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

[travestyny]

Ground Hog Day yet again! He signed to fight all three and the fights were pulled due to circumstances beyond his control.
This is irrefutable and undeniable!
Wills was not a top contender when Johnson was champion.
After Johnson lost his title he remained in exile from the US where he was subject to arrest.
What incentive was there for Wills to travel to wherever the now 38 years old Johnson was residing?
Johnson was knocked down in a spar with Smith whoop de doo! Give him a title shot!
Just like Marciano did whenToxie Hall knocked him down!
Just like Tyson did when Greg Page knocked him down!
Just like Vitali did when both Travis Walker and Raphael Butler knocked him down!
FYI Johnson boxed two more opponents that day after Smith knocked him down, so how just bad was that kd?
Smith was kod by Langford in 3 rds and floored by young super middle Carpentier ,beaten byDenver Ed Martin whom Johnson had ko'd . I'm sure Johnson was trembling in his boots at the thought of facing him! There was zero demand for rematches with either
O Brien or Battling Jim .

If I remember correctly, Johnson also agreed to fight Wills and they had a deal. Late in his career after he lost the title. The commission (for some reason I'm thinking New Jersey) wouldn't allow it. I'm guessing either they believed it wouldn't be competitive (Johnson was likely all in by then), or they suspected they'd put on a show. As in a literal "show."

By the way, reading through your conversation with GhostofDumpsey...Jesus Christ. The guy is a looney and a parasite. I've literally had the same conversations with him word for word, so I know what it's like. He posts like a hurt child and denies what is proven right in front of his eyes to the point of absurdity and has no shame about it. I don't know whether to advise you to not mind him, or to just keep stepping on his throat until his eyes pop out of his head.

Over in the lounge section quite a few posters believe that his hate for Johnson is only "skin deep." Thrown in quotations to let you decide which direction that means. I mean, the irrational blatant lengths gone to to deny reality is hard to reconcile. Which sadly means those posters may be right. A shame to me. But as he has shown. No shame to him.

By the way. How perfect was the name, "Unforgivable Blackness."

You always get my respect even when we disagree. Take care.

[Ivich]

You want to talk *****, go to the lounge.

I stand by my position that you are a Johnson apologist and fanboy. Otherwise you might be able to approach this thread objectively and in a more civil tone.

I stand by my position that Johnson signed to fight the black trio and that is proven and undeniable.
Johnson's style of fighting is not to my taste .
I'm civil with those who adopt the same tone to me.I offered you a truce and a chance to start afresh ,you did'nt want to know.The offer is still on the table.
I stand by my position that you are a Johnson hater and your posts emphaticaly prove it.
Wasn't it you who stated Johnson ducked George Kid Cotton? When I proved this was nonsense you took permanent umbrage.ps Battling Jim Johnson beat Cotton.
Now have you copied all my negative posts about Sam Langford,and when can we expect to see them here in print?
The silence from you on this is absolutely deafening!
An admission from you that you were mistaken on this would restore your shattered credibility and demonstrate that you have integrity,continuing silence on the subject implies just the opposite.
You're right on *****, no more from me.

[Ivich]

You want to talk *****, go to the lounge.

I stand by my position that you are a Johnson apologist and fanboy. Otherwise you might be able to approach this thread objectively and in a more civil tone.

I stand by my position that Johnson signed to fight the black trio and that is proven and undeniable.
Johnson's style of fighting is not to my taste .
I'm civil with those who adopt the same tone to me.I offered you a truce and a chance to start afresh ,you didn't want to know.The offer is still on the table.
I stand by my position that you are a Johnson hater and your posts emphatically prove it.

You wont find a topic started by me on any forum that is entitled
"Why Johnson Is Greater Than You Were Told"


Wasn't it you who stated Johnson ducked George Kid Cotton? When I proved this was nonsense you took permanent umbrage.
ps Battling Jim Johnson beat Cotton.
Now have you copied all my negative posts about Sam Langford,and when can we expect to see them here in print?
The silence from you on this is absolutely deafening!
An admission from you that you were mistaken on this would restore your shattered credibility and demonstrate that you have integrity,continuing silence on the subject implies just the opposite.
You're right on *****, no more from me.

[GhostofDempsey]

I stand by my position that Johnson signed to fight the black trio and that is proven and undeniable.
Johnson's style of fighting is not to my taste .
I'm civil with those who adopt the same tone to me.I offered you a truce and a chance to start afresh ,you did'nt want to know.The offer is still on the table.
I stand by my position that you are a Johnson hater and your posts emphaticaly prove it.
Wasn't it you who stated Johnson ducked George Kid Cotton? When I proved this was nonsense you took permanent umbrage.ps Battling Jim Johnson beat Cotton.
Now have you copied all my negative posts about Sam Langford,and when can we expect to see them here in print?
The silence from you on this is absolutely deafening!
An admission from you that you were mistaken on this would restore your shattered credibility and demonstrate that you have integrity,continuing silence on the subject implies just the opposite.
You're right on *****, no more from me.

I think your idea of a truce is that I agree with you unconditionally. You’ve exhausted yourself on this topic here and on the other forum. Johnson never had any real intention of fighting them despite whatever contracts he may have signed. The Australia fiasco was another goal post that was moved as he raised the stakes with each new demand. His best wins were middleweights. He accepted far less than $5k for Battling Jim, that’s all the evidence I need to convince me he wasn’t serious about fighting the other three, especially when he turned down $20K offers to fight them. Signs offers in NY knowing these fights couldn’t be made.

You keep citing Moyle, yet Moyle himself said Johnson never gave any black man aside from one (Battling Jim) a shot at his title (page 16), and said Johnson outweighed Sam by 40 pounds (page 63). You cite him as the foremost expert on Langford, yet contradict what he says in the book. You insist Laughran was too young for Greb at age 21, yet Langford was 20 when he fought Johnson and McVea 19.

[Ivich]

I think your idea of a truce is that I agree with you unconditionally. You’ve exhausted yourself on this topic here and on the other forum. Johnson never had any real intention of fighting them despite whatever contracts he may have signed. The Australia fiasco was another goal post that was moved as he raised the stakes with each new demand. His best wins were middleweights. He accepted far less than $5k for Battling Jim, that’s all the evidence I need to convince me he wasn’t serious about fighting the other three, especially when he turned down $20K offers to fight them. Signs offers in NY knowing these fights couldn’t be made.

You keep citing Moyle, yet Moyle himself said Johnson never gave any black man aside from one (Battling Jim) a shot at his title (page 16), and said Johnson outweighed Sam by 40 pounds (page 63). You cite him as the foremost expert on Langford, yet contradict what he says in the book. You insist Laughran was too young for Greb at age 21, yet Langford was 20 when he fought Johnson and McVea 19.

No point in having everyone agree with you ,you have a perfect right to our opinion as have I.Johnson signed to fight Langford and McVey for $45,000 plus round tickets and expenses.Ive just come back from a nice day in good company drinking and listening to bands at a festival, I dont have the precise figures to hand.Im not going to change your mind nor you mine.

Moyle is correct Johnson never gave any black fighter apart from Battling Jim a title shot,the question is whose fault was it those fights never happened?
Where in his book does Moyle lay the blame at Johnson's door?
Moyle doesnt know how much Johnson outweighed Langford by ,nor does he know how old Sam was when they fought I've corresponded with him on this.
He gave the most likely figure for Langford's age based on what he was able to discover.
I never said Loughran was too young I just pointed out he was 21 so stop trying to put words in my mouth I never spoke.
I don't believe Loughran was prime, and I dont believe Langford was prime. and I have never suggested that they were!
I said no doubt Langford improved after 1906 and no doubt Johnson did too!
It would be nice if you could bring yourself to admit I have never been a Langford hater ,and have never made negative posts about him, but you're not a big enough a man to do that are you?
You obviously want to remain at odds with me ,that's perfectly fine.You carry on!
Just dont insult my intelligence with crap about how Johnson ducked Kid Cotton!

[GhostofDempsey]

No point in having everyone agree with you ,you have a perfect right to our opinion as have I.Johnson signed to fight Langford and McVey for $45,000 plus round tickets and expenses.Ive just come back from a nice day in good company drinking and listening to bands at a festival, I dont have the precise figures to hand.Im not going to change your mind nor you mine.

Moyle is correct Johnson never gave any black fighter apart from Battling Jim a title shot,the question is whose fault was it those fights never happened?
Where in his book does Moyle lay the blame at Johnson's door?
Moyle doesnt know how much Johnson outweighed Langford by ,nor does he know how old Sam was when they fought I've corresponded with him on this.
He gave the most likely figure for Langford's age based on what he was able to discover.
I never said Loughran was too young I just pointed out he was 21 so stop trying to put words in my mouth I never spoke.
I don't believe Loughran was prime, and I dont believe Langford was prime. and I have never suggested that they were!
I said no doubt Langford improved after 1906 and no doubt Johnson did too!
It would be nice if you could bring yourself to admit I have never been a Langford hater ,and have never made negative posts about him, but you're not a big enough a man to do that are you?
You obviously want to remain at odds with me ,that's perfectly fine.You carry on!
Just dont insult my intelligence with crap about how Johnson ducked Kid ****ing Cotton! because if you do I'll rip you a new RECTUM!

Johnson insisted on a $10k deposit in an American bank after he had already agreed on the original terms, again moving the goal posts knowing full well no promoter was going to deposit that much money in an American bank and risk Johnson running off with their money.

The fault was with Johnson, hence he never gave any other black fighter a fair title shot. He admits to drawing the color line himself so you have it straight from the man’s mouth himself. It’s in every boxing history book I’ve read on the subject, including Moyle’s.

Your comment about Loughran’s age was to suggest he was too young, otherwise you’d have never brought into the discussion. Own up to your double standards since you wouldn’t make the same observation for McVea or Langford.

You may not be a Langford hater, but you are willing to side with Johnson against the three top black contenders during his title reign. Despite evidence that proves he ducked them as champion and their own testimony.

Johnson gave Cotton the same business as the rest. Come up with money he knew they could never raise to fight him. He would have been better off demanding he beat a certain caliber fighter to earn his shot rather than price himself out. I’ll let your last sentence slide since you are letting the liquor do the talking for you, or at least I’m giving you the benefit of the doubt.

[Ivich]

Johnson insisted on a $10k deposit in an American bank after he had already agreed on the original terms, again moving the goal posts knowing full well no promoter was going to deposit that much money in an American bank and risk Johnson running off with their money.

The fault was with Johnson, hence he never gave any other black fighter a fair title shot. He admits to drawing the color line himself so you have it straight from the man’s mouth himself. It’s in every boxing history book I’ve read on the subject, including Moyle’s.

Your comment about Loughran’s age was to suggest he was too young, otherwise you’d have never brought into the discussion. Own up to your double standards since you wouldn’t make the same observation for McVea or Langford.

You may not be a Langford hater, but you are willing to side with Johnson against the three top black contenders during his title reign. Despite evidence that proves he ducked them as champion and their own testimony.

Johnson gave Cotton the same business as the rest. Come up with money he knew they could never raise to fight him. He would have been better off demanding he beat a certain caliber fighter to earn his shot rather than price himself out. I’ll let your last sentence slide since you are letting the liquor do the talking for you, or at least I’m giving you the benefit of the doubt.

Bearing in mind Johnson got a comparative pittance to challenge Burns
wouldnt you want a deposit in a US bank before you travelled to Australia?
Thank you for admitting Im not a Langford hater, he was a far more likeable man than Johnson.

I've said both Langford and McVey were pre- prime, and so was Johnson.
Cotton was never more than a sparring partner his record is poor.Who would have promoted that fight and expect to make a profit,Johnson would have been fighting his protege for nothing.Demanding a cash bond isnt evidence of cowardice it was common practice then going back to Sullivan,Corbett,Fitz,Jeffries,all had the same arrangements in some fights
Lets look at it another way,Tyson Fury is challenged by some obscure nobody whom he has regularly employed as a punch bag,knowing no promoter would put on such a one-sided farce , he states he is willing to fight him provided he comes up with a cash bond to ensure he gets something for his trouble. Once he became champion Johnson announced his price for a title defence was $30,000 the same amount Burns had received to fight him,he relaxed this rule to fight Battling Jim because he was broke and hadn't fought for a year and a half and was living in a foreign country with no prospect of financial help from anyone.
Look at Cotton's record then tell me Johnson was afraid to fight him.Cotton was a big muscular man without power ,he was beaten by everyone of any ability and often by ko
Langford in 4rds ,John Lester Johnson in7 rds, Wills 4 times in 4 rds! Wills 3rds,Jeannette in4rds.Morris Harris in7 rds ,Johnson ko'd Harris in 1 round!

.He was never on Johnson's radar as a credible opponent.and we both know that!
I came on here early to delete that last sentence and I apologise for it, the gist of it was I would post Cottons record and invite posters to decide who was right about whether Johnson ducked him. My words were uncalled for.

[Dr. Z]

I think your idea of a truce is that I agree with you unconditionally. You’ve exhausted yourself on this topic here and on the other forum. Johnson never had any real intention of fighting them despite whatever contracts he may have signed. The Australia fiasco was another goal post that was moved as he raised the stakes with each new demand. His best wins were middleweights. He accepted far less than $5k for Battling Jim, that’s all the evidence I need to convince me he wasn’t serious about fighting the other three, especially when he turned down $20K offers to fight them. Signs offers in NY knowing these fights couldn’t be made.

You keep citing Moyle, yet Moyle himself said Johnson never gave any black man aside from one (Battling Jim) a shot at his title (page 16), and said Johnson outweighed Sam by 40 pounds (page 63). You cite him as the foremost expert on Langford, yet contradict what he says in the book. You insist Laughran was too young for Greb at age 21, yet Langford was 20 when he fought Johnson and McVea 19.

Yes he'll gladly point out a fighter age when it suits his agenda. With weights he omit the low ones for Johnson's opponents. Johnson had numerous offers of $30,000.00, $50,000.00 and $100,000.00 to fight Langford, Jeanette, and McVey. He never fought them, but he did have a signed contract to fight Langford . Of course he pulled out of the match in 1909. His word mean &#^t.

You information is solid.

[Incapable]

I stand by my position that Johnson signed to fight the black trio and that is proven and undeniable.
Johnson's style of fighting is not to my taste .
I'm civil with those who adopt the same tone to me.I offered you a truce and a chance to start afresh ,you didn't want to know.The offer is still on the table.
I stand by my position that you are a Johnson hater and your posts emphatically prove it.

You wont find a topic started by me on any forum that is entitled
"Why Johnson Is Greater Than You Were Told"


Wasn't it you who stated Johnson ducked George Kid Cotton? When I proved this was nonsense you took permanent umbrage.
ps Battling Jim Johnson beat Cotton.
Now have you copied all my negative posts about Sam Langford,and when can we expect to see them here in print?
The silence from you on this is absolutely deafening!
An admission from you that you were mistaken on this would restore your shattered credibility and demonstrate that you have integrity,continuing silence on the subject implies just the opposite.
You're right on *****, no more from me.

HI iv, hope you're doing well, mate.
Love to read your comments on here, your the best thing to happen on here and respect your knowledge.

[Incapable]

Johnson insisted on a $10k deposit in an American bank after he had already agreed on the original terms, again moving the goal posts knowing full well no promoter was going to deposit that much money in an American bank and risk Johnson running off with their money.

The fault was with Johnson, hence he never gave any other black fighter a fair title shot. He admits to drawing the color line himself so you have it straight from the man’s mouth himself. It’s in every boxing history book I’ve read on the subject, including Moyle’s.

Your comment about Loughran’s age was to suggest he was too young, otherwise you’d have never brought into the discussion. Own up to your double standards since you wouldn’t make the same observation for McVea or Langford.

You may not be a Langford hater, but you are willing to side with Johnson against the three top black contenders during his title reign. Despite evidence that proves he ducked them as champion and their own testimony.

Johnson gave Cotton the same business as the rest. Come up with money he knew they could never raise to fight him. He would have been better off demanding he beat a certain caliber fighter to earn his shot rather than price himself out. I’ll let your last sentence slide since you are letting the liquor do the talking for you, or at least I’m giving you the benefit of the doubt.

You really don't like Jack Johnson, do you!