Jack Johnson vs Fireman Flynn. Did you know

[travestyny]

Why would Johnson bother agreeing to something he knew wouldn't happen? How come nobody else (promoters, managers, media) knew the fight wouldn't happen when they arranged it? Only Johnson figured it out?

Exactly. But it's clear that this dude hates JJohnson so much that he'll say anything no matter how outlandish to fit his agenda.

Joe Jeannette and his manager. Jack Johnson and his people. The promoters--the McMahon brothers. The venue--The St. Nicholas Arena. Even Madison Square Garden which was also bidding to get this fight. Yep. They were all in on this together to help Jack Johnson duck because they had to protect JJ from Jeannette at all costs. Got it.

I wonder how much Jack Johnson had to pay everyone for their time and effort to keep up the farce.

[travestyny]

Dr. Z

I see you ran to a safe haven in Ghost of Forgery's thread. I can't post there, but I did notice you responded to this there:

Johnson had agreed to fight Langford for $10K in 1911 (that is $20K less than he demanded in 1909), but of course he backed out of that one too.

https://news.google.com/newspapers?n...,3746279&hl=en

lol. This is the problem with you guys. You don't do any research on your own. You only try to paint things a certain way to fit your agenda.

Jack Johnson was at ringside for a fight in Philadelphia. He got up and gave a speech that he would fight any man at the club over 6 rounds for $10,000, calling out Langford's name specifically.

The manager of the club, Jack O'brien, apparently got Johnson and Langford both to agree. They would fight for the $10,000 purse, post forfeitures of $2500 each, and there would be a side bet of $10,000.

Fight never comes off. Clearly Johnson ducked it, right?


Johnson claims Langford was the one who ran off:

I went to Philadelphia to Jack O'brien's club. Jack offered $10,000 for me to fight Langford. I grabbed at it, and the match was made all excepting getting Mistah Langford to sign. He ran away. The next thing I hear the Langford man was going to Europe as fast as he could.

Clearly Johnson must be lying, right?

Sam Langford, who has been clamorous in his desire to box Jack Johnson before the American A.C., Philadelphia, has left us.

O'brien claimed to have a contract with the heavyweight champion to box Sam Langford before his club, but Sam spoiled the play by quietly packing up and sailing for England.

I guess he wasn't lying. Langford was pretty quickly on a boat to England leaving the offer behind.

But whatever to fit your agenda, I suppose. What is it that you said I should do in that thread? "Quit while I'm behind."


I think you should take your own advice. lol

[Dr. Z]

Why would Johnson bother agreeing to something he knew wouldn't happen? How come nobody else (promoters, managers, media) knew the fight wouldn't happen when they arranged it? Only Johnson figured it out?

A better question is this fight could have happened in other nations. It didn't'. There were several offers to fight Jeanette.

Every serious historian knows Johnson ducked his best competition as champion.

The poster Travestyny was nuked on post #26 of this thread. Johnson signed for Langford and backed out with lies. He's trying to absolve Johnson from blame, his problem is the papers who quote his big offers to meet better competing are out there.

Who did this guy fight as Champion? Who? And I don't see Travestyny trying to fix his dubious losses, or draws from the lesser men he did fight the quality of which were not very good. He should know this. Maybe that's why he's not going there.

I could say I want a photo of everything too. SHOW ME! He can't even show me Jeanette's purse on the offer he posted.

The words of a cornered man who knows he's wrong. All he's doing is avoiding the facts and skipping questions. I can see he's at odds with other posters. And make no mistake about there's an agenda to him on this topic.

No Championship fight with Langford

No Championship fight with Jeanette

No Championship fight with McVey

No offer to Gunboat Smith

No championship fight with McCarty.

No re-match with O'Brien or Jim Johnson, who drew with him.

Oh Johnson meet Willard all right, and he was KO'd and lied about a fix. Who buys Johnson being honest? His integrity sucks, and backing out a fight with Langford proves it. As you see those in the business including his manager call him dishonest.

All from 1909-March 1915. The money offers were there. Several of them. So how come none of it happened?

Any fighter would love a big pay day and chance to be heavyweight champion of the world. Johnson simply denied the best of them a chance.

This is a man who's on record wanting to be the only black heavyweight championship of the world. I think he he pulled for Schmeling in his second fight with Louis. He certainly picked Schemling to win and ripped Louis in the press.

[travestyny]

A better question is this fight could have happened in other nations. It didn't'. There were several offers to fight Jeanette.

Every serious historian knows Johnson ducked his best competition as champion.

The poster Travestyny was nuked on post #26 of this thread. Johnson signed for Langford and backed out with lies. He's trying to absolve Johnson from blame, his problem is the papers who quote his big offers to meet better competing are out there.

Who did this guy fight as Champion? Who? And I don't see Travestyny trying to fix his dubious losses, or draws from the lesser men he did fight the quality of which were not very good. He should know this. Maybe that's why he's not going there.

I could say I want a photo of everything too. SHOW ME! He can't even show me Jeanette's purse on the offer he posted.

The words of a cornered man who knows he's wrong. All he's doing is avoiding the facts and skipping questions. I can see he's at odds with other posters. And make no mistake about there's an agenda to him on this topic.

No Championship fight with Langford

No Championship fight with Jeanette

No Championship fight with McVey

No offer to Gunboat Smith

No championship fight with McCarty.

No re-match with O'Brien or Jim Johnson, who drew with him.

Oh Johnson meet Willard all right, and he was KO'd and lied about a fix. Who buys Johnson being honest? His integrity sucks, and backing out a fight with Langford proves it. As you see those in the business including his manager call him dishonest.

All from 1909-March 1915. The money offers were there. Several of them. So how come none of it happened?

Any fighter would love a big pay day and chance to be heavyweight champion of the world. Johnson simply denied the best of them a chance.

This is a man who's on record wanting to be the only black heavyweight championship of the world. I think he he pulled for Schmeling in his second fight with Louis. He certainly picked Schemling to win and ripped Louis in the press.

Ok, you wrote a lot, filled with lots of bravado, embellishments, and all out lies.

Nothing you've said here was convincing, and we both know it. That's clearly why you are so upset.

Listen. I like Sam Langford just as much as I like Jack Johnson and Joe Jeannette. I'm not defending Jack Johnson. I'm defending the evidence that is out there about what factually happened. As such, I don't have a concern about how good you think he was, which I've explained to you over and over. What do I care if you think he wasn't very good? You are welcome to your opinion.

But when we talk about what factually happened in his career, you can't make up your own narrative, refuse to prove anything you say, and then cry about it.

So how about this. You've been ducking what I say a whole lot. You claim that I've ducked your questions. Ok. Let's go question for question. Quid pro quo. You ask a question, I answer it until it's answered satisfactorily, and then I have my chance to ask a question. We'll get to the bottom of the matter that way.

What do you think? You in?


And by the way, your long post didn't even answer the simple question from the guy you were responding to. You gave a great example of your MO during our conversation.

[The Old LefHook]

History does not exist, only interpretations of it. Common sense knows there would have been little public demand for black on black championship fights stateside. Who filled the stadiums? Whites. Who wrote the columns? Whites slavered to see whites regain championships and recover their race's honor from the Watusi. That was the market.
.
The tar baby was popular, but a fight with him went against the market. By burka, that's it.

[Willie Pep 229]

Of course it was for the championship. Jack Johnson acknowledged that it was, Joe Jeannette's manager acknowledged that it was, the promoters acknowledged that it was. We had this conversation here before.

"for the heavyweight championship"


Jeannette's Manager: "...for the championship title"

Johnson to "prevent title from slipping away"

Hey TNY,

As to whether this was a championship fight.

OK let me state my belief up front then I can talk about the articles you posted.

I THINK that if the fight had come off it was going to be a Ten Round 'Exhibition' with the classic clause, if Jeannette knocks Johnson out he can claim the title, but there would be 'no decision.'

This is the manner in which the Dempsey-Miske fight was staged and Louis-Walcott I was originally intended to be (before a last minute change took it to a full 15 round defense.) I believe there were other championship goes under this criteria as well.

Repeating myself I feel like the first article made Johnson sound like a celebrity guest opponent with no mention of it being a championship fight.

In this post, the first article is a promotional announcement that never came to fruition and his (the promoter's) intentions (words) were not binding.

The second seems to be a promo for Jeannette to make pre-fight personal appearance to help the gate. That this article would call it a championship fight isn't historically binding, he didn't have the authority.

The third article is of no value to the question, we know this guy and we know his agenda; he has Jeanette already champion in the first line.

The final article is most interesting, it makes it sound as though the writer spoke with JJohnson. It's almost a quote and taken at face value we can conclude JJohnson saw it a a championship go.

Finally in the article that followed this post (that you posted) we have Commissioner O'Neil telling us that JJohnson is ban from all 'exhibitions.'

To me there seems to be three ways to define the word 'exhibition' here:

1. It was the classic cover-up by simply calling all prize fights 'exhibitions' to duck the prohibition laws. I am not sure of the state of things in New York at this time. E.g. Corbett-Sullivan was billed as "A Boxing Exhibition to the Finish." (A beautiful oxymoron, don't you think?)

2. He (they) intended to stop JJohnson from all exhibitions, not just fight but singing and dancing as well. This seems an odd definition because O'Neil would hold no such authority.

3. That this fight was an 'exhibition' with the 'KO clause inserted.

My conclusion (so far) that this was a ten round exhibition with a 'if there is a KO' championship clause inserted.

I would say JJohson wasn't ducking here.

[travestyny]

Hey TNY,

As to whether this was a championship fight.

OK let me state my belief up front then I can talk about the articles you posted.

I THINK that if the fight had come off it was going to be a Ten Round 'Exhibition' with the classic clause, if Jeannette knocks Johnson out he can claim the title, but there would be 'no decision.'

This is the manner in which the Dempsey-Miske fight was staged and Louis-Walcott I was originally intended to be (before a last minute change took it to a full 15 round defense.) I believe there were other championship goes under this criteria as well.

Repeating myself I feel like the first article made Johnson sound like a celebrity guest opponent with no mention of it being a championship fight.

In this post, the first article is a promotional announcement that never came to fruition and his (the promoter's) intentions (words) were not binding.

The second seems to be a promo for Jeannette to make pre-fight personal appearance to help the gate. That this article would call it a championship fight isn't historically binding, he didn't have the authority.

The third article is of no value to the question, we know this guy and we know his agenda; he has Jeanette already champion in the first line.

The final article is most interesting, it makes it sound as though the writer spoke with JJohnson. It's almost a quote and taken at face value we can conclude JJohnson saw it a a championship go.

Finally in the article that followed this post (that you posted) we have Commissioner O'Neil telling us that JJohnson is ban from all 'exhibitions.'

To me there seems to be three ways to define the word 'exhibition' here:

1. It was the classic cover-up by simply calling all prize fights 'exhibitions' to duck the prohibition laws. I am not sure of the state of things in New York at this time. E.g. Corbett-Sullivan was billed as "A Boxing Exhibition to the Finish." (A beautiful oxymoron, don't you think?)

2. He (they) intended to stop JJohnson from all exhibitions, not just fight but singing and dancing as well. This seems an odd definition because O'Neil would hold no such authority.

3. That this fight was an 'exhibition' with the 'KO clause inserted.

My conclusion (so far) that this was a ten round exhibition with a 'if there is a KO' championship clause inserted.

I would say JJohson wasn't ducking here.

Well yea. Remember, We had this conversation before.

This fight was to take place in New York at the time when ALL fights in New York were exhibitions. No different than Willard's championship fight in New York. The title changing hands would have to happen on a stoppage.

Remember when we had the convo about the Frawley Act and...I've forgotten the other Act and such. There were plenty of other championship fights in NY while they were all considered exhibitions because of NY's rules.

I chose those articles to show the public and all sides involved stated it as a Championship fight. There were even other boxers (I think I read an article from Corbett) who expressly stated it as a Championship fight.

There is no way Joe Jeannette's manager would have had Jeannette fight with no chance of winning the title. While he did state that he believes Jeannette was already the champ, he clearly states in the article that after September, Jeannette would be the champion, and phrased it as he was "to fight JJ for the championship." I'm not really sure why you guys have insinuated that he would be lying about whether it's for the championship or not. The ONLY reason I can think of him to lie about it is for Travestyny to win an online debate.....? There is absolutely no reason for Jeannette to take a non-title fight when all he wanted was the title. I'm sure his manager wanted the title shot nearly as much as he did.

[Willie Pep 229]

Well yea. Remember, We had this conversation before.

This fight was to take place in New York at the time when ALL fights in New York were exhibitions. No different than Willard's championship fight in New York. The title changing hands would have to happen on a stoppage.

Remember when we had the convo about the Frawley Act and...I've forgotten the other Act and such. There were plenty of other championship fights in NY while they were all considered exhibitions because of NY's rules.

I chose those articles to show the public and all sides involved stated it as a Championship fight. There were even other boxers (I think I read an article from Corbett) who expressly stated it as a Championship fight.

There is no way Joe Jeannette's manager would have had Jeannette fight with no chance of winning the title. While he did state that he believes Jeannette was already the champ, he clearly states in the article that after September, Jeannette would be the champion, and phrased it as he was "to fight JJ for the championship." I'm not really sure why you guys have insinuated that he would be lying about whether it's for the championship or not. The ONLY reason I can think of him to lie about it is for Travestyny to win an online debate.....? There is absolutely no reason for Jeannette to take a non-title fight when all he wanted was the title. I'm sure his manager wanted the title shot nearly as much as he did.

How did I end up being one of the "you guys" I never said he was lying about whether he believed it was a championship fight - not now or earlier. The issue with him is that he has a strong vested interest and if what we want is to assess public attitude towards the fight, he is not a stand alone source.

But all this is kind of irrelevant to my point, as you point out above there was no way to stage a legal (with a decision) fight in New York.

So at some level it had to be presented as an exhibition but I believe it would have been a "fight" and had certain white people (like half the nation) hadn't stopped it Johnson would have fought Jeannette in 1912. No duck.

Does O'Neil ever use the "C" word?

[QueensburyRules]

Hey TNY,

As to whether this was a championship fight.

OK let me state my belief up front then I can talk about the articles you posted.

I THINK that if the fight had come off it was going to be a Ten Round 'Exhibition' with the classic clause, if Jeannette knocks Johnson out he can claim the title, but there would be 'no decision.'

This is the manner in which the Dempsey-Miske fight was staged and Louis-Walcott I was originally intended to be (before a last minute change took it to a full 15 round defense.) I believe there were other championship goes under this criteria as well.

Repeating myself I feel like the first article made Johnson sound like a celebrity guest opponent with no mention of it being a championship fight.

In this post, the first article is a promotional announcement that never came to fruition and his (the promoter's) intentions (words) were not binding.

The second seems to be a promo for Jeannette to make pre-fight personal appearance to help the gate. That this article would call it a championship fight isn't historically binding, he didn't have the authority.

The third article is of no value to the question, we know this guy and we know his agenda; he has Jeanette already champion in the first line.

The final article is most interesting, it makes it sound as though the writer spoke with JJohnson. It's almost a quote and taken at face value we can conclude JJohnson saw it a a championship go.

Finally in the article that followed this post (that you posted) we have Commissioner O'Neil telling us that JJohnson is ban from all 'exhibitions.'

To me there seems to be three ways to define the word 'exhibition' here:

1. It was the classic cover-up by simply calling all prize fights 'exhibitions' to duck the prohibition laws. I am not sure of the state of things in New York at this time. E.g. Corbett-Sullivan was billed as "A Boxing Exhibition to the Finish." (A beautiful oxymoron, don't you think?)

2. He (they) intended to stop JJohnson from all exhibitions, not just fight but singing and dancing as well. This seems an odd definition because O'Neil would hold no such authority.

3. That this fight was an 'exhibition' with the 'KO clause inserted.

My conclusion (so far) that this was a ten round exhibition with a 'if there is a KO' championship clause inserted.

I would say JJohson wasn't ducking here.

- -Basically, if I were to sumerize, you've shown just how difficult it was in that era to get a fight made because of reigning politicians and authorities that reflect the majority of the voters of that period.

The whole history of John L is rife with epic struggles just to fight another popular "white" fighter, so much of the time they were illegal subject to raids and/or imprsonment.

This continued well into the Dempsey era until there seemed to be a thaw in the pols who were probably taking to much heat by voters. Right about here Tex organized what could be seen as the first eliminator tourney for the right to face Dempsey that included Harry Wills.

After Dempsey, boxing pretty much legal and there was an explosion of interest.

Weensie has dug up interesting historical artifacts proving this, but refuses to attempt a broader reality the represent, instead using snippets to bolster his preorchestrated narrative.

For whatever the reasons, JJ has a light in the loafers record as a titlest. Over the years I've come to respect JJ as a very underrated intellect and narcissistic self promoter who was able to manipulate his way to the top and stay there in this bad era for boxing until Willard finished him.

I love that fight because idiots never can get it right because of personal narratives. He had been showing a propensity for actual fighting instead of holding, and in the lead up shows farsighted training concepts by refusing to run off old legs, instead swimming in the beautiful Caribbean that prob took him back to his childhood in Galveston.

He set a torrid pace vs Willard that easily wins a 15-20rd fight, but Willard not another Big White Dope had his own schedule he was finally able to impose.

Very underrated fight and blame Hollywood for allowing most of the footage of the great early filmed fights to be lost.

Without the fight biz, there would be no Hollywood point blank. They shaatt on their history that explains their vacuous releases for the vacuous masses.

[Dr. Z]

Robey knocks Jack Johnson down. ( 19009? ) I must say I never read this one. Roby wasn't a real boxer, rather a stage actor, But they were in the ring and the small man had enough to floor Johnson.

https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/135669369?searchTerm=jack%20jonhson%20offered%20boxing