BoxRec

margaret thatcher wrote: ↑15 Jan 2023, 16:55

Ezzard wrote: ↑15 Jan 2023, 07:20 Johnson: McVey, Jennette, Langford

Schmeling: Louis, Sharkey (one more and he'd be up there)

mcvea was 18 and had been boxing for just over a year when johnson beat him. langford was a 156 pound 19 year old facing a 26 year old 190 pound man. it would've been good to see him fight these guys when they were more developed

is there any other case in history, where people consider it an atg win to beat a teenager who hadn't even picked up the sport 2 years earlier? sounds crazy writing that

Benny The Kid wrote: ↑30 Jan 2023, 00:12

margaret thatcher wrote: ↑15 Jan 2023, 16:55

Ezzard wrote: ↑15 Jan 2023, 07:20 Johnson: McVey, Jennette, Langford

Schmeling: Louis, Sharkey (one more and he'd be up there)

mcvea was 18 and had been boxing for just over a year when johnson beat him. langford was a 156 pound 19 year old facing a 26 year old 190 pound man. it would've been good to see him fight these guys when they were more developed

is there any other case in history, where people consider it an atg win to beat a teenager who hadn't even picked up the sport 2 years earlier? sounds crazy writing that

We share the exact same thought's. Honestly this is like trying to give James Jeffries credit for beating a long out of retirement Peter Jackson.

Johnson's win over Mcvea would basically be his amatuer career. This is prior to his long layoff he didn't fight at all in 1905.
This is his amatuer career.

Lanford didn't really take off until 1907 as far as being any kind of heavyweight title threat and that was still a bit early for him.

Johnson did beat Jeanette in his prime because he was the weakest puncher of the three so he faced him the most due to the least threatening.

To me Jack Johnson never reached his prime due to the him dodging the competition. Particularly during his title run. He could of been better than he was...had he waged war against the top competition and learned to lose with dignity. He would of never been able to slice through all the top flight fighter's unscathed. But losing would of made him a better boxer in the long run.

Instead he was a smoking mirror's circus act fighting middleweights like Stanley Ketchel like John L Sullivan before him defending the heavyweight crown against a middleweight Charley Mitchell that's a circus act to me...nothing you can take seriously.

At least when Jeffries faced a middlewight he really had no other option's so it's hard to hold it against him. Both Sullivan and Johnson had plenty of other option's.