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

[GhostofDempsey]

When you dick measure guys from widely different eras like this do you ever think about how RJJ would have fought & did if he was born in 1878? Or how Jack Johnson would have fought & did if he was born in 1969?

To me this is such a crazy comparison of men who might as well be from different planets with almost 100 years between them that its an impossible comparison. Whoever comes later usually has the benefit of being able to grow via past great fighters that they saw or the people who worked with them saw or worked with in the past which is an advantage. And whoever came first lacks the ability to learn as much from the past generation which is a disadvantage.

I think sh^t like that doesn't get brought up enough cuz mfers aren't moving in a vacuum & there is a critical mass of intelligence & knowledge the closer to the present you get which gives whoever is closer to the presenta nice edge.

In fairness, an anology was made between two match ups from different eras without comparing a modern fighter to an older one. Houdini somehow brought in a direct comparison and I’m curious how he reached his conclusion.

So Choynski a middleweight KO’s Johnson, can be compared to a Hagler KO of say Frazier. The argument being made here is that Johnson feasted on a lot of much smaller men during his time. Some he still struggled with. Would we think any less of Joshua or Wilder if they were knocked out by Canelo or Zurdo? Or if a super middle weight went the distance with them? In any era we would count that against a HW champion, so why not Johnson?

[GhostofDempsey]

It’s obvious. You say you think you know boxing but don’t know classic boxing skills?

Johnson was a master of boxing skill as defined as the ability to parry, slip, block feint and counter to vital areas of the body/head. In close Johnson with just taps of his opponents elbows rendered body punches ineffective. When his opponents brought those blows to the head they would be blocked and quickly returned to “control” position.

RJJ relied upon his reflexes and speed. You won’t see the skills aforementioned seen with Johnson in every round he fought from Jones often. It’s all control at distance and overwhelm with speed. The finer points of the game are missing from Jones skill set whereas that’s all you see from Johnson.

Johnson could parry, grab, clinch and roll his shoulder into fighters because he had such a distinct size advantage. He too relied on reflexes to lean back from punches. Jones was more we’ll rounded than people give him credit. Johnson also fought a lot of guys with far less experience.

The weights you contend for Johnson Langford are inaccurate. There was no weigh in for the fight.

Langford says there was at least a 30 pound difference but possibly up to fifty. Given he was a natural MW, this is not inaccurate. Langford gave up almost six inches in height. As did Tommy Burns.

[phallus]

When you dick measure guys from widely different eras like this do you ever think about how RJJ would have fought & did if he was born in 1878? Or how Jack Johnson would have fought & did if he was born in 1969?

To me this is such a crazy comparison of men who might as well be from different planets with almost 100 years between them that its an impossible comparison. Whoever comes later usually has the benefit of being able to grow via past great fighters that they saw or the people who worked with them saw or worked with in the past which is an advantage. And whoever came first lacks the ability to learn as much from the past generation which is a disadvantage.

I think sh^t like that doesn't get brought up enough cuz mfers aren't moving in a vacuum & there is a critical mass of intelligence & knowledge the closer to the present you get which gives whoever is closer to the presenta nice edge.

i think a better comparison or fantasy match up would have been jack johnson against jack dempsey, except it never would have happened because dempsey wouldn't fight a black fighter. but dempsey is the kind of swarmer that would have given johnson problems, and they were the same size.

Johnson could parry, grab, clinch and roll his shoulder into fighters because he had such a distinct size advantage. He too relied on reflexes to lean back from punches. Jones was more we’ll rounded than people give him credit. Johnson also fought a lot of guys with far less experience.



Langford says there was at least a 30 pound difference but possibly up to fifty. Given he was a natural MW, this is not inaccurate. Langford gave up almost six inches in height. As did Tommy Burns.

johnson and jeffries were pretty close to the same size and johnson made it look easy beating jeffries, however mr. jeff was older and had been retired for several years. it's possible though that in johnson's time there were few big guys that had his level of skills.

[Eff Pandas]

Would we think any less of Joshua or Wilder if they were knocked out by Canelo or Zurdo? Or if a super middle weight went the distance with them? In any era we would count that against a HW champion, so why not Johnson?

Cuz different people, different timetables, different rules, different etc. & so on. This is all such a reach to compare guys from all eras or two specific guys from different eras. We're dealing with infinite intangibles.

[Eff Pandas]

i think a better comparison or fantasy match up would have been jack johnson against jack dempsey, except it never would have happened because dempsey wouldn't fight a black fighter. but dempsey is the kind of swarmer that would have given johnson problems, and they were the same size.

Thats definitely a fun lil scifi fight, but again I ask how many fights of each guy has people coming up with the conclusion they would come up with? I'm guessing not many.

[Zmerai Khan]

How many Jack Johnson fights have you seen in full? What fights were they?

Undoubtedly, he's seen the same footage as everyone else.

It clearly doesn't match the description so often found in print.

[Zmerai Khan]

Monte Cox always praised Johnson for literally decades. He decides one day to be controversial and writes this drivel. Comparing Jones, really a lower skilled fighter, to Johnson who was classicly trained is a laugh riot.

Whoa! Whoa! Whoa! Careful, pops! It may seem like Junior made his debut the same week you last changed your socks. But it's actually been long enough that he can be called a fighter of the past. There's surely members on this board who are too young to recall his heyday.

We all know how you love to heap praise upon overrated fighters of yesteryear; particularly at the expense of more contemporary and conspicuously talented fighters.

You do you. But you're shooting yourself in the foot criticizing Jones. Don't blow the opportunity.

[GhostofDempsey]

i think a better comparison or fantasy match up would have been jack johnson against jack dempsey, except it never would have happened because dempsey wouldn't fight a black fighter. but dempsey is the kind of swarmer that would have given johnson problems, and they were the same size.




johnson and jeffries were pretty close to the same size and johnson made it look easy beating jeffries, however mr. jeff was older and had been retired for several years. it's possible though that in johnson's time there were few big guys that had his level of skills.

Dempsey had in fact fought a black fighter. Had a contract to fight Wills but the money never came through.

Jeffries had to lose 70 pounds and was retired for six years. Jeffries was nowhere near his prime.

Johnson got KO’d by Willard. Dempsey destroyed Willard. While that doesn’t necessarily correlate to an automatic win for Dempsey over Johnson, I would wager a Dempsey victory. Johnson also never gave any title shots to other black fighters, drawing his own color line.

[Coreytrevor12]

156 for Langford to 185 for Johnson, 5'7 to 6'0 with an even reach.So think Keith Thurman vs Andre Ward

[Zmerai Khan]

When you dick measure guys from widely different eras like this do you ever think about how RJJ would have fought & did if he was born in 1878? Or how Jack Johnson would have fought & did if he was born in 1969?

To me this is such a crazy comparison of men who might as well be from different planets with almost 100 years between them that its an impossible comparison. Whoever comes later usually has the benefit of being able to grow via past great fighters that they saw or the people who worked with them saw or worked with in the past which is an advantage. And whoever came first lacks the ability to learn as much from the past generation which is a disadvantage.

I think sh^t like that doesn't get brought up enough cuz mfers aren't moving in a vacuum & there is a critical mass of intelligence & knowledge the closer to the present you get which gives whoever is closer to the presenta nice edge.

Except that the Irish were coming: Dempsey, Loughran, Tunney, the brothers Gibbons, Greb, Walker. And the Jews and Italians soon after. Pep, for instance, falls halfway between Johnson and Ali and is a far, far, far superior Boxer to them both.

Boxing in the late teens and twenties was very much the modern sport we know today. Different but clearly familiar. I am comfortable counting many pre-WWII fighters among the best of all-time. The footage proves it.

In regards to Johnson, too many excuses have to be made to justify many of the accolades cast upon him. He was good. The best man in his day. But not an all time great by any stretch of the imagination.