In the Ring With Jack Johnson

[apollack]

Just released!!

In the Ring With Jack Johnson - Part II: The Reign by Adam J. Pollack continues the series of the most detailed and thorough books ever written on Jack Johnson. This 880-page book completely covers Jack Johnson’s reign and life as world heavyweight champion.

As with Part I: The Rise, by utilizing multiple primary-sources, Part II: The Reign enables the reader to experience Jack Johnson’s life, both inside and outside the ring, and the world in which he lived. Both black and white-owned newspapers offer their plethora of perspectives on race and boxing. The book includes pre-fight hype and analysis, negotiations, training, the fights, post-fight analysis, what other boxers were doing, racial incidents and riots, analysis of the significant racial impact of Johnson’s achievements, legal impediments, religious and racial objections, and the details of Johnson’s many legal struggles, including a chapter covering his criminal trial for violation of the White-Slave Traffic Act, otherwise known as the Mann Act, using the actual trial transcript. The book also is chock-full of nearly 400 rare photographs, cartoons, and advertisements. Boxing fans and historians will obtain knowledge and insight into Jack Johnson’s life, career, and world like never before.

http://www.amazon.com/Ring-Jack-Johnson ... ck+johnson

[Caractacus]

Where you able to find out if Jack Johnson had ever actually fought(and lost to)
"Battling Norfolk"?
( in his comeback of course)

[apollack]

http://www.brothersonsports.com/heres-w ... ammad-ali/

[Caractacus]

Also I was wondering if any of Jack Johnson's"Lost" silent films have ever turned up?
Such as THE BLACK THUNDERBOLT(1922).

[Cap]

Is this the same Jack Johnson who turned his back on contenders of his own race because "...they wouldn't draw flies..." then turned around and defended against Battling Jim Johnson, a black man? He was a coward, plain and simple, determined to be the only man of colour to hold the heavyweight championship of the world.

[cfang]

It is disrespectful to a truly great champion and legendary figure of boxing to call him a coward. The one thing that stands out about him when you read through the 1400 odd pages of Pollacks two books on Jack Johnson is how incredibly brave he was. He fought everyone before he came champion and beat them all. Was Langford a risk, well yes but no more so that Jeanette or McVey. The truth was that public didn't want another black champion. Johnson could have defended against Langford, Jeanette, McVey etc ofc but it's clear he wasn't scared of them, it just made more sense for him to enjoy himself and defend occasionally against less challenging white fighters. He certainly wasn't scared and when you consider how he behaved in such a bold manner in a time when almost the whole white populous were against him and lynchings were common place, he's a braver man than anyone on this forum for sure.

[Tomasino]

Is this the same Jack Johnson who turned his back on contenders of his own race because "...they wouldn't draw flies..." then turned around and defended against Battling Jim Johnson, a black man? He was a coward, plain and simple, determined to be the only man of colour to hold the heavyweight championship of the world.

Cap, do you reckon Sam Langford would have taken him? Although Sam chased him around he was quoted as saying Johnson hit him harder then anyone else...

[Cap]

I believe the Langford of 1910-1913, when he was at his peak, stood an excellent chance of beating Johnson. His chances would improve still if he could get a referee who would not allow Johnson to hold.

[BoxBuzz]

Cap....I'm going to offer up another scenario other than coward.

The name of the game is professional boxing. So it really isn't about going around and getting yourself in fights.... just for the glory, or even to instill in others that you are the "best of the best".

Though that has to be a very satisfying side benefit of being the champion I'm quite sure.

I'm thinking he had a pretty solid chip on his shoulder...like most fellas who choose the life of a prize fighter. I mean something has to put the fire in your belly to want to get involved.

So he was a bit of a smart ass. So why NOT always choose the money? He was also a smart fella, not that different that our Money Mayweather of today. In fact, it could be said
he was the first of his kind. And in his day the risk was much bigger for a black man. I just can't see an ounce of coward in that guy. But he wasn't just going to go around giving his fights away for free. And since most were willing to pay to see some fair complected fella humble him, he followed the money. And he was SMART not to pass that torch on to someone else, unless forced to. Had he appeared to be less than Jeanette, ...or some other black contemporaries....it would be THEM calling the shots. Or at least exploiting the opportunities.

This seems like a no brainer. Follow the money. He was not a coward. He was just looking out for himself. These days it's just called management.

[Cap]

Funny. So many called Tommy Burns a coward for running away from Johnson. When the time was right Burns stood his ground. Johnson ran from Langford despite attractive offers from British promoters. Much better than he got for defending the title against Battling Jim Johnson. He ran and ran and ran. Johnson was afraid of losing the title to Langford and being tossed in the wastebin of history.

[Ambling Alp II]

When Johnson won the title in 1908, he was the best heavyweight in the world. (Had been for a few years already.)
He probably would have beat Langford or anyone else at this point. (Though he should have given Langford a title shot.)

However, Johnson was already 30 years old and 5 years older than Langford and 6 years older than McVey. The real question is when Johnson had slowed down to the point where Langford or McVey were likely to beat him. I would guess around 1912.

[cfang]

I've got Langford at all time #3 p4p but I don't believe he'd have ever beaten Johnson. Johnson was too big and had the perfect style to deal with Sam (especially now we have footage of him). I think both Jeanette and Mcvey were prob more of a threat around 1912. Langford could get a little fat too just like Johnson.

In fact although Jack kded Jeanette lots and lots of times when they fought I think Joe j with that more elusive style and active jab may have had more of a chance to outpoint Johnson. Thing to note here too is that Langford/Mcvey/Jeanette regularly used to fight and beat each other Johnson never lost to them - apart from the Jeanette dq. In fact if you ignore that anomaly and the hart match which Johnson actually won. He was unbeaten from 1901-1916 and in that time beat pretty much everyone. Without the colour bar of the day it's feasible he'd could have won the title in 03/04 and made many title defences more. I've got him #3 all time heavy and he's a legendary fighter. We rarely saw him at his best due to his general loafing. It's my view he'd have beaten all the other black heavys during his champion years. He'd have trained hard for them. He beat them all before and he'd beat them again. The best of his era by far IMO.

[pound per pound]

Is this the same Jack Johnson who turned his back on contenders of his own race because "...they wouldn't draw flies..." then turned around and defended against Battling Jim Johnson, a black man? He was a coward, plain and simple, determined to be the only man of colour to hold the heavyweight championship of the world.

Cap, do you reckon Sam Langford would have taken him? Although Sam chased him around he was quoted as saying Johnson hit him harder then anyone else...

This book seems interesting as it uses primary sources and gives multiple opinions allowing the reader to decide.

The Johnson vs. Langford match took place when Langford was under 160 pounds, and approximately 20 years of age. Johnson was much older and had 30 pounds on Langford.

Langford grew into his heavyweight body and was significantly more dangerous by the time Johnson became champion.

I don't think Johnson was a coward in the ring, but in terms of giving the best men a shot, he was very risk adverse. I do think he skirted the best black contenders as champion in Sam Langford, Joe Jeannette, and Sam McVea. Money offers were out there from known promoters to make these matches happen. Johnson used the excuse of the color line to take easier matches, then as Cap points out gave Jim Johnson a match when it became convenient for him.

What would Muhammad Ali's title reign look like if he never fought Frazier, Foreman, or Norton, and went after a bunch of Chuck Wepner types instead, drew with a middle weight, was floored by another blown up middle weight and drew again with a journeyman type like Battling Jim Johnson in a poor 10 round affair? It's a fair question to ask. I think history would hold it against him. Ali is called the greatest because he fought the best as champion and beat each man near their best.

[Caractacus]

Just imagine it was Sam Langford instead of Stanley Ketchel who fought
Jack Johnson for the title that evening,
and Langford had won by KO.
How do you feel (certain members)of the public would have treated Langford in the press as the Heighyweight champion?

[cfang]

True but Johnson had cleaned up the division before becoming champ and he himself was avoided for 5 years. Different times. Johnson could have koed ketchell in a round but kept him up for the cameras. True Langford got bigger but so did Johnson. He would always have been much the bigger man. Langford had a middle/lt heavy frame. Jack a proper heavy.

[pound per pound]

True but Johnson had cleaned up the division before becoming champ and he himself was avoided for 5 years. Different times. Johnson could have koed ketchell in a round but kept him up for the cameras. True Langford got bigger but so did Johnson. He would always have been much the bigger man. Langford had a middle/lt heavy frame. Jack a proper heavy.

Cfang,

160 lbs does not have much of a chance vs 190 lbs, but 185lbs has a real chance vs 205lbs.

Johnson was KO'd by Joe Choynski in 1901. Choynski was not much bigger than 170lbs. Langford's body type was fine at 170-185 lbs, and KO'd much bigger men in Sam McVea, Harry Wills, and Jim Johnson.

A 1909-1914 match up between Langford and Johnson would has easily been the best match up of the times.

[cfang]

Haha I just can't criticise Langford. He's one of the greatest fighters of all time. I think Johnson would have outboxed him any time but I guess we'll never know. Great fighters both. Wish they were around today.

[HomicideHenry]

Good work Adam. Always great to see you reveal new books. I hope you keep at it and write on Willard, Dempsey, Tunney, etc. Haven't really seen or heard from you since interviewed you a few times on ATGRADIO. Glad to see you're still writing these stellar books. Gives modern fans much insight to not just the fighters, but the time period in which they came.

[cfang]

True Henry. Was a bit like getting Klompton's Greb book when I got the this one...Christmas :-)

[Caractacus]

yeah, the biography on
"Big Wheeler"
should be really interesting since
Jess Willard's career hasnt been ever extensively
written about as far as I know.
( and this past April marked the 100th anniversary of his becoming World Heavyweight Champion)
I wonder if he still has kinfolk in Pottawatomi County(Kansas)
that can help him shed more light on him.
I do know that Jess Willard as roots in the Buckeye State(Ohio)

[L.A. kidd]

Is this the same Jack Johnson who turned his back on contenders of his own race because "...they wouldn't draw flies..." then turned around and defended against Battling Jim Johnson, a black man? He was a coward, plain and simple, determined to be the only man of colour to hold the heavyweight championship of the world.

I agree with you about Johnson, he caused a lot of people to hate blacks because of him, I can't see where that did his race any good.

if he would have been a gentleman. not married white women, and thrown that up in the white man's face he may have done his race some good.

as it was, he did the black man more damage by being smart-ass and telling the white man to shove it. he certainly deserves no respect.

as a fighter he was vastly over-rated. always bulling smaller foes in the ring. his true colors shone through when he quit against Willard.

[Ambling Alp II]

He beat larger opponents. He did not "bully" his opponents. He did not quit against Willard.

[L.A. kidd]

well, i saw the film of the fight and he after the 25th round, he seemed to give up. and also don't ever forget james j, Jeffries was out of the ring for 6 years, and lost 100 lbs when he came back to fight Johnson. if jeff would have been in his prime, jeff would have beat him. because Jeffries was better in his prime, than Willard was in his.

[Ambling Alp II]

Well yes, Jeffries in his prime was better than Jess Willard; I don't think too many people would argue with that.
However, Johnson was well past his prime when he lost to Willard, just as Jeffries was past his prime when he fought Johnson.

Jeffries vs Johnson prime for prime? That is arguable, but I would lean towards Johnson. This fight actually could have happened.

He didn't give up at all. He had taken a lot of punishment, and this was the 26th round. He was extremely tired and got knocked out.

[Caractacus]

Yeah,but Jack Johnson was still the(undisputed) Heavyweight Champion
when he had fought Willard.
Jeffries had retired 6 years ealier and had no intention of fighting ever again
until he was presurred into it and backed into a corner.
So there is a psychological factor to take into account to.