BoxRec

instead of 1875 ?
would he look like this one dude seen here with all the muscles ?
( The action begins at about 5:00 into this clip)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vVeVcVBW_CE

Sounds like you're a big rasslin fan.

Jack Johnson said he didn't like Boxing. He got into it because he was a dock worker as a kid and took part in some of the lunch-hour fisticuffs to pass the time. He found out he was exceptionally good at it, and being an enterprising kid he thought that he might be able to earn a living at it eventually if he got good enough. Every time he got a chance to observe the more clever boxers he took mental notes.

When a traveling carnival came to town a prize fighter by the name of Bob Tomlinson offered 25 dollars to anyone who could go 4 rounds with him. JJ watched these contests for a few evenings and the locals all went out in 3 rounds or less. A 16-year-old Johnson decided to issue his own challenge and earned the 25 dollars. That cemented his plans to pursue a ring career.

Were he born to wealthier parents in a later era of more opportunity -- he might have become a musician.

what do you theorize he learned from Joe Choynski ?
I remember he took the opportunity to learn some pointers from Choynski
even after he was knocked out.
They sparred for the public in the calaboose while waiting to be released there in Galveston.

I don't think he was really knocked out... The police stopped the contest so there was no KO... As the police intervened and yelled for them to stop, Choynski tagged Johnson as the turned to look at the police. He probably went down but it wasn't a finishing KO. He probably learned something from Choynski, and vice versa. They shared trade secrets and sparred because there was nothing better to do. People say he learned to block and counter with the same hand.

the funny thing is Jack Johnson remembered it being a right hook,but Choynski remembered it as being a short left hook
that knocked Johnson out,and Johnson went down slowly and unconcious to the ground from it.

Kalan wrote:Sounds like you're a big rasslin fan.

no not really,but I did read that Jack Johnson also sort of had a side career as a wrestler.
He wrestled in Europe during the 1910's and also wreseld in between boxing matches when he was released from Leavenworth.
I do not believe I have ever read any article or book that concentrated on his wrestling.

The dude at 7:30 looks like he could be Jack Johnson's grandson.whaddya think ?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vVeVcVBW_CE

Caractacus wrote:The dude at 7:30 looks like he could be Jack Johnson's grandson.whaddya think ?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vVeVcVBW_CE

I think you are right...

He'd be 42

Or 41 depending on what month he was born and if he survived middle age... That's the only thing you can determine as to how his life would go. But if he went into Professional Boxing and competed at Cruiserweight, he may have met James Toney and David Haye.

I don't think a man of Johnson's style would last in today's era. Stiff backed, stiff legged, hands out. Mike Tyson would absolutely destroy someone of that style. Period.

Johnson was great at parrying;stopping his opponent's punches with his own gloves. This is almost a lost art. He would have been very hard to hit cleanly in any era. He would have dominated this era. As for Tyson, that would have been a very interesting fight.

Tough to say how the shift in time would change him, but Jack Johnson as he was wouldn't have come close to dominating this era from what I've seen. The 'giant' would be a tiny HW and hands way out parrying + hugging that made Wlad appear clinch averse would only take him so far. Didn't he avoid many top challengers too?

He'd do better against cruiserweight, light heavvweight, super middleweight, and middleweight sized fighters--in other words, the guys that made up a large portion of his opposition.

History shows that big fighters almost never beat great fighters near Johnson's size in when the fighter's are close to their prime. It almost never happens.

Johnson is a major historical figure and may have been a great fighter for his time (though he did avoid many opponents), but that's it. An upright, arms straight out defense (and hugs galore if they closed the distance) would be much less effective if the 6'0" giant with a 74 inch reach was dealing with the top HWs of recent years, rather than guys who would be light heavyweights (or lighter) today.

By the way, which wins suggest that, even with the size disparity, Johnson would be levels above modern HWs? What amazing quality is there in that respect when you cut out the wins over novices, guys who would be well beneath HW today, and guys who were inactive 6 years?

No that's not it. He was one of the greatest heavyweights of all time.
Yes he could have had a better title. But he did beat several fighters who would have been heavyweights today.

His would hardly get hit at against today's super slow heavyweights. He would have little trouble picking off their slow punches.

Again people are constantly saying the really big fighters have huge advantages. In the real world, great fighters in the 180-200 range almost always beat really big heavyweights.

There are several reasons for this;
-People overrate reach. Just because someone has a long reach doesn't mean he can use it effectively. He still has to measure his the distance of his opponent well, have good footwork to get in range, and have enough speed and accuracy to land. Recent heavyweights have been painfully slow in hand and foot speed, often aren't accurate or know how to measure the distance between them and their opponents.

-In close quarters, it's actually an advantage to have less of a reach.

-Excess weight usually hurts a fighters stamina. He either has to fight at a slow pace or he gets tired quickly. He is a bigger target to hit. As mentioned it usually hurts his foot and hand speed as well.

-You also can't rate toughness and smarts with numbers.

Who were the top fighters he beat who were the size of HWs today, keeping in mind that now even guys around the 190s will cut to make LHW? How much credit would you give Anthony Joshua for beating Ward, Kovalev, and Stevenson? George Groves? What about knocking out Golovkin after getting dropped himself? It's telling that he was labelled a giant when his height and reach would be pretty normal even for a super middleweight today; it's also telling that most Johnson HL videos will feature bouts against a career middleweight, a 5'7" 168 pound opponent, and a guy who hadn't fought in 6 years.

Johnson was ahead of his time, I'll give you that, but standing straight up and basically keeping guys away by extending your arms won't be nearly as effective against capable fighters who are far bigger. His second path to offense was basically just to bully opponents by clinching and throw uppercuts with his free hand (i.e. holding and hitting), which, again, isn't so easy when you're a much smaller man.

Johnson was a good fighter, and very good for his time, but would he dominate the modern HW eras? No. His HW resume isn't nearly as strong as his historical standing either, and I know how the guys in this section love to point out the shortcomings in other fighters' records.

Joe Jeannette and Sam McVey would be heavyweights today.
You are missing the point. It's not an advantage to weight 250 or more pounds. It's a disadvantage. There have been big heavyweights all throughout history. They almost always lost against a quality fighter around Johnson's size. It happened again and again.

There have been very few great light heavyweights/cruiserweights in the last 25 years. What happened when Roy Jones moved up?

As for the videos, obviously many of Johnson's fights aren't on video. you have to take the poor footage when watching what is available.

You aren't catching what Johnson is doing defensively. He is parrying the other fighters shots. He was extremely hard to hit clean by anyone.
The only recent fighter remotely like Johnson in style was James Toney. An old, out of shape Toney was able to compete pretty well at heavyweight.

Agree that Johnson could have made better title defenses. Had he successfully defended the title against Jeannette, McVey, Langford, he would deserve to be rated even higher.

Gosh, what I've "learned" from looking at this thread is that all Johnson did was stand up straight and keep his arms outstreched.

LOL

Sidney Carton wrote:Gosh, what I've "learned" from looking at this thread is that all Johnson did was stand up straight and keep his arms outstreched.

LOL

And going by this post, I've learned that you lack reading comprehension skills and the intellectual depth to address the points raised in any meaningful way. Step it up, Sid

Ambling Alp II wrote:Joe Jeannette and Sam McVey would be heavyweights today.
You are missing the point. It's not an advantage to weight 250 or more pounds. It's a disadvantage. There have been big heavyweights all throughout history. They almost always lost against a quality fighter around Johnson's size. It happened again and again.

There have been very few great light heavyweights/cruiserweights in the last 25 years. What happened when Roy Jones moved up?

As for the videos, obviously many of Johnson's fights aren't on video. you have to take the poor footage when watching what is available.

You aren't catching what Johnson is doing defensively. He is parrying the other fighters shots. He was extremely hard to hit clean by anyone.
The only recent fighter remotely like Johnson in style was James Toney. An old, out of shape Toney was able to compete pretty well at heavyweight.

Agree that Johnson could have made better title defenses. Had he successfully defended the title against Jeannette, McVey, Langford, he would deserve to be rated even higher.

Joe Jeannette is listed at 5'10" with a 74 inch reach, and on multiple occasions after fighting Johnson he weighed in the low 180s; for some perspective, Kovalev and Chilemba also weighed in the low 180s entering their LHW fight last year, and neither are particularly big for the division. Most of Jeannette's listed weights make him no more than a cruiser today (limit 200 pounds), and considering modern weight cutting practices, he probably wasn't much larger, if at all, than the top contemporary LHWs.

McVea (just 18 when they first fought) is listed at only 5'10" as well, and given his fight weights he was probably around the size of a modern cruiser, though significantly shorter than guys like Usyk, Gassiev, Huck, Nelson, Haye, Holyfield, etc. By the way, did Jeannette and McVea have numerous undocumented contests before boxing Johnson, because their records seem to indicate that, for the most part, they were quite inexperienced when they fought JJ--certainly much less experienced than they'd become..

I can see that Johnson did a lot of parrying and was good at it, but I don't think that makes him someone who, while maintaining a fight winning offense, would be able to shut down the attack of most top heavyweights from recent years. Further, parrying is limited in its effectiveness against punches that are not thrown straight down the middle. As for the Toney comparison, JT was a stationary counterpuncher who wouldn't stay on the outside keeping smaller opponents off like Johnson did, and when things were inside he didn't rely on out-manning opponents with constant holding and hitting in the way Johnson can be seen doing. Toney's style was much less built around being bigger and stronger than his opposition, and, besides, he didn't come close to dominating any era of HWs.

Johnson's lists of world title victims features several mediocre names indeed, at least as far as extrapolating results to bouts with the top modern HWs. Of the 6 guys he beat in title bouts, we have a 5'7" 168 pound fighter, a 5'10" 162 pound fighter, a 5'9" 170 pound fighter who usually competed at MW, and a fighter inactive 6 years; today such mismatches would rightfully struggle to get sanctioning. Notable names appear on his record at other points, but Sam Langford was all of 156 pounds, and Jeannette and McVea were lacking in experience and not HW sized by today's standards anyway.

Given Johnson's size, the opposition he beat, and what I can see on film, I'm just not convinced that he'd be able to dominate entire eras of modern HWs. This isn't to say that size is everything, or that he wasn't a very good fighter, but I don't think JJ should be considered a foregone modern HW killer when he feasted on much, much smaller men and green opposition.

Yet another misnomer you often hear now is that a fighter under 200 from way back would be a cruiserweight today. If he was a great fighter, he wouldn't stay a cruiserweight.
Jack Dempsey, Rocky Marciano etc. would have been heavyweights in any era.

Jeannette and McVey were great fighters. They would have been heavyweights if they fought today. They were both extremely strong and tough men.
They had more experience than it may appear when they fought Johnson. They have bouts that went unrecorded, and gained a lot of experience fighting tough competition very early in their careers. They also fought fights going 15 and 20 rounds which gives you a lot more than knocking out a tomato can in one round. Talented fighters were spoon fed easy wins so they could go 20-0 back then.

The Burns fight would have sanctioned; Burns was the champion. Jeffries was a former champion and a legend. It would be sanctioned today. Not saying that they were big achievements; but they would have been sanctioned.

Johnson would have little trouble against attack of today's heavyweights. They are painfully slow in both hand and foot speed.
Johnson was a smart fighter. He was patient and could handle different different sizes of fighter and different styles.

You are making the classic mistake of being obsessed with numbers (weights, reach etc.)
Johnson knew how to use reach more than today's heavyweights. At a certain point, weight stops being an advantage. At a later point, it becomes a disadvantage.

Johnson would dominate today's heavyweights simply because he was great and they suck.

You've claimed that JJ would dominate modern HW eras, so, when examining your claim and trying to extrapolate from his bouts to how he would theoretically fare against these modern opponents, it's perfectly relevant to consider the differences between the two sets of opposition.

The fact is, virtually none of Johnson's notable wins occurred over people who were close in size to contemporary HWs. Anthony Joshua, the Klitschkos, Lewis, etc. would rightfully get no credit for beating up the likes of Kovalev, Kessler, Golovkin, Groves, and Lara (would you highly rate those wins?), yet circus wins of this sort form a big part of Johnson's resume. Further, and as I've shown with the Kovalev-Chilemba example, someone like Jeannette was not at all the size of a modern HW, and if he did in fact move up he'd be tiny. This is not to say that size means everything, but disparities of this nature heavily impact bout outcomes, and Johnson's little guys were not so good as to make it irrelevant.

McVea and Jeannette, the 5'10" guys you questionably listed as fighters who would be HW sized today, clearly lacked experience when facing Johnson. McVea was all of 18 the first time they met, and neither him nor Jeannette had more than a couple listed fights (Jeannette losing all of his previous documented bouts); it may well be they had more experience than shown, but I have seen nothing to suggest that they weren't still essentially novices to the sport. They were prospects in today's terms, avoided by JJ once he won the title and they were more experienced, and many top contemporary HWs would have far more seasoning from their amateur and pro careers.

As for the footage, I guess we'll have to disagree on what we see. I see a guy who is 6'0" relying heavily on size and strength advantages that he wouldn't come close to having against top HWs of recent years, and I don't think the defensive skills you note would be enough to overcome the deficiencies he'd be facing. Johnson was ahead of his time, but that time was of tiny HWs, massive weight disparities, huge experience gaps, and generally underdeveloped technique. He has to be one of the most overrated HWs when it comes to how his reputation as an ATG boxing genius compares to his resume...they're not commensurate at all.

While I'm confident in my positions, I will certainly acknowledge that I may be wrong.

crusader wrote:

Sidney Carton wrote:Gosh, what I've "learned" from looking at this thread is that all Johnson did was stand up straight and keep his arms outstreched.

LOL

And going by this post, I've learned that you lack reading comprehension skills and the intellectual depth to address the points raised in any meaningful way. Step it up, Sid

crusader(?) doeesn't have a clue.

And when someone calls him on his drivel he sends out more.

Sorry Sid, I work in facts and reasoned arguments. Too much for you to handle apparently!