Why is Jack Johnson a top ten heavyweight?

[Thread Stealer]

Jack Johnson's reign as the colored HW champ was very impressive. He was defending against some really good HWs and future HOFers like Sam McVea, Sam Langford, and Joe Jeanette. Then he had his recognition as the world heavyweight champion.

His achievements are pretty impressive. As far as watching him on film, he was a clever fighter and great for his time. But seriously, he is painful to watch. If I have trouble sleeping, I think I'll watch his fights.

[Steak]

No vote = a 20 something poster
Yes vote = a 30 plus poster who no longer thinks the universe revolves around his generation.

Poet

uh huh. so do you have any real legitimate reasons why you think Jack Johnson is a top ten? most of the heavyweights I have above Johnson are before my generation anyway, so you didnt really say much there.

[CaRnAgEViOLaToR]

jack johnson is a top 10 heavyweight imo he beat everyone in his time and was a hero. maybe he ducked a rematch with langford but thats it

[Left Hook Tua]

uh huh. so do you have any real legitimate reasons why you think Jack Johnson is a top ten? most of the heavyweights I have above Johnson are before my generation anyway, so you didnt really say much there.

just because he's not your top 10 or even mine doesn't mean he's NOT a top 10 guy.

he has top 10 level resume , legacy , skills , etc.

he makes more than a few guys top 10 imo. not mine though.

[Thread Stealer]

No vote = a 20 something poster
Yes vote = a 30 plus poster who no longer thinks the universe revolves around his generation.

Poet

I'm still in my twenties.

[TheGreatA]

Jack Johnson's reign as the colored HW champ was very impressive. He was defending against some really good HWs and future HOFers like Sam McVea, Sam Langford, and Joe Jeanette. Then he had his recognition as the world heavyweight champion.

His achievements are pretty impressive. As far as watching him on film, he was a clever fighter and great for his time. But seriously, he is painful to watch. If I have trouble sleeping, I think I'll watch his fights.

A lot of the fights back then were like that. Either they were dull or they were brutal.

I guess the audiences had more patience then... I can't imagine myself watching Jim Corbett and Peter Jackson for 61 rounds only for the fight to end in a no decision.

[LondonRingRules]

In March 1898 he was sacrificed to Jim Jeffries, who flattened him in three rounds

** Just scrolled thru on a lark, not meaning to respond.

While I rate Johnson, I don't rate him in top 10. Take away the Jeffries win, and you have very little which is a testament to what Jeffries was, the Tyson of his day where the Johnson victory secured the legend, and his finances which oddly enough leads to his downfall.

Jeffries was a crude novice fighter against Peter friggin' Jackson how ever old and infirm he was. Damned sight more impressive than young Clay against 50 yr old Archie Moore, or even Liston against Patterson.

Had Jeffries not been stampeded back into the ring by a career earnings payday and white hope baiting, he would arguably be #1 today as he was invincible. Johnson would be nothing much because eventually he would have been forced to fight Jeannnette and Langford, one of which already beat him and the other holding him close before maturing with an additional 30 lbs and on a heavyweight tear that has never been duplicated.

Every fighter enters his prime under unique circumstances. Holmes' were not as favorable as Ali's for example, which was probably good for Holmes since he couldn't carry Ali's jockstrap. Same with Rocky, which is why the Gods of Boxing lined up those two together in the pantheon of undefeated fighters before Big Lar's fall from grace.

Johnson lucked into an opportune time and blew it ultimately, yet is accorded respect by current historians. Thing is he continues to drop in the ratings as people look at his fights and ask, "why is he defending against these little fellas and journeymen and that old guy?"

Who the hay in the heavy ranks is gonna be dropped by Ketchell for example? Maybe little Leon or Floyd, but that's about it.

[Steak]

just because he's not your top 10 or even mine doesn't mean he's NOT a top 10 guy.

he has top 10 level resume , legacy , skills , etc.

he makes more than a few guys top 10 imo. not mine though.

Im not gonna be stubborn and ignore everyone. Im really asking why some people consider him top ten. so far Thread Stealer and theManchine have given me some pretty good info.

but I really do wonder if video footage of guys like Sam McVea even exists. and then some people tell me that boxrec is unreliable, and Im an idiot for trying to judge old time fighters by that. what the hell am I supposed to judge these guys by then? newspaper reoprts? the same newspaper reports that cant even agree with other newspapers on who won the fight, and will flat out be contrasting to one another?
its kind of frustrating sometimes.

[ACHlLLES]

Sam McVea

Reminds me of sam peter in some ways, except in way better shape

[slicksouthpaw16]

9 people actually voted no? LOL, thats why i rarely post here anymore. The only thing that is wrong with this forum is the posters, because they are ridiculous. You would never get this on esb. You take the first black heavyweight champion that there ever was, who fought and chased for his shot at the title, won the title, beat the best black boxers of that era( Langford, Jeanette, Mcve), beat the greatest fighters on that era, was one of the first to mix his offense with his defense, held the title for almost 7 years without a defeat and dealt with a lot of racism and there was a lot in that time, and say that he doesn't crack the top 10?. The man was absolutely brilliant, and i suggest some of you revisit your boxing history. I rank him at 3 behind Ali and Louis.