Why Does Jack Johnson Get a Pass on Opposition while Marciano Does Not?

[Dempsey-Louis]

"The funny thing about Langford is that he's half-blind, and he comes to Doc Kearns [manager of heavyweight champion Jack Dempsey] in the '20s -- and remember, Sam Langford has been fighting since the aughts -- and he wants to fight Dempsey. And Doc Kearns says, 'Sam, we were looking for somebody easier.'

"He was half-blind, he was a goddamned middleweight, and he was that good."

This just sounds like Kearns was being complementary (while saying no) to the old fighter. I don't think Kearns words should be interpreted in the manner you are suggesting.

[Mr.MojoRisin']

Look how many excuses you just made


1. The fight wasn't in Philly. What I posted clearly says that the fight was in New York. And I posted that it was to be a 6 round exhibition. Just because you're triggered that he didn't want anything to do with Jeanette, don't blame me for that shlt. I showed the proof and I can show more proof via newspapers.

2. So you found that he fought another black guy. Great. The dud (intended spelling) had an 0-4 record. Dempsey fought him during his very first fight. Cong**** on correcting me about that.

3. Did he fight a black guy since the dude broke three of his ribs? NOPE.

4. Seems like most thought he lost that draw to me...

1. You said that Jeanette ran him out of New York moron. Dempsey was in New York in 1916. Nothing about Jeanette was proposed. It was Philly that the ex. match with Joe Bonds was proposed according to your source.

2. Now you're major lack of boxing knowledge on the era is really apparent. A.) You didn't even know Boston Bearcat was black. B.) The record on boxrec is obviously incomplete as are MOST fighters from that era due to lack of records. If you had the faintest idea of what you're talking about you would know that no fighter fights one fight in 1916 then ****ing quits for 6 years. Lmao idiot. Also, Bearcat fought Langford which isn't included on the record.

3. So which black guys were around that a match was possible with? Only white fighters were getting a shot at the title and after Dempsey hooked up with Kearns he was being groomed for the title from then on out.

4. It doesn't really matter what it seems like to you. Clearly you have a severe lack of knowledge on the subject entirely. Do you think because you bold something that we can't read the rest of the text? If you were looking at it from an objective point of view you would see that there are several varying degrees saying who won. Some say it was Dempsey, some say it was Johnson, some say it was a draw. From the accounts it sounds like Dempsey was giving it right back to Johnson as well and finished strong. It was a rightful draw.

[travestyny]

"The funny thing about Langford is that he's half-blind, and he comes to Doc Kearns [manager of heavyweight champion Jack Dempsey] in the '20s -- and remember, Sam Langford has been fighting since the aughts -- and he wants to fight Dempsey. And Doc Kearns says, 'Sam, we were looking for somebody easier.'

"He was half-blind, he was a goddamned middleweight, and he was that good."

This just sounds like Kearns was being complementary (while saying no) to the old fighter. I don't think Kearns words should be interpreted in the manner you are suggesting.

Well, who knows. Who am I to say. Who are you to say? The author of the piece wrote it that way, but who is he to say?

That's what the article says. You are free to take it how you want, of course.

[Dempsey-Louis]

Me thinks, there was much more resistance to 'mixed bouts' then you are allowing for, especially when there was a title at stake.

Note below how the Sate of New Jersey (in 1922) would consider a Willard fight so long as he could prove he was in fighting shape, but how there is no possibility for a Wills fight, racially labeled 'such bouts.'

This was important because NJ was telling Rickard he couldn't use his Boyles Thirty Acre stadium (which Rickard built) for a Wills bout.

Ironically two years later NJ would allow Rickard to stage the Wills-Firpo bout at Boyles Thirty Acres.

I wonder if there was a change in government or did they not see Wills-Firpo as a mixed bout ("such a bout").

[travestyny]

1. You said that Jeanette ran him out of New York moron. Dempsey was in New York in 1916. Nothing about Jeanette was proposed. It was Philly that the ex. match with Joe Bonds was proposed according to your source.

Seems that you are the moron. Can you read? It says clearly that it took place in New York.




Now read it carefully again. It will explain who the moron is!!!

2. Now you're major lack of boxing knowledge on the era is really apparent. A.) You didn't even know Boston Bearcat was black. B.) The record on boxrec is obviously incomplete as are MOST fighters from that era due to lack of records. If you had the faintest idea of what you're talking about you would know that no fighter fights one fight in 1916 then ****ing quits for 6 years. Lmao idiot. Also, Bearcat fought Langford which isn't included on the record.

You found a black boxer that Dempsey fought who was making his debut. Whoopty dooo for you. That makes 2. The last one broke his ribs and he didn't fight another after that, did he? Do you have any information to add about this?

3. So which black guys were around that a match was possible with? Only white fighters were getting a shot at the title and after Dempsey hooked up with Kearns he was being groomed for the title from then on out.

I thought I just posted a quotation saying he was offered a fight with Langford but he said he was scared. But then again, I forgot that you can't read properly.

4. It doesn't really matter what it seems like to you. Clearly you have a severe lack of knowledge on the subject entirely. Do you think because you bold something that we can't read the rest of the text? If you were looking at it from an objective point of view you would see that there are several varying degrees saying who won. Some say it was Dempsey, some say it was Johnson, some say it was a draw. From the accounts it sounds like Dempsey was giving it right back to Johnson as well and finished strong. It was a rightful draw.

And clearly you haven't learned to read yet. Once you get hooked on phonics, come back and perhaps you can do better

Question: Did Dempsey say he felt he won or lost? I'll bold it so you can read it more clearly

[Mr.MojoRisin']

When did I twist around anyone's words? Did I ever say he hated black fighters? Go ahead and quote me on that.

You got triggered so badly that you're seeing things that weren't there

You're making it out as if Dempsey was drawing the color line because he wanted to. That's twisting his words around.

Keep overusing the term triggered. Makes you sound like a high school conservative kid that thinks increasing the minimum wage would cause inflation. Lmao loser.

And no, once again you failed to read properly and you got it wrong, just like you tried to correct me saying that he ducked Joe Jeannette in Philly. It was New York.

Alright I'll give you that. But Dempsey wasn't "ran out of New York". That's a blatant misrepresentation on your part and you know it's false. Try to be objective here.

The quotation did NOT say he was only saying he wouldn't fight Jack Johnson. It clearly says that he is drawing the color line. The ****ing quotation says "I will never fight a colored man." What part of that made you get this wrong?

I never said it did. That's what a large chunk of the newspaper article is referring to. They were asking Dempsey about fighting Johnson to which he said he isn't going to fight Johnson because nobody wants to see it. You conveniently leave out the part after he said "I will never fight a colored man" to where he immediately begins to refer to Jack Johnson. That obviously what the context of that statement was.

Calm your ass down, take a breath, and read what was written carefully.

Good, keep telling yourself that.

[Mr.MojoRisin']

It's better than not fighting them at all. And I don't see how you can argue otherwise.

Actually not fighting them at all would have just the same bearing on his resume. You're reasoning for them being good to have on his resume is because they were great black heavyweights of the era. But the catch is at the time Johnson fought them they were not great black heavyweights. For christ sake Langford weighed 156 pounds! There is no way in hell that Johnson should get credit for a win over a middleweight!!

[travestyny]

You're making it out as if Dempsey was drawing the color line because he wanted to. That's twisting his words around.

Keep overusing the term triggered. Makes you sound like a high school conservative kid that thinks increasing the minimum wage would cause inflation. Lmao loser.

You're the one coming in with the "moron" and "loser" comments, and you've shown you can't even read.



Hope that helps you out. As for him drawing the color-line, the quotations speak for themselves. He said it, so what the fvkc do you want me to do about it? Read the damn quotations for yourself. I didn't make him say it

Alright I'll give you that. But Dempsey wasn't "ran out of New York". That's a blatant misrepresentation on your part and you know it's false. Try to be objective here.

LMAO. Ohhhhh nowwww you see that it was in fact YOU that was the moron, huh? Keep that in mind.

I never said it did. That's what a large chunk of the newspaper article is referring to. They were asking Dempsey about fighting Johnson to which he said he isn't going to fight Johnson because nobody wants to see it. You conveniently leave out the part after he said "I will never fight a colored man" to where he immediately begins to refer to Jack Johnson. That obviously what the context of that statement was.

How the fvkc did I conveniently leave out anything when I posted the entire article, you fool? I didn't leave anything out. It's YOU that is leaving the part out that says clearly, "I will never fight a colored man." I believe there was more than one colored man around at that time, yea?

Good, keep telling yourself that.

I wasn't telling myself anything. I was telling you to calm down, take a breath, and read carefully.

[travestyny]

Actually not fighting them at all would have just the same bearing on his resume. You're reasoning for them being good to have on his resume is because they were great black heavyweights of the era. But the catch is at the time Johnson fought them they were not great black heavyweights. For christ sake Langford weighed 156 pounds! There is no way in hell that Johnson should get credit for a win over a middleweight!!

Why didn't Dempsey fight Langford when he was offered the fight in 1916?

[travestyny]

Me thinks, there was much more resistance to 'mixed bouts' then you are allowing for, especially when there was a title at stake.

Note below how the Sate of New Jersey (in 1922) would consider a Willard fight so long as he could prove he was in fighting shape, but how there is no possibility for a Wills fight, racially labeled 'such bouts.'

This was important because NJ was telling Rickard he couldn't use his Boyles Thirty Acre stadium (which Rickard built) for a Wills bout.

Ironically two years later NJ would allow Rickard to stage the Wills-Firpo bout at Boyles Thirty Acres.

I wonder if there was a change in government or did they not see Wills-Firpo as a mixed bout ("such a bout").

But we do know from history that there was indeed a public demand for the bout. That's the entire reason that in the end Dempsey was only able to avoid it by claiming he wasn't given enough money.

There was clearly a demand for him to fight Joe Jeanette in NYC as well, as can be verified by the crowd calling him a coward.

You do realize that Dempsey's license was even suspended by the NY commission until he promised to fight Wills, right? That's how far this went.

The only thing that's relevant to me, it seems, is if Dempsey should take any blame in it. We know his management wanted him to swerve these guys. We also know that Dempsey believed that fighters like Wills deserved a shot. Should he take any blame for it not coming off? I guess it depends on how you want to look at it.