Why Jack Johnson is Not as Great as You We’re Told

[ron davis]

Billeau2, I couldn't agree with you more, well done. JJ fought with open (mitt) gloves, which increases the speed (reflexes) of his punches. Peace.

[Longhaul]

Great article by Monte Cox that expresses much of what I have been saying.

Jack Johnson, 78-11-14-2 NC*, was and is considered by many historians and sports writers as one of the greatest heavyweight boxers of all time. There is no questioning Johnson’s historical significance as the first black world heavyweight boxing champion. The fact that he was able to ascend to the heavyweight throne against significant racism and retire from the ring virtually unmarked speaks volumes about his ability. Like Muhammad Ali he had great natural physical gifts, speed, reflexes, anticipation/judgment of distance and strength. He used these abilities as a renowned defensive boxer who could block and counter with a reputation rivaling that of Floyd Mayweather Jr. in our time. The question here is would Johnson’s skill set hold up in a modern ring against a more sophisticated attack? To answer that question we need to take a look at Jack Johnson the boxing stylist.

Nat Fleischer, founder of The Ring magazine, wrote in 1958 that Johnson’s “mastery of ring science, his ability to block, counter, and feint, are still excelled” in his book 50 Years at Ringside. Johnson was primarily a counter-puncher much like Roy Jones Jr. He was lightning-quick in his ability to leap in and score with surprising counter strikes. Like Roy he did not like to lead but preferred to let his opponent bring the fight to him. Johnson rarely threw a lead jab, but instead would slide straight back, glove block his opponent’s leads and then counter. Another thing Jack Johnson has in common with Roy Jones is his ability to fight inside or off the ropes. Jones would fire rapid flurries off the ropes, go to the body and counter. Johnson’s approach was a little different, he would stymie an opponent by holding, shoving their shoulders like George Foreman did against Joe Frazier and would arm lock them in place like Mike Tyson did against Francois Botha, and then use sizzling uppercuts inside while grappling with his opponents. Rarely did Johnson throw combinations but would counter with one or two punches and then slide back so as to lure his opponent to rush at him, like Tommy Burns did time and again, and then pick off their wide lead hooks and jabs negating their primitive rushes and then counter again with one or two punches. This Jack Johnson did better than any heavyweight of his era.

Jack Johnson, often called the “Galveston Giant,” was certainly bigger than most of his opposition which is why he was able to get away with things like the shoulder shove against a shorter fighter; the fact that Johnson was physically bigger and stronger than most of his opposition contributed to his success. The crowding style fighters of Johnson’s day lacked boxing refinement, resembling a nose tackle in American football jockeying for position at the line of scrimmage rather than the finesse of side to side movement that we see arriving with Jack Dempsey and later with Joe Frazier and Mike Tyson. Swarmers like Tommy Burns and Fireman Jim Flynn were cloddish in their aggression, completely lacking cunning and sophistication. Johnson looked like a defensive genius neutralizing their boorish aggression and toying with them with his superior physicality.

Let’s be honest, the heavyweights of this era look questionable on the films we have. One of the best available films is that of the Sam McVea-Battling Jim Johnson bout from 1910. Both McVea and Jim Johnson look completely crude showing no head movement, no side to side movement, little footwork with their heads often straight up rather than chins down, and moving straight back into the line of fire. The film reveals heads up linear attacks, some feinting but also wide open winging punches. Nothing that compares to the tight defense, head slips, and side to side weaving combined with countering that a modern swarmer like Mike Tyson implements. I am reminded of Jimmy Jacobs argument with Nat Fleischer from the Great Debate in the March 1968 Ring. In that article Jacobs relayed how he had shown some films with speed correction to a group of old-timers—without saying who the participants were—the old-timers would shout, “who are these bums” and when told the films were the likes of Jim Corbett, Bob Fitzsimmons, Jim Jeffries. George Dixon and Abe Attell they were silenced.

On the other hand the more recently found Sam Langford-Joe Jeannette film of the same period looks better. Jeannette had an educated jab and better movement while Sam looks indestructible with his power and aggression but even here Jeannette hardly resembles Ezzard Charles in his boxing acumen, nor does the powerful Langford look as sophisticated as the bobbing and weaving Joe Frazier in his attack, relying more on his strength, brutal power and toughness to take it to his opponents. It is noteworthy that Jack Johnson avoided the dangerous Langford once Sam reached the peak of his career. While Jack Johnson is given props for being the first black heavyweight champion it should also be made clear that he too drew the color line not giving Langford, Jeannette or McVea title shots once he was champion.

Mike Tyson spoke of the stylistic problems Jack Johnson would face in a modern ring. In the BBC video Tyson and the Heavyweights, 1988, with British boxing historian Harry Carpenter (this is available on YouTube) Mike explains that the things Jack Johnson did would be so much more difficult to do today because Johnson would block “a punch at a time” and today fighters “throw seven or eight punches, consistent punches.” Johnson could not just slide back and pick off punches out of the air against a fighter like Joe Louis or Evander Holyfield due to their multi-punch combinations. Nor would he be able to nullify a swarmer with a more complex and seasoned attack like that of Frazier or Tyson. Neither Frazier nor Tyson pursued in a straight line like the men that Johnson fought but instead gave angles and side to side upper body movement. Instead of coming straight forward as a perfect target for Johnson’s punches, they slipped to the side and attacked body to head and in combinations. Both of these men would be able to do what the crowding style fighters of his day could not and that is to take away Johnson’s space and force him to rush his punches. Frazier was able to force the greatest escape artist in history, Muhammad Ali, to stand his ground and fight him off. If Johnson tried to hold, Frazier would dig both hands to the body, if he tried to slide back and counter Frazier—and Tyson too—would bob and weave forcing him to miss and come around or up the middle with hammering counters of their own. Johnson would be forced to fight against fighters that were as big and physically strong as he was and who were much harder punchers.

This brings us to a final point, the quality of Johnson’s chin. Johnson was once knocked out by 168-pound Joe Choynski. Can one imagine a 168- or even 175-pound Roy Jones knocking out 21-year-old Mike Tyson? Forget that there was an agreement for Johnson to carry middleweight champion Stanley Ketchel, a middleweight’s punch put him on the canvas. Could Marvin Hagler have put Joe Frazier or Mike Tyson on the canvas? For those who live in a fantasy world please recall that Hagler never fought even a light heavyweight and realize that Frazier destroyed hard-hitting 175-pound Bob Foster in two rounds. If a 160-pound boxer’s punch could put Johnson on the canvas then what would Joe Frazier’s left hook or Mike Tyson’s barrage of punches do to him? What would happen in a Roy Jones versus Mike Tyson showdown? Jack Johnson’s chin is really no better than that of Roy Jones. Both men were able to avoid blows due to their superiority over their opposition but when caught folded like an accordion.

Jack Johnson is a fighter who is looked at through a pair of rose-colored glasses. He is viewed through the eyes of nostalgia and historical significance and not by how he and his contemporaries appear on film. It may not be popular to criticize him because of his place at the forefront of black champions but Jack Johnson—if he were teleported from his championship days to a modern ring—would not do well against many of the more contemporary greats.

****king great post.Ketchel smashed his ass on that knockdown.

[Longhaul]

When you **** measure guys from widely different eras like this do you ever think about how RJJ would have fought & did if he was born in 1878? Or how Jack Johnson would have fought & did if he was born in 1969?

To me this is such a crazy comparison of men who might as well be from different planets with almost 100 years between them that its an impossible comparison. Whoever comes later usually has the benefit of being able to grow via past great fighters that they saw or the people who worked with them saw or worked with in the past which is an advantage. And whoever came first lacks the ability to learn as much from the past generation which is a disadvantage.

I think sh^t like that doesn't get brought up enough cuz mfers aren't moving in a vacuum & there is a critical mass of intelligence & knowledge the closer to the present you get which gives whoever is closer to the presenta nice edge.

Watch Ketchel a middleweight knock the **** out of him .He got back up and kod stanley But it was a solid knockdown .I could not envision hagler knocking heavyweight champ Larry Holmes down in a fight exb or sparring.He also fought a lot of guys who competed at lower weights.

[cfang]

Jack Johnson is one of the greatest heavys and indeed greatest boxers of all time. In terms of his record and ability he was light yers ahead of all the boxers of his time. He beat all the top black heavys before he won the title then was virtually unbeatable.

He was like an early century heavy version of mayweather, incredible defence and reflexes.

What this whole thread seems to lack is the real world and historical context. Johnson fought at a time of the most terrible racism. They would throw things at him between rounds, he put up with the most awful fouls against him (check out flynn throwing his head at him round after round). He came up in battle royals too. Everyone wanted him to lose and yet, he kept on winning.

Apart from a no question dodgy decision against hart and a dq against jeanette, he was undefeated for 15 years near enough. What a man he was and what strength of character. What sums up his time is the way he ws portrayed in the media at the time, kind of like a character from uncle toms cabin. Then when you see footage of him speaking in the 40s, hes incredibly eloquent, kind of like james earl jones who played him brilliantly ofc.

Yes his record would be more impressive if he took fights more seriously, he would loaf about very often and carry fighters just for fun. There's no doubt in my mind he'd have koed anyone of his time and comfortably too. The colour bar thing is a total joke. He was professional and everyone wanted to see him lose to a white boxer. it made total sense for him to fight whomever for the least risk when he'd already beaten all the top back fighters and been generally treated like crap for years - he owed nobody anything in my view. A legend of the sport and a man of outstanding talent and bravery.

[QueensburyRules]

- -Keep in mind James Earl played a fictional character loosely based on Howard Sacklers The Great White Hope, a racist moniker penned a on any white contender of that era in regrettable use even beyond Holmes vs Cooney.

James Earl was vilified by the black nationalists of the day for being too light skinned and near run outta town after militant protests.

As I mentioned earlier, JJ not well educated, yet literate with the capacity to incorporate an English accent into his native Texas dialect, a shape shifter to be sure.

Interesting how he became a US patriot in ww2 and raised war funds.

Guess he figured Adolph weren't for him.

[Ivich]

Dempsey had in fact fought a black fighter. Had a contract to fight Wills but the money never came through.

Jeffries had to lose 70 pounds and was retired for six years. Jeffries was nowhere near his prime.

Johnson got KOd by Willard. Dempsey destroyed Willard. While that doesnt necessarily correlate to an automatic win for Dempsey over Johnson, I would wager a Dempsey victory. Johnson also never gave any title shots to other black fighters, drawing his own color line.

Now Im not making topics,'Im trawling through old ones.This caught my eye.
Jeffries was down to fighting weight a good nine months before the fight.He was weighed when he came back from Carlsbad.
Before he formally announced his return to the ring Jeffries went into training he had over a year to get into fighting trim.Johnson defended against Jim Johnson a black fighter.
Johnson signed articles to defend against Jeannette in NY twice ,for the McMahon Brothers , and twice the fight was vetoed by the NYAC.
Johnson accepted a purse offer to defend against McVey and Langford in Australia and he signed the contract.When Johnson jumped bail the Australian clergy whipped up a campaign to prevent him fighting there and the promoter H McIntosh bailed out.
The NYAC Chairman issued a public statement saying he did not think it in the best interests of boxing to allow Johnson to defend his title there, he even refused to let Johnon box a charity match for a good cause there. Both sets of promoters issued public statements saying they had "bowed to public pressure," and pulled the plugs on the fights.
Apart from Jack Johnson is there any other fighter you have a hate agenda against?'
Neither Johnson or Langford weighed in for their fight,the weights were" guestimates" Langford 156 Johnson185.
Clay Moyle the expert on Langford believes Langford's best weight was 175/180lbs.So he would have been20/24lbs below his best weight. for their fight.
Johnson declared he was in the shape of his life for the Jeffries fight for which he weighed 208lbs,So he would have been 25lbs below his best weight for the fight,
Certainly Langford [,though he had more fights than Johnson when they met,] improved,equally certain is it that Johnson improved.
For what it may be worth.
Moyle, a huge Langford fan ,who isn't? Believes that prime for prime Johnson beats Langford.


Adam Pollack through his diligent research believes Johnson was scaling in the super middleweight area when he fought Choynski.So this talk of Johnson a heavyweight, being kod by a middleweight,actually a super middle is just BS.


Jim Corbett
TomSharkey
Jack Johnson
JimJeffries
All named Choynsky as the hardest puncher they fought.

[GhostofDempsey]

Now Im not making topics,'Im trawling through old ones.This caught my eye.
Jeffries was down to fighting weight a good nine months before the fight.He was weighed when he came back from Carlsbad.
Before he formally announced his return to the ring Jeffries went into training he had over a year to get into fighting trim.Johnson defended against Jim Johnson a black fighter.
Johnson signed articles to defend against Jeannette in NY twice ,for the McMahon Brothers , and twice the fight was vetoed by the NYAC.
Johnson accepted a purse offer to defend against McVey and Langford in Australia and he signed the contract.When Johnson jumped bail the Australian clergy whipped up a campaign to prevent him fighting there and the promoter H McIntosh bailed out.
The NYAC Chairman issued a public statement saying he did not think it in the best interests of boxing to allow Johnson to defend his title there, he even refused to let Johnon box a charity match for a good cause there. Both sets of promoters issued public statements saying they had "bowed to public pressure," and pulled the plugs on the fights.
Apart from Jack Johnson is there any other fighter you have a hate agenda against?'
Neither Johnson or Langford weighed in for their fight,the weights were" guestimates" Langford 156 Johnson185.
Clay Moyle the expert on Langford believes Langford's best weight was 175/180lbs.So he would have been20/24lbs below his best weight. for their fight.
Johnson declared he was in the shape of his life for the Jeffries fight for which he weighed 208lbs,So he would have been 25lbs below his best weight for the fight,
Certainly Langford [,though he had more fights than Johnson when they met,] improved,equally certain is it that Johnson improved.
For what it may be worth.
Moyle, a huge Langford fan ,who isn't? Believes that prime for prime Johnson beats Langford.


Adam Pollack through his diligent research believes Johnson was scaling in the super middleweight area when he fought Choynski.So this talk of Johnson a heavyweight, being kod by a middleweight,actually a super middle is just BS.


Jim Corbett
TomSharkey
Jack Johnson
JimJeffries
All named Choynsky as the hardest puncher they fought.

Please stop. Jeffries was coming off a 6-year retirement, and losing close to 100 pounds at any age is going to drain you. If Wlad had to come out of retirement next year and lose 100 pounds to fight Fury, what do you think his odds of winning would be?

I don't have a hate agenda against Johnson. I just think he is overrated and he cherry picked his way through his title reign. I've made my arguments ad nauseum. Johnson was clearly much larger than Langford. You went on to discredit Greb's win over Loughran because "he was only 21 years old", yet you didn't hold that same standard against Johnson when he beat Langford and McVea who were 19 - 21 years old. Loughran also had 40 fights by the time he fought Greb, McVea had less than 10 for each of the times he fought Johnson, Jeannette had less than 20 fights for each of the times he fought Johnson. All is moot though, since Johnson never gave McVea, Langford or Jeannette legitimate shots at the title. Carry on.

[Ivich]

Please stop. Jeffries was coming off a 6-year retirement, and losing close to 100 pounds at any age is going to drain you. If Wlad had to come out of retirement next year and lose 100 pounds to fight Fury, what do you think his odds of winning would be?

I don't have a hate agenda against Johnson. I just think he is overrated and he cherry picked his way through his title reign. I've made my arguments ad nauseum. Johnson was clearly much larger than Langford. You went on to discredit Greb's win over Loughran because "he was only 21 years old", yet you didn't hold that same standard against Johnson when he beat Langford and McVea who were 19 - 21 years old. Loughran also had 40 fights by the time he fought Greb, McVea had less than 10 for each of the times he fought Johnson, Jeannette had less than 20 fights for each of the times he fought Johnson. All is moot though, since Johnson never gave McVea, Langford or Jeannette legitimate shots at the title. Carry on.

McVey's early record is incomplete. Langford had over 50 fights when he fought Johnson.Johnson signed to fight his three oustanding challengers the fact that those fights did not happen was not his fault so no, he wasn't cherry picking,and that been totally disproven.The fact that you keep repeating it and ignoring the public statements made by the promoters the Chairman of the NYAC,and Joe Jeannette himself who went into print stating I dont blame Jack fpr the fight falling through,emphatically proves you hate Johnson
The White public wanted a White heavyweight champion so they matched him with White challengers [they had to do that to try and achieve the result they wanted,]lol
Its your right to rate Johnson wherever you wish.just leave the BS out of it ,

[GhostofDempsey]

McVey's early record is incomplete. Langford had over 50 fights when he fought Johnson.Johnson signed to fight his three oustanding challengers the fact that those fights did not happen was not his fault so no, he wasn't cherry picking,and that been totally disproven.The fact that you keep repeating it and ignoring the public statements made by the promoters the Chairman of the NYAC,and Joe Jeannette himself who went into print stating I dont blame Jack fpr the fight falling through,emphatically proves you hate Johnson
The White public wanted a White heavyweight champion so they matched him with White challengers [they had to do that to try and achieve the result they wanted,]lol
Its your right to rate Johnson wherever you wish.just leave the BS out of it ,

Ah, and here comes the excuses. Now the hidden records and unsanctioned fights come into the picture, the double standards that you don't hold to Johnson. I'm not even going to read your post past the first line since you chose to start off with excuses and double standards.

[Ivich]

Ah, and here comes the excuses. Now the hidden records and unsanctioned fights come into the picture, the double standards that you don't hold to Johnson. I'm not even going to read your post past the first line since you chose to start off with excuses and double standards.

1902-04-12				George Sullivan	2 0 0		Auditorium, Oxnard	W-KO	6/20		bout score wiki
McVea had fought twice before coming to Oxnard, once in Salinas and once in Australia; he had a reported record of 6-0-2 prior to this fight.

Why would I need an excuse? Johnson dominated McVey in each of their fights,