he was taller than the average person.

Here are the heights of champions before and after Johnson:

John L. Sullivan *5′ 10½″
James J. Corbett 6′ 1
Bob Fitzsimmons 5′ 11½
James J. Jeffries *6′ 0
Marvin Hart 5′ 11½
Tommy Burns 5′ 7
Jack Johnson 6′ 0½″*
Jess Willard *6′ 6½
Jack Dempsey 6′ 1

JJ wasn't tall compared to the others. I just went to BoxRec and looked up some of Jack Johnson's opponents.


Fred Russell 6′ 3″
Theodore Van Buskirk 6'0
Joe Kennedy 6′ 2
Klon***e Haynes 6′ 0
Jim Scanlan 5′ 11½″
Joe Choynski 5′ 11
Hank Griffin 6′ 1
Joe Kennedy 6′ 2
Hank Griffin 6′ 1
George Gardner 5′ 11½
Denver Ed Martin 6′ 3½
Sandy Ferguson 6′ 3
Joe Butler 6′ 0½
Black Bill 6′ 0
Jim Jeffords 6′ 4
Peter Felix 6′ 3

those are professional HW boxers at a time when HW boxing was attracting many of the planet's big, athletic men. if you're considering them a fair comparison for the size of the average man i'd call that silly.

there will also be much better records kept of the size of the more famous fighters. when heights for HW are tallied mistakenly, it's often on the tall end.


johnson was quite large among his contemporaries. he's well filmed. you can look at his size and style for yourself. he won the title from tommy burns, who was 5'7" and 168 lbs on the day of the fight. several of johnson's opponents were in fact under the LHW limit.


i don't have a ton of time to go through the weights of each of the men you listed, but there are several among them who were markedly lighter than johnson upon first glance, and some of those who outweighed him were at the tail end of their careers.



he was called the galveston giant for show, then?

and what was going on when he fought a fighter with unheard of size at the time in willard [six and a half feet tall, and 240 lbs?]

[bklynboy]

those are professional HW boxers at a time when HW boxing was attracting many of the planet's big, athletic men. if you're considering them a fair comparison for the size of the average man i'd call that silly.

there will also be much better records kept of the size of the more famous fighters. when heights for HW are tallied mistakenly, it's often on the tall end.


johnson was quite large among his contemporaries. he's well filmed. you can look at his size and style for yourself. he won the title from tommy burns, who was 5'7" and 168 lbs on the day of the fight. several of johnson's opponents were in fact under the LHW limit.


i don't have a ton of time to go through the weights of each of the men you listed, but there are several among them who were markedly lighter than johnson upon first glance, and some of those who outweighed him were at the tail end of their careers.



he was called the galveston giant for show, then?

and what was going on when he fought a fighter with unheard of size at the time in willard [six and a half feet tall, and 240 lbs?]

I agree with you that Johnson fought many, much smaller fighters (both in height and weight. The fight game was so much different back then. But people were not tiny compared to now.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heights..._United_States

George Washington, Thomas Jefferson were over 6 foot. And yes others were smaller.

Re Willard - yes he was an anomaly for that time but that held true until the 1990s. The only truly big fighters that I can think of after Willard and before the 1990s were Carnera and Terrell.

And in the 1990s only Riddick Bowe and Lennox Lewis were good. (At least as far as I can remember off hand). Tucker wasn't that good. Grant wasn't much of a player and Valuev was a non-entity. The Ks are good (more because of excellent conditioning and lack of quality opponents).

I think tall fighters and heavy fighters are making it now because a big unskilled guy usually beats a smaller unskilled guy. Tyson Fury is terrible and he is ranked in the top 10.