Ezzard wrote:granberry
This is an interesting observation. On one hand there is no readon for Ward to use the paragraph from 39-40 if he doesn't want to. I mean, he's trying to construct an argument of some kind and he'll take what suits him. BUT what is odd is that he doesn't quote Smith by name as his name obviously adds a lot of weight to the comment and generates more interest from boxing fans. So why does he fail to quote Smith directly? This makes me think that you're right, something does not quite ring true.
I take it you don't rate this book?
What are your feelings on Johnson?
Why do you feel that Ward is portraying Johnson in this way (is this soemthing to do with the 'politically correct' comment you made previously?
Do you reccomend the book?
I'm interested in your reply as I was going to buy a copy and take it on holiday with me in 2 weeks time...
Do you reccomend the book?
I recommend it highly as an example of a book written to SELL AN AGENDA.
What are your feelings on Johnson?
I have no "feelings" on Johnson.
I have two eyes and I watch films of him (when I do).
Johnson was a counter puncher. Everything he did was based on that.
Willard made Johnson lead. In doing that, Willard controlled their fight.
And Johnson did not have the punch to finish Willard, although he tried hard.
Johnson was stupid to allow the fight to be set for 45 rounds.
Johnson's reign as heavyweight champion is tainted by his refusal to defend his title against Sam Langford.
As part of their transparent agenda (Black is good---White is bad) the Johnnie-come-lately’s who have no interest in boxing (and of course no competence when it comes to boxing) push their Black is good---White is bad politically correct agenda by repeating repetitively that that Dempsey didn't fight Wills
But the same phony self-proclaimed "authorities" never mention that Johnson embarrassed himself as champion by refusing to get in the ring with by far the most dangerous threat to his keeping his title---Sam Langford.
(not to mention Jeannette and McVey).
Johnson’s fights with Ketchel and Jeffries are of no significance as far as determining his ability.
Ketchel was a middleweight (That’s why they have weight classes in boxing).
Jeffries was a washed up physical specimen who hadn't fought for 6 years and had to lose almost 100 pounds, had no warmup fights to determine if he could even beat a mediocre heavyweight at that point in time, and did almost no sparring (and most of it against long retired Corbett and Choynsky and his own brother Jack---all LONG inactive).
The fact that it took 15 rounds for a Johnson in his prime to beat the shell of Jeffries illustrates two things :
1—Johnson was not a puncher.
2---the remarkable physical specimen that Jeffries was to stay that long even in the decrepit state he was in for boxing at that time.
Johnson at his best was a top level defensive fighter who threw his most effective punches inside.
He couldn’t do that against Willard since Willard was too tall for Johnson to hit with uppercuts
And Willard was too strong in comparison to Johnson and controlled Johnson in the clinches.
Johnson tried very hard to stop Willard by doing all the leading for the first 5-10-15 rounds but he was not successful at breaking down Willard although he won most of the rounds up to that point.
Johnson did not look great against Frank Moran, who was a dangerous puncher and a strong sturdy physical specimen.
Overall, Johnson's avoidance of Sam Langford harms his standing as a heavyweight champion.
