Jack Johnson backed out of signed contract to rematch Langford

[travestyny]

So you believe that a Newark newspaper headline is the sole source of a title fight between Johnson and Jeannette? A fight of this magnitude would have been headline news around the world. Newspapers would print whatever a manager tells them. There were no fact checkers back then, no television or live interviews. Grease a reporters palms and you got a headline. This was a publicity stunt to sell tickets. Hence NY commission stopping the exhibition because it has already been promoted as a title fight prior.

Bro.....


I can't do this anymore. It was a publicity stunt? I've shown more than one newspaper saying the same thing. That it was to be for the heavyweight title. And the last one was from Joe Jeannette's manager himself. It doesn't get anymore clear than that!

Come on, man. You've shown that you are too biased to have this conversation. I wish you well.

[QueensburyRules]

Did you fall and hurt your head again?

- -OK, Barney hugged until U pass out squealing in joy.

[travestyny]

- -OK, Barney hugged until U pass out squealing in joy.

Somebody needs to come get their grandfather off the net.

[QueensburyRules]

Somebody needs to come get their grandfather off the net.

- -It's Ok to grow up on Barney. U gen had no choice.

[Willie Pep 229]

Carnival of Champions (1892) was promoted as a 'gloved contest' so it could meet the MQB definition as a 'boxing exhibition.'

Not only were all three of its fights (exhibitions) promoted as title fights, but all were scheduled 'to the finish.'

If it seem paradoxical that an exhibition can be categorized as a title fight, how does one, with a straight face, possibly claim a 'boxing exhibition' to be a 'fight to the finish.'?

From the Internet:

. . . boxing promoters in New Orleans found a way around the 1882 state law that prohibited “personal combat with fists” by arranging bouts under the Marquess of Queensbury [sic] Rules which required, among other things, that fighters cover their fists with padded gloves. In January of 1890, the New Orleans city council revised city ordinances to categorize prizefights sponsored under Queensbury [sic] Rules by regularly chartered athletic clubs as “permissible exhibitions.”

Boxing in New Orleans
11/27/2013 by S. Derby Gisclair

We know the term exhibition was commonly used as a dodge to anti prize fight laws but it seems to have been used shamelessly.

[QueensburyRules]

Carnival of Champions (1892) was promoted as a 'gloved contest' so it could meet the MQB definition as a 'boxing exhibition.'

Not only were all three of its fights (exhibitions) promoted as title fights, but all were scheduled 'to the finish.'

If it seem paradoxical that an exhibition can be categorized as a title fight, how does one, with a straight face, possibly claim a 'boxing exhibition' to be a 'fight to the finish.'?

From the Internet:

. . . boxing promoters in New Orleans found a way around the 1882 state law that prohibited “personal combat with fists” by arranging bouts under the Marquess of Queensbury [sic] Rules which required, among other things, that fighters cover their fists with padded gloves. In January of 1890, the New Orleans city council revised city ordinances to categorize prizefights sponsored under Queensbury [sic] Rules by regularly chartered athletic clubs as “permissible exhibitions.”

Boxing in New Orleans
11/27/2013 by S. Derby Gisclair

We know the term exhibition was commonly used as a dodge to anti prize fight laws but it seems to have been used shamelessly.

- -Prizefighting roots was always illegal that attracted the dregs of society that always hover to fleece the suckers.

Keep in mind also bullbaiting and dogfighting were popular and legal in the beginnings, so a weak state is never gonna have the resources to prevent what people do naturally, ie Kimbo Slice, et al.

As far as Dempsey/Wills, imagine the how the boxing landscape would've been beneficially changed had JJ honored his contract with the NSC and immediately fought Langford for his first title defense in London.

Instead he beat up his Aussie mgr who had secured him his title shot vs Burns to filch all the winnings and then hightailed it to Vancouver where he skulked back into the US. Everything since added to his ignominious history that teensy denies.

[travestyny]

- -Prizefighting roots was always illegal that attracted the dregs of society that always hover to fleece the suckers.

Keep in mind also bullbaiting and dogfighting were popular and legal in the beginnings, so a weak state is never gonna have the resources to prevent what people do naturally, ie Kimbo Slice, et al.

As far as Dempsey/Wills, imagine the how the boxing landscape would've been beneficially changed had JJ honored his contract with the NSC and immediately fought Langford for his first title defense in London.

Instead he beat up his Aussie mgr who had secured him his title shot vs Burns to filch all the winnings and then hightailed it to Vancouver where he skulked back into the US. Everything since added to his ignominious history that teensy denies.

Has nothing to do with Wills vs. Dempsey.


And what I've denied I've provided proof of. You, on the other hand, began talking about New Mexico because you are too dim to keep up.

[travestyny]

Carnival of Champions (1892) was promoted as a 'gloved contest' so it could meet the MQB definition as a 'boxing exhibition.'

Not only were all three of its fights (exhibitions) promoted as title fights, but all were scheduled 'to the finish.'

If it seem paradoxical that an exhibition can be categorized as a title fight, how does one, with a straight face, possibly claim a 'boxing exhibition' to be a 'fight to the finish.'?

From the Internet:

. . . boxing promoters in New Orleans found a way around the 1882 state law that prohibited “personal combat with fists” by arranging bouts under the Marquess of Queensbury [sic] Rules which required, among other things, that fighters cover their fists with padded gloves. In January of 1890, the New Orleans city council revised city ordinances to categorize prizefights sponsored under Queensbury [sic] Rules by regularly chartered athletic clubs as “permissible exhibitions.”

Boxing in New Orleans
11/27/2013 by S. Derby Gisclair

We know the term exhibition was commonly used as a dodge to anti prize fight laws but it seems to have been used shamelessly.

Don't even worry about trying. The only mystery here now is why Ghost hates JJohnson so much that he would accuse Joe Jeannette's manager of participating in a "scam" to favor Johnson, with zero evidence and in the face of plenty of evidence that he is wrong.

Makes no sense, but whatever

[QueensburyRules]

Has nothing to do with Wills vs. Dempsey.


And what I've denied I've provided proof of. You, on the other hand, began talking about New Mexico because you are too dim to keep up.

- -The future then had everything to do with Dempsey and Wills.

Not only are U deflectingly disingenuous, but U have the IQ of a flatworm.

[GhostofDempsey]

Carnival of Champions (1892) was promoted as a 'gloved contest' so it could meet the MQB definition as a 'boxing exhibition.'

Not only were all three of its fights (exhibitions) promoted as title fights, but all were scheduled 'to the finish.'

If it seem paradoxical that an exhibition can be categorized as a title fight, how does one, with a straight face, possibly claim a 'boxing exhibition' to be a 'fight to the finish.'?

From the Internet:

. . . boxing promoters in New Orleans found a way around the 1882 state law that prohibited “personal combat with fists” by arranging bouts under the Marquess of Queensbury [sic] Rules which required, among other things, that fighters cover their fists with padded gloves. In January of 1890, the New Orleans city council revised city ordinances to categorize prizefights sponsored under Queensbury [sic] Rules by regularly chartered athletic clubs as “permissible exhibitions.”

Boxing in New Orleans
11/27/2013 by S. Derby Gisclair

We know the term exhibition was commonly used as a dodge to anti prize fight laws but it seems to have been used shamelessly.

So do you think that the Johnson vs. Jeannette exhibition was truly a title fight? Any title fight back then, especially for the HW title, would have been big news, posted across every major newspaper in the country if not the world. Yet, some obscure Newark newspaper was the only one with the scoop? A title fight between Johnson and Jeannette would have been headline news with signed contracts/agreements in hand.

Some venues would try to circumvent the laws in NYC by claiming the tickets sales for fights were "club dues" and that the fight could still go on since it was a private club and not a public venue.

Every boxing historian, scholar and the fighters themselves have insisted Johnson never gave them a title shot while he was champ. One or two newspaper articles do not change that fact.