BoxRec

If it was Sam Langford who had defeated Tommy Burns for the title.
would he have been so controversial ?
would he have had the integrity to give a another "brotha"
a shot at his title ?

Caractacus wrote:If it was Sam Langford who had defeated Tommy Burns for the title.
would he have been so controversial ?
would he have had the integrity to give a another "brotha"
a shot at his title ?

I doubt he would have been so controversial, he seemed to have a very different character to Johnston. Any black man winning the title would have caused a stir back then but he would not have stirred it as much I think.

As for fighting another black man, I suspect he might have but finances drove Johnston to defend only against whites and ultimately Langford fought for money, that might have been the deciding factor, as it was for Johnston and he might have faced similar foes

I don't think he would have been popular with whites, but nowhere near as hated as Johnson.

I think he would have cashed early with some easy payday title defenses. However, I am guessing that eventually he would have taken on Johnson, Jeannette, McVey. Sheer speculation of course.

What ?
Jack Johnson was popular with "Whites" .
what are you talking about ?
Then show me proof he wasn't with a photgraph from anywhere were Jack Johnson is standing around with some White people and who arn't all smiling.
Jack Johnson was very popular with a lot of Whites in America.

I am assuming that you are joking about Johnson being popular with whites.

Ambling Alp II wrote:I am assuming that you are joking about Johnson being popular with whites.

why would I be joking ?

Had Sam won the Heavyweight Championship, he would have a greater legacy and he would go up in most people's all time lists.

davie wrote:

Caractacus wrote:If it was Sam Langford who had defeated Tommy Burns for the title.
would he have been so controversial ?
would he have had the integrity to give a another "brotha"
a shot at his title ?

I doubt he would have been so controversial, he seemed to have a very different character to Johnston. Any black man winning the title would have caused a stir back then but he would not have stirred it as much I think.

As for fighting another black man, I suspect he might have but finances drove Johnston to defend only against whites and ultimately Langford fought for money, that might have been the deciding factor, as it was for Johnston and he might have faced similar foes

Johnson was the first American boxer to defend the Heavyweight Championship against a black man.

but didnt he wrestle him instead of box him ?
I know Johnson also did some wrestling while he was over in Europe.

Kalan wrote:

davie wrote:

Caractacus wrote:If it was Sam Langford who had defeated Tommy Burns for the title.
would he have been so controversial ?
would he have had the integrity to give a another "brotha"
a shot at his title ?

I doubt he would have been so controversial, he seemed to have a very different character to Johnston. Any black man winning the title would have caused a stir back then but he would not have stirred it as much I think.

As for fighting another black man, I suspect he might have but finances drove Johnston to defend only against whites and ultimately Langford fought for money, that might have been the deciding factor, as it was for Johnston and he might have faced similar foes

Johnson was the first American boxer to defend the Heavyweight Championship against a black man.

yeah but it was Tommy Burns( a "Whiteman and also a Canadian) was the first to give a brotha a shot at it.

Caractacus wrote:

Ambling Alp II wrote:I am assuming that you are joking about Johnson being popular with whites.

why would I be joking ?

Maybe you need to do some research about Jack Johnson, as well as the racial bigotry in American society during his time.

Caractacus wrote:What ?
Jack Johnson was popular with "Whites" .
what are you talking about ?
Then show me proof he wasn't with a photgraph from anywhere were Jack Johnson is standing around with some White people and who arn't all smiling.
Jack Johnson was very popular with a lot of Whites in America.

Johnson was very popular with white folks who didn't have a racist bone in their bodies. He had a winning personality and a jovial attitude like George Foreman---but he was 10 X smarter and hung around literary types like Gene Tunney.. Tunney was too stuck on himself to be popular with anybody but other insufferable snobs.. Johnson would shoot the breeze with anyone. It was generally people who never met him---and bought into racial stereotypes---who didn't like him.

davie wrote: finances drove Johnston to defend only against whites

WRONG.

Jack Johnson defended his title against Jim Johnson [who was black] in Paris.

Sidney Carton wrote:

davie wrote: finances drove Johnston to defend only against whites

WRONG.

Jack Johnson defended his title against Jim Johnson [who was black] in Paris.

Sorry I missed the one example.

I should have said "in racially divided America, Johnston was forced to only fight whites."

Had he not had reason to flee America he wouldn't have found himself in that position. But in America, the money was not there against black opponents. therefore the decision to fight only whites for the vast majority of his title reign, was financially driven

I think it was driven by managers, match makers, and promoters of the day... The people who proposed fights for Johnson to evaluate... There were no orgs dictating who the next challenger was going to be -- or purse bids going out.