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

[ron davis]

Jack johnson was "the greatest" no doubt!

He was a master boxer, with lightning speed. He caught punches in the air and avoided ever being cut. Can anybody name any other great boxers who never suffered a cut? Ali,Frazier,Louis, Dempsey, Foreman, Marciano, Ezzard Charles, just to mention a few, that can't say never suffered a cut. In fact, every Champion in all Divisions suffered a cut.
Gans,Pep, Ross, McLarnin, Armstrong, Canzoneri, Ambers, Zivic, Robinson, Cerdan, Zale, Moore, and on and on. That's how Great Jack Johnson was! Peace.

Come to think of it there was one Great Boxer/Fighter who never suffered a cut in three hundred fights amateur and pro and retired with 20/20 vision. Instantly nobody escaped getting mauled by him, includes 5 HOFer's.......... .......

[OctoberRed]

He was a master boxer, with lightning speed. He caught punches in the air and avoided ever being cut. Can anybody name any other great boxers who never suffered a cut? Ali,Frazier,Louis, Dempsey, Foreman, Marciano, Ezzard Charles, just to mention a few, that can't say never suffered a cut. In fact, every Champion in all Divisions suffered a cut.
Gans,Pep, Ross, McLarnin, Armstrong, Canzoneri, Ambers, Zivic, Robinson, Cerdan, Zale, Moore, and on and on. That's how Great Jack Johnson was! Peace.

Come to think of it there was one.......... .......

[Mooshashi]

A huge mistake is made when watching Johnson fight. Clinching is not what Johnson is doing. He is controlling his opponent. Watch his bout with Flynn. Flynn struggles to get inside. When he gets inside Johnson senses via pressing upon his elbows when body punches are being launched. By tapping Flynn’s elbows the power of these blows is negated. All the while Johnson is countering with uppercuts.

Regarding Johnson clinching and grappling...let's keep in mind that most of Johnson's fights were scheduled for 15-20, even 45 rounds. It would have been impossible for any fighter, especially a HW, to fight every second of a 25 round fight.

Even in the Gans-Nelson scheduled 45 round fights they didn't throw punches every second. They had to rest mid round.

[GhostofDempsey]

He was a master boxer, with lightning speed. He caught punches in the air and avoided ever being cut. Can anybody name any other great boxers who never suffered a cut? Ali,Frazier,Louis, Dempsey, Foreman, Marciano, Ezzard Charles, just to mention a few, that can't say never suffered a cut. In fact, every Champion in all Divisions suffered a cut.
Gans,Pep, Ross, McLarnin, Armstrong, Canzoneri, Ambers, Zivic, Robinson, Cerdan, Zale, Moore, and on and on. That's how Great Jack Johnson was! Peace.

Come to think of it there was one.......... .......

Again, a lot easier to accomplish against middleweights and washed up fighters. The fighters you listed actually fought the best of the best. It is much with Jack.

[ron davis]

I stand my ground. Heavyweights in that era fought with 3 ounce gloves. Peace.

[billeau2]

So we have to ask what made Johnson special? did anything? And to answer that question lets look at a couple of things: One thing that stands out is what happens when we have smaller gloves and how punches work in fighting.

When Dempsey and eventually Louis became the progenators for the new style of boxing, gloves got bigger. When gloves are bigger punches depend more on pure force and less upon accuracy and anatomical linking. So when Dempsey tells us to throw the hook with the shoulder the waist turning and settle our weight, the punch becomes like a Thai roundhouse kick. We can generate a lot of force because of the gloves and not break our hand as easily. Any punch thrown with force follows that same concept, to Dempsey even the jab is used that way... and I say that conceptually, not saying that Dempsey fought that way. Dempsey tells us in his book to throw a jab in a manner that would look like LIston, or foreman.

The weight settling... putting the weight down as the fist hits the target becomes the technique. This is expressed in many ways, for example speed is utilized as a way to maximize force...lets hold on to that concept for a moment. This is not something that is a given when punching.

During Johnson's time the speed of a punch was for the sake of not telegraphing the blow, keeping the blow in a communitive line: the fist is natural and held just taunt enough to squeeze the air, the glove hardly covering the hand... the wrist is straight and connects to the elbow which is held inward because if it is held at an angle the force will dissopate at the elbow. the shoulder is relaxed and takes the force of the punch slightly as the hand is thrown and the target is hit, and the shoulder is grounded by the weight sinking slightly, as the stomach is pulled in, the waist may turn BUT the legs do not turn because force would dissopate out at the legs, just as with the elbows! And the feet and knees sink a bit into the ground to push the body out ever so slightly in a very subtle forward direction...Unless the puncher steps in as he punches.

In Johnson's time a punch would achieve success when the dynamics described above were followed to one degree, or another. But the speed of the blow was not related to swinging the punch, rather it was related to throwing the punch straight to the target with no diversions. Accuracy was prized. you knew the angle and target of the chin, and the blow was not a concussive brain shaker, like we see today, rather it was a short piston like shot to the chin tip, or to the plexus, or the side of the head.

Choyinski was a guy, like Fitz, Jem Mace, Daniel Esponiza, etc...who was very accurate in his punching. Accurate punching allowed men to fight with less regard to weight class. So it is not suprising that a fighter like chyrthantium joe could catch jack Johnson, who he mentored as a fighter.

The style at the time was to use lunges, weight shifts, angles, grappling...including tying up a hand, so that one could land a punch, and usually it is correct to say that a man would not throw many punches, focusing instead on throwing either one, or a simple combination of two punches, unless they could get their opponent moving backwards.

Enter johnson. a guy who threw combinations to great effect, was an incredible grappler, and had footwork that allowed him to do things like come in very fast when attacking, defensive evasion, etc. Johnson had a type of speed of delivery that would become a hallmark for the classical style that followed his era. In those days fighters did not use small shoulder movements, etc they would rather use feints, set ups with the feet that would allow them to come in and drive an opponent back which in turn would allow them to land on proper targets.

It is hard to compare the two styles because they emphasize different things. A fighter from choyinski's time would find fighters of the classical times lacking foot speed, finesse, and would wonder why they fought at such a close distance. How could one react to an attack (the emphasis was the attack, not types of punches) when they were in front of their opponent? on their front foot? and squared up?

Of course a figher from modern times would think guys like JOhnson, etc looked strange. You don't see the punching clearly in the older film always... and it looks silly when we see, for example Corbet training with Tunney. but the reason it looked silly was often because a fighter was feinting, or using a punch to set up something at a distance which was not visible on film...

[The Old LefHook]

Boxers who only know how to actively box might be in trouble in a 45 round fight, you are saying. I agree. Since they cannot fight like Ali for 45 rounds, what do they do in the down time, having no actual techniques for that time? Modern fighters would be mauled and mangled in the clinches with their arms yanked out of the sockets, and hammered to death inside. Do any of their modern techniques balance this out, however? Might their modern techniques lay such a beating on Johnson that he will become less effective and superior at his own advantages?

[billeau2]

Boxers who only know how to actively box might be in trouble in a 45 round fight, you are saying. I agree. Since they cannot fight like Ali for 45 rounds, what do they do in the down time, having no actual techniques for that time? Modern fighters would be mauled and mangled in the clinches with their arms yanked out of the sockets, and hammered to death inside. Do any of their modern techniques balance this out, however? Might their modern techniques lay such a beating on Johnson that he will become less effective and superior at his own advantages?

Certainly! it works both ways. Martial arts principle to live by: You fight the way you train, you can predict with certainty that the more the training is part of the scenario trained for, the better you will do.

So in reality? If Tai Chi Masters fought full contact with pads hammer and tongs, and MMA fighters did forms and conceptually discussed self Defense without any contact... We would live in a very different martial arts universe! Which is why I love the guys who say "martial arts are garbage, learn how to box and wrestle." Well... in our society the best men can do is fight like children in a school yard that and that is hence, perhaps a correct statement. But when Tai Chi, classical Ju Jutsu where actually fighting arts, they were designed for men who were professional fighters...with weapons used, and in a Japanese battle field if you went down, with armor and all? You would lose your head.

my point is that its all predicated on training habits and what one trains to do. Or as confucius say: "One not need the biggest thumb to become tittlewink champion!!

[QueensburyRules]

- -Let's face it, even allowing generational style variations and rule changes, JJ was usually booed and agitated the crowd whereas Langford usually cheered and lauded, the difference being Sam was the fighter and JJ the spoiler and those mentalities are with us today along with many other overlaps.

Never seen any film prior to Burns for him, but he spoiled, clowned, fought dirty with an uppercut on a break dropped Burns that may have been the only KD.

Burns looks great in a mobile crouching style and let's his hands go and the only one attempting to fight. JJ picks his shots that visibly hurt Burns while Burns shots seen to bounce off JJ harmlessly.

Bunch of shameless monkey biz in how the police stop the bout, and this is the peak JJ. Never looked good in subsequent filmed fights, and I take it Battling Johnson fight was such a horror the French stopped recording and binned it.

JJ goes toe to toe against Frank Moran, the Fighting Dentist for a torrid 20 rds, but Moran had been beat by 20 yr old Luther McCarty the fight before and Moran had been KOed 3x previous.

http://boxrec.com/en/boxer/11647

Then in an ironic role reversal, JJ the runt mobile having his shots bounce harmlessly off Willard before the boom gets lowered.

So his last two fights were the only ones we have that were crowd pleasers where he truly makes an effort.

Remember, when he simply didn't show up against Hart, he lost a golden opportunity to fight a still prime Jeffries who shortly after retired.

[billeau2]

- -Let's face it, even allowing generational style variations and rule changes, JJ was usually booed and agitated the crowd whereas Langford usually cheered and lauded, the difference being Sam was the fighter and JJ the spoiler and those mentalities are with us today along with many other overlaps.

Never seen any film prior to Burns for him, but he spoiled, clowned, fought dirty with an uppercut on a break dropped Burns that may have been the only KD.

Burns looks great in a mobile crouching style and let's his hands go and the only one attempting to fight. JJ picks his shots that visibly hurt Burns while Burns shots seen to bounce off JJ harmlessly.

Bunch of shameless monkey biz in how the police stop the bout, and this is the peak JJ. Never looked good in subsequent filmed fights, and I take it Battling Johnson fight was such a horror the French stopped recording and binned it.

JJ goes toe to toe against Frank Moran, the Fighting Dentist for a torrid 20 rds, but Moran had been beat by 20 yr old Luther McCarty the fight before and Moran had been KOed 3x previous.

http://boxrec.com/en/boxer/11647

Then in an ironic role reversal, JJ the runt mobile having his shots bounce harmlessly off Willard before the boom gets lowered.

So his last two fights were the only ones we have that were crowd pleasers where he truly makes an effort.

Remember, when he simply didn't show up against Hart, he lost a golden opportunity to fight a still prime Jeffries who shortly after retired.

The lack of film we have on great fighters is always a thorn in the side of historians. For example, when you talk about a prime Jeffries, there were men around that talked him up as the greatest. And Jeffries, regardless of his fighting weight, was the right size for a big, strong heavyweight in any era. And when we deconstruct what does big and strong mean?

I can only look at experience for an answer: when I was training there were plenty of guys who were big and had good builds who were strong... But one day after we had an exhibition a man who I will call "Robocop" came to our dojo. The man was a police officer in Oakland and one of the scariest human beings I ever met in terms of strength. He was gentle and thank God, but this guy had big hands, shoulders, and was super strong. he could literally break a rib when you had a padded vest on. Now here is what my point is: Robocop was about 220 or so, I suspect...certainly not 240, and maybe less.

Unless someone has been hit by different people, even under controlled circumstances...and choked about as well lol, it is hard to imagine what it is to fight somoene who may not weight 250, and may not have a lot of excess muscle (Robocop was lean) but who is strong in a manner that is destructive. Jeffries looks to me like one of those guys.

A fight against Jeffries would have been very interesting for JJ and not against the shell that jeffries was when he came back. I do wonder if Johnson at that time was ready.

What we do see of Johnson is similar to what we see when we look at Roy Jones. We see what he could do in the ring. We then have to deduce what he looked like when prime from the bit of footage we have. As far as fighting dirty I don't think he bended the rules more than others. Heck we don't call Marciano dirty when he knocks out Arnold Cream and then hits him for good measure. "Protect oneself at all times" is the admonition.

I think it is correct to say we need more film. One can see deadly combinations that precede the frequent use of such, from JJ, and one can see fast feet, etc but today we can look at every film of a prime fighter and get a very clear picture indeed.