Jack Johnson backed out of signed contract to rematch Langford

[QueensburyRules]

- -JJ was fighting out of France when Jeannette and Langford made arduous overseas sojourns there to cajole JJ into a fight.

Had Dempsey jumped to France, he'd have carte blanch to fight Wills, but Jack didn't flee his country since he was making mo$ than he ever did under Kearns.

[GhostofDempsey]

That you have refused to answer the question again says it all.

Enjoy your day.


If anyone else wants to step in and answer for him, be my guest. And if the facts paint you into a corner....so be it I guess.

I'm satisfied with the testimony of three fighters IN THEIR OWN WORDS who were denied a title shot by him, historians, scholars, writers, and the sources I provided that show he was made generous offers between 1912 - 1914 and accepted none of them. His questionable resume speaks for itself. Good enough for me. Everyone gets to choose what works for them I guess, especially 100+ years after the fact.

[PAC-BOY]

That's all fine. I don't have a problem with any of it.

All I'm asking is why you are denying that the commission stopped the Jack Johnson vs. Joe Jeannette fight from happening.

Like do you really believe the newspapers.....more than one...are making that up out of the blue?

Where did you get your information?

[travestyny]

I'm satisfied with the testimony of three fighters IN THEIR OWN WORDS who were denied a title shot by him, historians, scholars, writers, and the sources I provided that show he was made generous offers between 1912 - 1914 and accepted none of them. His questionable resume speaks for itself. Good enough for me. Everyone gets to choose what works for them I guess, especially 100+ years after the fact.

You're just lying.

The truth is you reject any proof that he accepted these fights. That's already clear.

The fact that he accepted a fight against Jeannette and the New York Commission scrapping the fight was the only reason it didn't happen is crucial evidence as to whether what you're saying is true or not. That you refuse to acknowledge all the evidence of that happening, but provide no proof that it is a lie, shows that you simply want to stick to your agenda in the face of proof that you are wrong.

You asked me if Joe Jeannette was lying. I attempted to answer you by showing you proof that their fight was signed and sealed and would have been delivered if not for the commission....but now you don't want to look at whether he is lying. Suit yaself.

I guess your contention now is that men don't lie....? If you wanted to discuss this honestly, you wouldn't refuse to answer a question that is crucial to whether you are right or not. It's clear you are wrong.

[travestyny]

Where did you get your information?

Which piece of information? Point it out and I'll gladly point you to it. If anyone wants to continue with this rhetoric that I've altered any of these documents, they are going to be sadly mistaken.

Pretty sure I gave links for everything except this. So here you go.

https://chroniclingamerica.loc.gov/l...22/ed-1/seq-1/

[PAC-BOY]

Which piece of information? Point it out and I'll gladly point you to it. If anyone wants to continue with this rhetoric that I've altered any of these documents, they are going to be sadly mistaken.

Pretty sure I gave links for everything except this. So here you go.

https://chroniclingamerica.loc.gov/l...22/ed-1/seq-1/

You were asking him if he believed the newspapers. Yet you got your info from the news papers. Or am i wrong? I was confused on that.

[travestyny]

You were asking him if he believed the newspapers. Yet you got your info from the news papers. Or am i wrong? I was confused on that.

I don't think you are confused. I asked him if he believes that multiple newspapers all reporting that the fight was canceled by the commission was a lie.

He refused to answer.


Does it make sense to you that over a matter of days and maybe weeks multiple newspapers would not only report on the fight being scrapped by the commission, but also provide quotations from people responding to the fight being scrapped by the commission.

Are you also saying that all these newspapers are lying, the quotations from multiple people are made up, the quotations from even the promoter were made up. All of it?

[GhostofDempsey]

You're just lying.

The truth is you reject any proof that he accepted these fights. That's already clear.

The fact that he accepted a fight against Jeannette and the New York Commission scrapping the fight was the only reason it didn't happen is crucial evidence as to whether what you're saying is true or not. That you refuse to acknowledge all the evidence of that happening, but provide no proof that it is a lie, shows that you simply want to stick to your agenda in the face of proof that you are wrong.

You asked me if Joe Jeannette was lying. I attempted to answer you by showing you proof that their fight was signed and sealed and would have been delivered if not for the commission....but now you don't want to look at whether he is lying. Suit yaself.

I guess your contention now is that men don't lie....? If you wanted to discuss this honestly, you wouldn't refuse to answer a question that is crucial to whether you are right or not. It's clear you are wrong.

I’m not lying, I just told you what you don’t want to hear, because as we know, it is more important for you to convince someone you are right rather than respect someone else’s opinion. I’ve been cordial and respectful with you, but now you are crossing a line.

You are stuck on 1912, when I have posted sources that Johnson was offered lucrative fights with Jeannette and the others all the way to 1914. Each one of these men insist he never gave them a legit shot at his title. It is documented in the history books. I have provided multiple sources.

So a fight got cancelled by the commission. Perhaps it was all a stunt to begin with as boxing has always been corrupt. Johnson didn’t fight for the rest of 1912 and most of 1913, despite several offers to fight overseas when he fled the country. So you think Jeannette was lying but the corrupt commission was telling the truth? How come no else was dis*****g Jeannette or Langford when they insisted he wouldn’t give them a shot as champion? It is in the history books!

Just a warning, you are on thin ice. Call me a liar again and you are out. You were the one who entered this thread with an agenda. Insisting it was a revenge thread. You refuse to accept evidence I have provided. Once again a stand off where you aren’t content with an answer so you throw a tantrum. If you don’t like my answers, or respect my position then we have nothing left to discuss.

[travestyny]

I’m not lying, I just told you what you don’t want to hear, because as we know, it is more important for you to convince someone you are right rather than respect someone else’s opinion. I’ve been cordial and respectful with you, but now you are crossing a line.

You are stuck on 1912, when I have posted sources that Johnson was offered lucrative fights with Jeannette and the others all the way to 1914. Each one of these men insist he never gave them a legit shot at his title. It is documented in the history books. I have provided multiple sources.

So a fight got cancelled by the commission. Perhaps it was all a stunt to begin with as boxing has always been corrupt. Johnson didn’t fight for the rest of 1912 and most of 1913, despite several offers to fight overseas when he fled the country. So you think Jeannette was lying but the corrupt commission was telling the truth? How come no else was dis*****g Jeannette or Langford when they insisted he wouldn’t give them a shot as champion? It is in the history books!

Just a warning, you are on thin ice. Call me a liar again and you are out. You were the one who entered this thread with an agenda. Insisting it was a revenge thread. You refuse to accept evidence I have provided. Once again a stand off where you aren’t content with an answer so you throw a tantrum. If you don’t like my answers, or respect my position then we have nothing left to discuss.

You're not fooling me. You simply want to cut off the conversation and put me on ignore because you can't handle the truth. It's the reason that you refuse to answer the question. I don't know why you want me to sugar coat what you're doing, but fine. I won't call you a liar.

You're right that I'm not satisfied with your answer BECAUSE YOU WON'T GIVE AN ANSWER.

Your claim is that Jack Johnson never accepted fights with Jeannette, Langford, and Mcvea.

We can start here.

So did he accept a fight with Jeannette or not? Why you don't want to discuss something that is directly in contrast to your opinion I would say is beyond me.

If you believe it is false, just say so. Then I'll send you a bunch of other articles that corroborate this evidence.


You've posted NOTHING that proves this to be a fabrication. Not one thing. If you have evidence that it's a fabrication, post it. The ONLY thing you've posted here is conversations from another forum and words from Joe Jeannette claiming that Johnson drew the color line.

Well, shouldn't you want to look at the evidence on whether Johnson drew the color line against Jeannette?

What am I missing here? I'm willing to answer any question you have. Willing to look at any bit of evidence you post. Ask yourself if you are willing to do the same.

Will you answer now or refuse yet again?

[travestyny]

So a fight got cancelled by the commission. Perhaps it was all a stunt....

Actually, I see the answer here.


So you agree that Jack Johnson did agree to fight Jeannette. Just because you want to speculate that it was a scam isn't valid proof of anything.


Any proof that it was a scam? If so, please show me. I'd love to see it. If not, seems to me you just admit that you are wrong about this....

I provided that show he was made generous offers between 1912 - 1914 and accepted none of them.