BoxRec

So everyone puts him top or near top on a list of the worst ever heavyweight champions but was he that rubbish? He held a 20 round win over jack Johnson. Ok so JJ probably won but even so..going 20 and being competitive with one of the greatest heavys of all time was an impressive feat? JJ was coming off wins over childs, mcvea, Martin etc.

Hart did best o'Brien and Gardner too. He was clearly tough, resilliant and had stamina. He may have given a few of the champs after trouble on a given night?

I'd read Adam Pollack's IN THE RING WITH MARVIN HART to get a better understanding of "The Fighting Kentuckian." He wasn't horrible. He wasn't bad. He just happened to be "average" in the grand scheme of things.

Probably all that talk appeared more because of the fact, that he had won a vacant belt. That was uncommon then, by the mean concepts of those times, when there was only one champion and you had to beat him to have such a title.

cfang wrote: ↑26 Aug 2018, 09:03 So everyone puts him top or near top on a list of the worst ever heavyweight champions but was he that rubbish? He held a 20 round win over jack Johnson. Ok so JJ probably won but even so..going 20 and being competitive with one of the greatest heavys of all time was an impressive feat? JJ was coming off wins over childs, mcvea, Martin etc.

Hart did best o'Brien and Gardner too. He was clearly tough, resilliant and had stamina. He may have given a few of the champs after trouble on a given night?

Why do you assume Hart was given a 'gift decision' ? --- this excerpt is from BoxRec's page:

Hart managed to deal the only effective blow in the eleventh round, when he landed a right swing on Johnson's jaw that staggered the black man and nearly knocked him over. Referee Greggains stated that he gave the decision to Hart, because all through the fight Hart did all the forcing and leading. According to Greggains, if Hart had not pursued his tactics there would have been no fight, as Johnson merely contented himself with countering. Hart's face was battered to a pulp, but Johnson's blows did not seem to have much sting to them. Johnson did a great deal of uppercutting, but Hart covered up and the blows did not seem to hurt him." (Washington Post)

APerno wrote: ↑26 Aug 2018, 17:40

cfang wrote: ↑26 Aug 2018, 09:03 So everyone puts him top or near top on a list of the worst ever heavyweight champions but was he that rubbish? He held a 20 round win over jack Johnson. Ok so JJ probably won but even so..going 20 and being competitive with one of the greatest heavys of all time was an impressive feat? JJ was coming off wins over childs, mcvea, Martin etc.

Hart did best o'Brien and Gardner too. He was clearly tough, resilliant and had stamina. He may have given a few of the champs after trouble on a given night?

Why do you assume Hart was given a 'gift decision' ? --- this excerpt is from BoxRec's page:

Hart managed to deal the only effective blow in the eleventh round, when he landed a right swing on Johnson's jaw that staggered the black man and nearly knocked him over. Referee Greggains stated that he gave the decision to Hart, because all through the fight Hart did all the forcing and leading. According to Greggains, if Hart had not pursued his tactics there would have been no fight, as Johnson merely contented himself with countering. Hart's face was battered to a pulp, but Johnson's blows did not seem to have much sting to them. Johnson did a great deal of uppercutting, but Hart covered up and the blows did not seem to hurt him." (Washington Post)

Ah yes it's hard to say. I've always thought reading between the lines Johnson outpointed Hart but they kind of gave it to Hart on effort. Johnson could loaf about a lot though. I guess Johnson won thinly but they gave it to Hart so Johnson probably deserved the loss as he could no doubt have won convincingly.
Very hard to say.

cfang wrote: ↑27 Aug 2018, 12:47

APerno wrote: ↑26 Aug 2018, 17:40

cfang wrote: ↑26 Aug 2018, 09:03 So everyone puts him top or near top on a list of the worst ever heavyweight champions but was he that rubbish? He held a 20 round win over jack Johnson. Ok so JJ probably won but even so..going 20 and being competitive with one of the greatest heavys of all time was an impressive feat? JJ was coming off wins over childs, mcvea, Martin etc.

Hart did best o'Brien and Gardner too. He was clearly tough, resilliant and had stamina. He may have given a few of the champs after trouble on a given night?

Why do you assume Hart was given a 'gift decision' ? --- this excerpt is from BoxRec's page:

Hart managed to deal the only effective blow in the eleventh round, when he landed a right swing on Johnson's jaw that staggered the black man and nearly knocked him over. Referee Greggains stated that he gave the decision to Hart, because all through the fight Hart did all the forcing and leading. According to Greggains, if Hart had not pursued his tactics there would have been no fight, as Johnson merely contented himself with countering. Hart's face was battered to a pulp, but Johnson's blows did not seem to have much sting to them. Johnson did a great deal of uppercutting, but Hart covered up and the blows did not seem to hurt him." (Washington Post)

Ah yes it's hard to say. I've always thought reading between the lines Johnson outpointed Hart but they kind of gave it to Hart on effort. Johnson could loaf about a lot though. I guess Johnson won thinly but they gave it to Hart so Johnson probably deserved the loss as he could no doubt have won convincingly.
Very hard to say.

When I read Boxrec's (The Washington Post's) review it made me think of Ali-Frazier I - I always felt Ali loafed and threw away a decision he could have won (and Frazier's face was beaten to a pulp.)

APerno wrote: ↑27 Aug 2018, 19:04

cfang wrote: ↑27 Aug 2018, 12:47

APerno wrote: ↑26 Aug 2018, 17:40

Why do you assume Hart was given a 'gift decision' ? --- this excerpt is from BoxRec's page:

Ah yes it's hard to say. I've always thought reading between the lines Johnson outpointed Hart but they kind of gave it to Hart on effort. Johnson could loaf about a lot though. I guess Johnson won thinly but they gave it to Hart so Johnson probably deserved the loss as he could no doubt have won convincingly.
Very hard to say.

When I read Boxrec's (The Washington Post's) review it made me think of Ali-Frazier I - I always felt Ali loafed and threw away a decision he could have won (and Frazier's face was beaten to a pulp.)

I think Ali for once was actually "acting" like he was loafing. To gain a perceptions advantage. He may have honestly put a bigger world of hurt on Frazier than Frazier put on him, but that fight was very destructive for both guys. But his "loafing" was to give the impression that he wasn't being mauled....now that's an achievement all unto itself....to get beat up by Joe Frazier, and look make it look like your surfing.....that's deserving of an Oscar, but Joe was nailing his target/s pretty well that night. Though I have always thought that his bouncing back up after the KD was one of the most impressive moments in boxing.

BoxBuzz wrote: ↑28 Aug 2018, 12:41

APerno wrote: ↑27 Aug 2018, 19:04

cfang wrote: ↑27 Aug 2018, 12:47

Ah yes it's hard to say. I've always thought reading between the lines Johnson outpointed Hart but they kind of gave it to Hart on effort. Johnson could loaf about a lot though. I guess Johnson won thinly but they gave it to Hart so Johnson probably deserved the loss as he could no doubt have won convincingly.
Very hard to say.

When I read Boxrec's (The Washington Post's) review it made me think of Ali-Frazier I - I always felt Ali loafed and threw away a decision he could have won (and Frazier's face was beaten to a pulp.)

I think Ali for once was actually "acting" like he was loafing. To gain a perceptions advantage. He may have honestly put a bigger world of hurt on Frazier than Frazier put on him, but that fight was very destructive for both guys. But his "loafing" was to give the impression that he wasn't being mauled....now that's an achievement all unto itself....to get beat up by Joe Frazier, and look make it look like your surfing.....that's deserving of an Oscar, but Joe was nailing his target/s pretty well that night. Though I have always thought that his bouncing back up after the KD was one of the most impressive moments in boxing.

Definitely agree, Ali pulling himself up off the canvas after being beat on for 15 rounds was one of the most courageous acts the game has ever seen; there would subsequently be many examples of Ali's toughness to come but up to that point we never really saw Ali tested (save maybe Cooper I).

I think he was tested in the first Liston fight. He could barely see for the end of round 4 and much of round 5, and he hung in there until he could.

Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑29 Aug 2018, 10:50 I think he was tested in the first Liston fight. He could barely see for the end of round 4 and much of round 5, and he hung in there until he could.

Yea OK that was a test of character, having Sonny Liston chasing you when you can't see must be a daunting experience; I was thinking physical punishment.

He did take more punishment in the first Frazier fight than in any previous fight. Actually the Bonavena fight would probably be second. He simply did not have the speed, reflexes, or stamina that he once had.

Regarding Johnson fight The San Francisco Call said it was a just decision, cannot remember what Chronicle reproted - as an earlier poster stated the Pollack book is the way to go as it gives info from bulletin and maybe examiner although not sure on that one. I read it quite some time ago but would have to consult again about what he said (getting older and memory not what it was).

Link to Call Report - https://chroniclingamerica.loc.gov/lccn ... nge&page=1

2nd part (page 14, Column 5) - https://chroniclingamerica.loc.gov/lccn ... -1/seq-14/

A 3 part decription of Hart wiining title against Root -

1 - https://www.boxinginsider.com/history/h ... me-forgot/
2 - https://www.boxinginsider.com/history/m ... ot-part-2/
3 - https://www.boxinginsider.com/history/h ... ay-part-3/

Further reading IBRO Profile by Matt Donnellon -

[url]https://www.ibroresearch.com/2008/07/ma ... -champion/[/url

For what it's worth from what I have read Hart was a sturdy durable type who could take punishment and dish it out but not exceptional.

scribbs1 wrote: ↑29 Aug 2018, 17:07 Regarding Johnson fight The San Francisco Call said it was a just decision, cannot remember what Chronicle reproted - as an earlier poster stated the Pollack book is the way to go as it gives info from bulletin and maybe examiner although not sure on that one. I read it quite some time ago but would have to consult again about what he said (getting older and memory not what it was).

Link to Call Report - https://chroniclingamerica.loc.gov/lccn ... nge&page=1

A 3 part decription of Hart wiining title against Root -

1 - https://www.boxinginsider.com/history/h ... me-forgot/
2 - https://www.boxinginsider.com/history/m ... ot-part-2/
3 - https://www.boxinginsider.com/history/h ... ay-part-3/

Further reading IBRO Profile by Matt Donnellon -

[url]https://www.ibroresearch.com/2008/07/ma ... -champion/[/url

For what it's worth from what I have read Hart was a sturdy durable type who could take punishment and dish it out but not exceptional.

Great post - I guess it should come as no surprise that what took us multiple posts and some research, the guy sitting ringside figured it out in his first sentence: "Marvin Hart matched his gameness against the cleverness of jack Johnson . . ."

- I only read the JJ fight so far will get to the Root matter soon (ouch, OK sorry) - any chance I could impose on you to post the second page (page 14, Column 5) I wanted to see how this guy (writer) reacted to the 11th round 'almost knock down.'

Thanks great post.

Some good reads.
I have read in several books that Johnson should have got the decision. Guess we will probably never know,

APerno wrote: ↑29 Aug 2018, 18:27

scribbs1 wrote: ↑29 Aug 2018, 17:07 Regarding Johnson fight The San Francisco Call said it was a just decision, cannot remember what Chronicle reproted - as an earlier poster stated the Pollack book is the way to go as it gives info from bulletin and maybe examiner although not sure on that one. I read it quite some time ago but would have to consult again about what he said (getting older and memory not what it was).

Link to Call Report - https://chroniclingamerica.loc.gov/lccn ... nge&page=1

A 3 part decription of Hart wiining title against Root -

1 - https://www.boxinginsider.com/history/h ... me-forgot/
2 - https://www.boxinginsider.com/history/m ... ot-part-2/
3 - https://www.boxinginsider.com/history/h ... ay-part-3/

Further reading IBRO Profile by Matt Donnellon -

[url]https://www.ibroresearch.com/2008/07/ma ... -champion/[/url

For what it's worth from what I have read Hart was a sturdy durable type who could take punishment and dish it out but not exceptional.

Great post - I guess it should come as no surprise that what took us multiple posts and some research, the guy sitting ringside figured it out in his first sentence: "Marvin Hart matched his gameness against the cleverness of jack Johnson . . ."

- I only read the JJ fight so far will get to the Root matter soon (ouch, OK sorry) - any chance I could impose on you to post the second page (page 14, Column 5) I wanted to see how this guy (writer) reacted to the 11th round 'almost knock down.'

Thanks great post.

I have submitted edit of original post with link to second page - awaiting moderation of post (not been here for a while and not sure if I can post automatically after certain number of posts)

Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑30 Aug 2018, 11:08 Some good reads.
I have read in several books that Johnson should have got the decision. Guess we will probably never know,

The consensus I think is Johnson should have got the decision but some of the rounds are scored even in Call report. I always used to go with consensus which, for fights of past with no video tape is probably best way to go, although the fight that altered my perception on taking all results with a pinch of salt was first Bradley - Pacquiao fight, which I was in a very limted number in thinking the decision was correct (not looking to debate that issue as I know that people think I'm crazy on that score and been debated numerous times but still believe I scored it right).

As you stated we will never truly know unless some miraculous tape appears or time machine invented - both flights of fancy.

Glad you enjoyed links

He's for sure one of the worst Lineal Heavyweight Champions, but that is inherantly a pretty elite group.

Someone has to be the worst of the best.

How Bad was Marvin Hart ?
LOL He was HW champion of the World
and you were not.