Jess Willard vrs Jack Johnson/100th Anniversary

[APerno]

A little off task, but interesting. [short]

http://www.perno.com/Boxing/JJ02.pdf

You're right about one thing.. That story is WAY off target.. It has nothing to do with the phony Johnson-Willard fight. It's another hate-piece on Johnson.

How about answering the evidence I present in my posts??? ... You can't without admitting the fight and the KO punch were fake.

You think it phony? New York Times? - I don't want to draw a conclusion about whether the fight was fixed or not, but I do find the debate interesting - the final right hand is at a camera angle that makes it impossible to confirm the punch; I believe if you really want to prove this issue you have to look not at the fight film but seek out empirical evidence outside the actual fight; e.g agreement papers, a govt. official's diary, a bank transfer of funds, subsequent financial or social behavior, ETC. Something independent of the fight, something that exists only because there was a fix in. Debating what we perceived happened in the ring isn't going to do it; but folks like us have been at this since 1915; and there is no reason why our generation can't have at it as well - but I believe the fight alone will never get us to an answer.

[APerno]

Kalan - this one may tickle your fancy ! - April 5th date is interesting; had to go to press the night before the fight. - Why give the press such an interview?

http://www.perno.com/Boxing/JJ03.html

[Kalan]

Well APerno, the feds never arrested Johnson did they??? So they wasted a lot of time didn't they??? But I'm more interested in your previous post.

You don't need that level of evidence.. They indict somebody because there's a strong body of evidence that he committed a crime -- not absolute proof---but proof beyond a reasonable doubt.. You don't need anywhere CLOSE to absolute proof to show Johnson-Willard was a fix.. The articles you unearthed describe Johnson out-punching an inept, amateurish, and bumbling Willard 10 to 1.. That's a very lopsided margin.. They describe Johnson dominating for 20 rounds.. They describe 5 rounds of inactivity and cat-calling from the spectators for the fighters to do something...and somebody yelling "FAKE" ... Johnson had a lot of rounds to give away if he wanted to rest up for a long time because he was winning by so huge a margin.. Willard was also doing almost nothing as well.. Johnson was looking for communications and signals from his wife at that point of the fight. Reporters describe Johnson as looking toward his wife's box.

How many Heavyweight Title fights in History were there where the KO shot was doubted by many writers??? Ali-Liston II and Johnson-Willard are the only ones.. Both KO shots were doubted for good reasons.. Ali didn't land a real hard punch and Liston was never given a count by the referee.. In fact, Liston got up and the fight resumed -- so the abbreviated fight and ending stunk like Hell.. Willard didn't land a good shot because there was no sound of impact.. Willard said the KO shot was an uppercut inside which nobody saw or heard.. and it's tough for a boxer as inept as Willard to land anything on a master boxer like Johnson -- much less a loaded, lead right from the outside. Then you had the gentle way Johnson fell.. His head not bouncing.. Johnson's knees being drawn up to start the count.. and Johnson shading his eyes from the sun as the newspaper reported.

The smoking gun was Johnson sending word o his wife following the 25th that the fight would be over in the next round and to exit the arena -- as also reported and your last newspaper article stated.. In the face of all that, how could the KO punch be legit???

[Caractacus]

The real question is :How much did Jack Johnson value in being the Heavyweight Champion of the World ?
What was it worth to him and how much of his identity and self worth was with being it?
Could you put a price on it ?

[Caractacus]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IFZVlsLs9Eo

yeah,sure thing,at 9:05 you can see the fighting spirit of Jack Johnson just leave his body
when that punch lands.
The odd thing is (or perhaps not so odd) was these seconds of fight footage were not used in Ken Burn's
anti-American propaganda documentery UNFORGIVABLE BLACKNESS,
when they focused on the Willard fight and they do mention the heart punch
but didnt show it.

[Kalan]

BULLCRAP!!!! NO PUNCH lands at 9:05 of your video... They're both posing and doing absolutely NOTHING..

Your whole video is a white racist propaganda film.. Dubbing in a phony Johnson voice and fictional dialogue..

With the phony, dubbed voice in your video, Johnson gives Willard tons of respect when he had none for him -- as if Johnson was a bowing and scraping black man.. How can you have any respect for an inept boxer you can out-punch 10 to 1 and completely dominate the first 20 rounds???

Willard hated boxing and was clubbed down by 187-pound Dempsey like an overgrown punching bag in his next fight, over 4 years later.. He avoided boxing as much as he could.. Meanwhile Johnson was back in action a lot sooner than Willard and won his next 13 fights in a row while Willard went 2-2 with 2 KO losses.. Willard was a bum.. He couldn't have beaten Johnson legitimately in a million years.

[pound per pound]

A little off task, but interesting. [short]

http://www.perno.com/Boxing/JJ02.pdf

You're right about one thing.. That story is WAY off target.. It has nothing to do with the phony Johnson-Willard fight. It's another hate-piece on Johnson.

How about answering the evidence I present in my posts??? ... You can't without admitting the fight and the KO punch were fake.

The punch was not fake at all.

[Caractacus]

BULLCRAP!!!! NO PUNCH lands at 9:05 of your video... They're both posing and doing absolutely NOTHING..

Your whole video is a white racist propaganda film.. Dubbing in a phony Johnson voice and fictional dialogue..

With the phony, dubbed voice in your video, Johnson gives Willard tons of respect when he had none for him -- as if Johnson was a bowing and scraping black man.. How can you have any respect for an inept boxer you can out-punch 10 to 1 and completely dominate the first 20 rounds???

Willard hated boxing and was clubbed down by 187-pound Dempsey like an overgrown punching bag in his next fight, over 4 years later.. He avoided boxing as much as he could.. Meanwhile Johnson was back in action a lot sooner than Willard and won his next 13 fights in a row while Willard went 2-2 with 2 KO losses.. Willard was a bum.. He couldn't have beaten Johnson legitimately in a million years.

Man,that aint my video.
It is a clip from the 1970 OSCAR award wiining documetery JACK JOHNSON
that was produced by Jim Jacobs and Bill Cayton of BIGfIGHTSiNC.

[Caractacus]

The fight originally was supposed to take place in Juarez Mexico (not to far from El Paso Texas) March.6.1915
were a huge cattleman's convention was going to take place.
Willard started training in El Paso before going to Cuba.

Willard's sparring partner was Walter Monahan (Jack Johnson's former protege and sparring partner)

Jack Johnson's sparring partners were Bob Armstrong and Sam McVey
plus reportedly two other American boxers who he had previously fought.
anyone know who those two were ?
( I think one may have been Jim Johnson )
check this old newspaper article out.

http://archives.chicagotribune.com/1915 ... -for-fight

[Kalan]

My guess that is why Johnson held his guard so low in this fight.
He didnt like being punched in the body by such a big man.
At times in the footage you can even see Johnson flinch whenever Willard faints.
BTW It was just as hot there in the ring (110 degrees)for Willard as it was for Johnson.
"Hotter Then Hell" Willard was quoted as saying years later.

That's a lie... It wasn't 110 degrees... Where did you get that bullcrap??? ... I guess that's why almost all the spectators wore coats and ties... Even the referee wore a vest and tie... People just love to dress up when it's 110 degrees out.. Seeing Johnson flinch is another lie -- He was a master boxer who out-punched Willard 10-1 according to reporters at the actual fight... He made Willard look like a distressed and bumbling amateur..

Johnson had been in many more fights against higher caliber fighters than Willard ever fought... Nothing Willard could do would make him flinch... In truth you can't tell much from a grainy video.. It's better to go with the newspaper reports. There is almost no footage of any blow by Willard making real good contact, but plenty of footage of Johnson's punches hitting Willard effectively enough to score -- which agrees with the newspaper reports.

[Kalan]

Man,that aint my video.
It is a clip from the 1970 OSCAR award wiining documetery JACK JOHNSON
that was produced by Jim Jacobs and Bill Cayton of BIGfIGHTSiNC.

I don't care who produced it... It's a racist piece of crap with the dubbed voice overs, fictional dialogue, and total misrepresentations of the footage. The actual newspaper articles are a lot more accurate and give shocking information... Such as Johnson sending word to his wife before the 26th round to exit the area and head for home because the fight was over in the next round.. and then Johnson initiating a clinch and checking to to see if his wife had left her box -- before he sets up the fake KO punch... Which there was much doubt among sportswriters that an authentic KO punch had been thrown -- and for very good reason.. That so-called KO punch looked fake as Hell.

[APerno]

Can you find the mistake in this article? You would think the NYT would do better research - what is interesting is that many fight fans make the same mistaken assumption - funny they got the date right but . . .

http://www.perno.com/Boxing/jj04.html

[Caractacus]

Can you find the mistake in this article? You would think the NYT would do better research - what is interesting is that many fight fans make the same mistaken assumption - funny they got the date right but . . .

http://www.perno.com/Boxing/jj04.html

Yes,27 days after July.4th.1910 would be July.31.1910 not July.31.1912.
(obviously a typo)
You will have to do better then to try to stump us all here Mr. APerno.

[Caractacus]

Okay it was actually really only 105 degrees that Spring day in Havana Cuba.
BTW the fight started at 1 o'clock in the afternoon so that is why the Newspaper THE DAY
got the round-by-round coverage published in time for its evening edition April.5.1915.

BTW of course they dressed nicely ringside in 1915.
The was still sort of Victorian/Edwardian times and everyone had "more class" back then.
people still wore suits and ties and straw hats to fights in the 1950's and 1960's,
it wasnt until about the mid-1970's when you could go to a sporting event dressed like a slob or a hippie
and not feel self-concious about it.

[Kalan]

APerno is now ignoring the evidence of a fixed fight -- to focus on whether a newspaper got a freakin' date correct... Who GAF???

Many who support Willard's version of events claim the fight was on one of the hottest July 4th's ever.. "IT WAS HOT AND GETTING HOTTER!!" When actually it wasn’t even fought in the summer. It was fought in early spring on April 5th and wasn't nearly as hot as propaganda films try to make it..

It's just another way to reconstruct history and make a legitimate World Champion out of a cheapskate who failed in one business venture after another and only boxed because he was searching for a way to make a buck.. Willard's behavior following his illegitimate ascendancy to the heavyweight throne, displayed his dislike for boxing and his love of money. He didn't want to box but he tried to sell his fame anyway he could.

Willard refused to lend his time to boxing exhibitions for charitable events, demanding money to do so... When he attended a magic show by famed magician Harry Houdini, he was invited to come up on stage and be introduced to the crowd... Willard shouted at Houdini, “If you pay me what you’re paying those other people up there I’ll be glad to come up.” ... The astounded Houdini angrily shouted back, “Then come on up Mr Willard. I’ll pay you EXACTLY what I’m paying my other guests.”

Willard conferred with his companions and shouted “On with the show.” Houdini said “I’ll continue with my presentation as I wish Mr Willard. First I want you to keep your word and come up for here for the compensation I’m paying my other guests.” Willard shouted “On with the show you four flusher” and a heated screaming match ensued between Willard and Houdini until Willard and his companions left – to the applause of the crowd and cat calls of “Get out of here you punch drunk stiff” ... and worse... The public turned against Willard for good reason.

[APerno]

Can you find the mistake in this article? You would think the NYT would do better research - what is interesting is that many fight fans make the same mistaken assumption - funny they got the date right but . . .

http://www.perno.com/Boxing/jj04.html

Yes,27 days after July.4th.1910 would be July.31.1910 not July.31.1912.
(obviously a typo)
You will have to do better then to try to stump us all here Mr. APerno.

Ah! Barbarian - think again - the date is correct the fight is wrong - the Sims law (prohibition against the interstate movement of prize fight films) did indeed pass on July 31st 1912 - 27 days after the Johnson-Flynn fight - it is a common misnomer - most believe that the law passed after the viewing of the Johnson-Jeffries fight, but it didn't - it was two years later - at the time of the Johnson-Jeffries fiasco several cities passed anti-fight viewing laws, as several States did as well - but no federal law was passed at the time - back in 1910 a different congressman named Smith (R-Iowa) tried to get a federal anti-viewing law passed, (not trafficking) but it never got voted on (many thought Jeffries would win and didn't want the law) and then congress went out of session - it was not until the prospect of the Johnson-Flynn (New Mexico) did the issue resurface under Sims (R-Tenn) in 1912. - Even then the southerners blew it; Sims exposed himself when he stated that he was hoping to pass the law quickly so as to stop the 'miscegenationist' fight that was about to occur (Johnson-Flynn) - This put off many Yankees who saw it as prior restraint and were embarrassed by the outright racist statements being made - Sims knew that Johnson hoped to make more money from the film than the fight itself, and believed if he could take away the prospect of film revenue the fight would fall apart, it didn't - eventually the northern congressmen came around after the fight and they passed the law July 31, 1912 - it didn't matter much though, Flynn embarrassed himself, trying to butt Johnson over and over again and got disqualified, in a fight almost everyone called a 'stinker' there was no money to be made anyway.

See Dan Streible, Fight Pictures, pages 246-247

It is amazing that as early as 1912 people (the New York Times) were already making this mistake; believing so surely that the law was passed in immediate reaction to the Johnson-Jeffries fight, the idiot writer didn't even look up the date of the Johnson-Jeffries fight. Whoever wrote that article didn't know sh*t about the game.

[APerno]

APerno is now ignoring the evidence of a fixed fight -- to focus on whether a newspaper got a freakin' date correct... Who GAF???

Many who support Willard's version of events claim the fight was on one of the hottest July 4th's ever.. "IT WAS HOT AND GETTING HOTTER!!" When actually it wasn’t even fought in the summer. It was fought in early spring on April 5th and wasn't nearly as hot as propaganda films try to make it..

It's just another way to reconstruct history and make a legitimate World Champion out of a cheapskate who failed in one business venture after another and only boxed because he was searching for a way to make a buck.. Willard's behavior following his illegitimate ascendancy to the heavyweight throne, displayed his dislike for boxing and his love of money. He didn't want to box but he tried to sell his fame anyway he could.

Willard refused to lend his time to boxing exhibitions for charitable events, demanding money to do so... When he attended a magic show by famed magician Harry Houdini, he was invited to come up on stage and be introduced to the crowd... Willard shouted at Houdini, “If you pay me what you’re paying those other people up there I’ll be glad to come up.” ... The astounded Houdini angrily shouted back, “Then come on up Mr Willard. I’ll pay you EXACTLY what I’m paying my other guests.”

Willard conferred with his companions and shouted “On with the show.” Houdini said “I’ll continue with my presentation as I wish Mr Willard. First I want you to keep your word and come up for here for the compensation I’m paying my other guests.” Willard shouted “On with the show you four flusher” and a heated screaming match ensued between Willard and Houdini until Willard and his companions left – to the applause of the crowd and cat calls of “Get out of here you punch drunk stiff” ... and worse... The public turned against Willard for good reason.

Kalan as I said to the Barbarian it is not the date it is the fight that is wrong (see details directly above) - and as a 30 history teacher, it's bad history, so I care (GAF)

[APerno]

P.S. Smith's (1910) anti-viewing law would likely have been unconstitutional anyway (prior restraint) - Sims (1912) anti-trafficking law was supported by the interstate commerce clause.

[APerno]

SORRY - the proper reference for the Dan Streible, Fight Pictures, book is pages 244-245 - must have had a 'senior moment.'

[Kalan]

it is the fight that is wrong (see details directly above) - and as a 30 history teacher, it's bad history, so I care (GAF)

Actually the fight is right. They outlawed the importation of fight films and interstate shipping of fight films. The US Congress didn't want Americans watching Johnson battering, and knocking out the heroic Jim Jeffries in brutal fashion.. They had the fight right, however the year was 1910 not 1912..

Most people pay no attention to that. They're not into dates. What year did Sullivan win the Heavyweight Title? ... What year did Corbett KO Sullivan? ... What year did Jeffries win The Heavyweight Title? ... What year did the Queensberry Rules go into effect? ... Who really GAF?

As a grade school kid I knew the years that Eli Whitney invented the cotton gin and Robert Fulton designed the steamboat. Gee whiz, the facts they belabor kids with. I don’t remember that crap, but unless I compete on Jeopardy I’d never need to know. You can google it if you need to.

As a former History Teacher you need to learn the lessons of history mean far more than the dates. People who come into a prize illegitimately usually come to a bad end. Willard took far more punishment in his final 4 fights than he dished out. Serves the arrogant, grumpy cheapskate right. He was disrespected and disliked by many, including Dempsey, Johnson, and Firpo.

[APerno]

it is the fight that is wrong (see details directly above) - and as a 30 history teacher, it's bad history, so I care (GAF)

Actually the fight is right. They outlawed the importation of fight films and interstate shipping of fight films. The US Congress didn't want Americans watching Johnson battering, and knocking out the heroic Jim Jeffries in brutal fashion.. They had the fight right, however the year was 1910 not 1912..

Most people pay no attention to that. They're not into dates. What year did Sullivan win the Heavyweight Title? ... What year did Corbett KO Sullivan? ... What year did Jeffries win The Heavyweight Title? ... What year did the Queensberry Rules go into effect? ... Who really GAF?

As a grade school kid I knew the years that Eli Whitney invented the cotton gin and Robert Fulton designed the steamboat. Gee whiz, the facts they belabor kids with. I don’t remember that crap, but unless I compete on Jeopardy I’d never need to know. You can google it if you need to.

As a former History Teacher you need to learn the lessons of history mean far more than the dates. People who come into a prize illegitimately usually come to a bad end. Willard took far more punishment in his final 4 fights than he dished out. Serves the arrogant, grumpy cheapskate right. He was disrespected and disliked by many, including Dempsey, Johnson, and Firpo.

NO! the law was passed in 1912 ACTUALLY - that people like you are constantly wrong about when this law was passed and because you won't even take a moment to find out the correct lousy date, is why I posted the article - to show how far back this ignorance goes!

And here you are spreading the wrong info yet again, and with such a insulting hubris I might add!

From Wikipedia "Pushed for the Sims Act, which forbade interstate transportation of fight films, primarily boxing after the Johnson v Flynn fight in 1912." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thetus_W._Sims

"To say this to me is insulting: "As a former History Teacher you need to learn the lessons of history mean far more than the dates." just plain rude! I wonder if you know how to apologize, because here is a great opportunity!

[APerno]

it is the fight that is wrong (see details directly above) - and as a 30 history teacher, it's bad history, so I care (GAF)

Actually the fight is right. They outlawed the importation of fight films and interstate shipping of fight films. The US Congress didn't want Americans watching Johnson battering, and knocking out the heroic Jim Jeffries in brutal fashion.. They had the fight right, however the year was 1910 not 1912..

Most people pay no attention to that. They're not into dates. What year did Sullivan win the Heavyweight Title? ... What year did Corbett KO Sullivan? ... What year did Jeffries win The Heavyweight Title? ... What year did the Queensberry Rules go into effect? ... Who really GAF?

As a grade school kid I knew the years that Eli Whitney invented the cotton gin and Robert Fulton designed the steamboat. Gee whiz, the facts they belabor kids with. I don’t remember that crap, but unless I compete on Jeopardy I’d never need to know. You can google it if you need to.

As a former History Teacher you need to learn the lessons of history mean far more than the dates. People who come into a prize illegitimately usually come to a bad end. Willard took far more punishment in his final 4 fights than he dished out. Serves the arrogant, grumpy cheapskate right. He was disrespected and disliked by many, including Dempsey, Johnson, and Firpo.

READ THIS PLEASE: https://100yearsagotoday.wordpress.com/ ... ght-films/

Includes a great pic of Johnson!

[APerno]

it is the fight that is wrong (see details directly above) - and as a 30 history teacher, it's bad history, so I care (GAF)

Actually the fight is right. They outlawed the importation of fight films and interstate shipping of fight films. The US Congress didn't want Americans watching Johnson battering, and knocking out the heroic Jim Jeffries in brutal fashion.. They had the fight right, however the year was 1910 not 1912..

Most people pay no attention to that. They're not into dates. What year did Sullivan win the Heavyweight Title? ... What year did Corbett KO Sullivan? ... What year did Jeffries win The Heavyweight Title? ... What year did the Queensberry Rules go into effect? ... Who really GAF?

As a grade school kid I knew the years that Eli Whitney invented the cotton gin and Robert Fulton designed the steamboat. Gee whiz, the facts they belabor kids with. I don’t remember that crap, but unless I compete on Jeopardy I’d never need to know. You can google it if you need to.

As a former History Teacher you need to learn the lessons of history mean far more than the dates. People who come into a prize illegitimately usually come to a bad end. Willard took far more punishment in his final 4 fights than he dished out. Serves the arrogant, grumpy cheapskate right. He was disrespected and disliked by many, including Dempsey, Johnson, and Firpo.

https://books.google.com/books?id=Bpc1f ... aw&f=false

[APerno]

Kalan - I actually do expect an apology for that remark about my professionalism! We'll see what kind of man you are.

[Chuck1052]

For many decades until the 1930s in the United States, the very formidable anti-boxing forces went out of their way to curb professional boxing before and after Jack Johnson was the world heavyweight champion. The presence of Johnson undoubtedly is an important factor in the federal legislation prohibiting the interstate transportation of fight films being enacted, but the anti-boxing forces probably would have backed such legislation even if Johnson wasn't around.

- Chuck Johnston