BoxRec

Say no more.

What fight/stadium is that, Ric?

Deno1986 wrote:What fight/stadium is that, Ric?

The May 12, 1923 Jess Willard vs. Floyd Johnson bout at New York's Yankee Stadium.

Great photo. That really should give people an idea of how big boxing was at one time. It also shows how great of a promoter Tex Rickard was. This was well after Willard had lost the title and Floyd Johnson was just a fringe contender.

What a great photo.

I think boxing is still huge, just not so much in the western world.

Ambling Alp wrote:Great photo. That really should give people an idea of how big boxing was at one time. It also shows how great of a promoter Tex Rickard was. This was well after Willard had lost the title and Floyd Johnson was just a fringe contender.

Boxing was huge in America and the UK at that time, but Muhammed Ali and Don KIng took it to a new level in the 1970s a level far bigger than that picture. Asia , Africa , Japan they took it to those places and filled stadiums.

Until Tysons reign ended in 1990, the HW prize was still the richest in sport.

It did help the sport that Ali (and a few others) fought in other countries, giving the sport more exposure in those places. However, in the last 20-30 years, King has been a major factor in the demise of the sport.

Take a look at that crowd in the picture. There was probably at least 50,000 people there. This was a fight between two fighters who were not in the top 10. You just don't see that kind of thing anymore (between 2 non-premier fighters) and haven't for a long time.

i know the argument once was don king turned boxing into the red light district of sports but I think history will look very kindly on don's heyday (1974-2001) since his terminal decline the last ten years boxing is no longer the richest prize in sport......there is no DK figure around by that i mean a larger than life character.....still maybe im wrong perhaps golden boy and their movie star looks promoter is the way forward.....but getting back to DK what a promoter....hell he even almost turned valuev into a star with his beast for east moniker.....he couldnt help the tools he had to work with there!.....he made mayorga a star in the early 2000s if mayaorga had been able to back up that billing in the ring.......in comparison Arum is just a bottom line guy but arums record is good as well that said.......if king had been in charge of pacman pacman would be as big as Ali........on the flip side these fighters chose not to go to King for his unsavoury practices which r well documented.....king also never developed a fighter just took him off others......and he was responsible for almost killing the HW division at various times for his manipulation of the alphabet boys......and

Ambling Alp wrote:Take a look at that crowd in the picture. There was probably at least 50,000 people there. This was a fight between two fighters who were not in the top 10. You just don't see that kind of thing anymore (between 2 non-premier fighters) and haven't for a long time.

The New York Times reports 63,000 attended this Milk Fund charity show, which cost $130,000 to put on, according to Rickard. This was Willard's first bout since losing the title to Dempsey four years earlier. The card also included Luis Angel Firpo, Jack McAuliffe II, Jack Renault, Fred Fulton, Al Reich, Jim Herman, Harry Drake and Joe McCann.

So with a former champion and a fringe contender involved...it's kinda the equivalent of a fight between Hasim Rahman and Franklin Lawrence today. That really does put that crowd in perspective, doesn't it?

I think that boxing could be as big as this once again, if we bring it back to the maninstream networks, and I'm talking about the big fights...

If we can stop all this PPV nonsense, boxing could be back on treack quicker thna what people think.

marcianofan wrote:So with a former champion and a fringe contender involved...it's kinda the equivalent of a fight between Hasim Rahman and Franklin Lawrence today. That really does put that crowd in perspective, doesn't it?

Amen.

This was of course a time when men had their way about what is and what is not to be. Women were not overly represented within the decision making structure. This would be considered progress by many.

Seriously the feminization of society has had it's good points and it's bad points.

For me this is not one of the good points. The ability to enjoy a good scuffle, with beer being served should be a protected right.

BoxBuzz wrote:This was of course a time when men had their way about what is and what is not to be. Women were not overly represented within the decision making structure. This would be considered progress by many.

Seriously the feminization of society has had it's good points and it's bad points.

For me this is not one of the good points. The ability to enjoy a good scuffle, with beer being served should be a protected right.

dont forget the corn nuts!

Pictures like that, among other things, are why Dempsey is always my answer for the most influential and popular fighter in history.

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:Pictures like that, among other things, are why Dempsey is always my answer for the most influential and popular fighter in history.

Dempsey was very popular and influential but he pales in comparison to The Impact Ali had Globally

Dempsey introduced Boxing to technology. I know you love Ali too much for any sort of history lesson, but without Dempsey there may not have been a platform for Ali.

scallum wrote:

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:Pictures like that, among other things, are why Dempsey is always my answer for the most influential and popular fighter in history.

Dempsey was very popular and influential but he pales in comparison to The Impact Ali had Globally

Neither hat the influence of Jack Johnson, did they?

Boilermaker wrote:

scallum wrote:

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:Pictures like that, among other things, are why Dempsey is always my answer for the most influential and popular fighter in history.

Dempsey was very popular and influential but he pales in comparison to The Impact Ali had Globally

Neither hat the influence of Jack Johnson, did they?

Jack johnson had more influence than any athlete ever. If he would have failed maybe there is no Jackie Robinson, Jim Brown, Joe Louis, Sugar Ray Robinson, Ali... Jack gave a peoples that were third class citizens belief that they could compete with the oppressors

scallum wrote:

Boilermaker wrote:

scallum wrote: Dempsey was very popular and influential but he pales in comparison to The Impact Ali had Globally

Neither hat the influence of Jack Johnson, did they?

Jack johnson had more influence than any athlete ever. If he would have failed maybe there is no Jackie Robinson, Jim Brown, Joe Louis, Sugar Ray Robinson, Ali... Jack gave a peoples that were third class citizens belief that they could compete with the oppressors

I haven't exactly studied the matter, but I'm not so sure of that. I think the way he disregarded what people thought of him, especially by keeping company almost exclusively with white women (which made him unpopular with both white and black people alike, at least to some extent). I think his example may have even strengthened the resolve of people like the baseball owners against allowing a black player into the league. I think it's clear that Joe Louis (by projecting a uniformly positive image up to and including becoming the face of the war effort) was a lot more instrumental in paving the way for Robinson and improving race relations than was Johnson, who may have even been detrimental to both of these causes.

Johnson likely was as culturally significant in his time as Dempsey and Ali, and perhaps even more so, but I'm not sure he had quite the lasting and positive impact some here are ascribing to him, if only because America wasn't ready for him yet.

If Johnson was not a sucess it would have destroyed the spirit of a entire peoples imo.

scallum wrote:If Johnson was not a sucess it would have destroyed the spirit of a entire peoples imo.

Not necessarily. There had already been a number of champions of African descendent before Jack Jonson came on the scene, and three all-time greats: George Dixon, Joe Gans, and Barbados Joe Walcott. Indeed, arguably boxing was the only integrated sport at the turn of the century - although even great black fighters like Dixon and Gans were treated poorly in comparison with their white counterparts.

Jack Johnson prompted a negative reaction from the white establishment, and he was viewed negatively by conservative black leaders like Booker T. Washington. In fact, if memory serves, even the more liberal W. E. B. Du Bois stated that Jack needed to tone it down.

Because of the backlash, I believe he hurt African-Americans more than helped them. Certainly, Harry Wills was deprived of a title shot because of that backlash, and one wonders if that carried over to other sports as well. You might be right: People might never have heard of Jackie Robinson - but that's because some other African-American baseball players might have made it to the majors in the 30s or 40s if not for the negative backlash caused by Jack Johnson.

Jack Johnson was a boxer, and not an activist. Unlike Muhammad Ali - with whom he is often compared - I cannot recall a single instance in which he took up any cause for other African-Americans. He cared about numero uno, and nobody else.

Johnson did hurt the cause of blacks in many ways. Not defending the title against top black contenders and some of the things he did outside of the ring hurt the cause of black boxers and possibly other black athletes.

As for the sports popularity, Dempsey was one of a greatest box office draws ever. However, as evidenced by the Willard-Floyd Johnson fight, Tex Rickard was a phenomenal promoter. Dempsey's defenses against Miske and Gibbons didn't draw nearly as well as his other title fights. They were the only title fights that Dempsey had that Rickard did not promote.

Louis, Ali, and Tyson were also great draws. Louis increase big crowds of the 1930s to even bigger crowds. Ali helped rejuvinate a sport that was in serious decline in popularity in the late 1950s/1960s. Tyson got back some of fans that had left in the early 1980s.

In a sense its is apples and oranges to compare the box office appeal of fighters from different eras. In Dempsey's day, TV ratings, Pay Per view ratings etc. were not factors. However it's safe to say that there aren't many fighters today who could draw 63,000 fans to a fight. How many people would come see Rahman-Lawrence even if it was free?

There was so much prestige attached to the Hwy Title back in the day it was ridiculous. If it was not so important there would not have been the search for a great white hope after the sucess of Johnson.There would not have been scores of blacks murdered across the usa just because of the sucess of Johnson. I am proud of him today and im not oppressed so I cn imagine how folks felt back in early 1900s

There was so much prestige attached to the Hwy Title back in the day it was ridiculous. If it was not so important there would not have been the search for a great white hope after the sucess of Johnson.There would not have been scores of blacks murdered across the usa just because of the sucess of Johnson. I am proud of him today and im not oppressed so I cn imagine how folks felt back in early 1900s