BoxRec

I was just looking at Jack Johnson's record for the first time really, and noticed several memos about possible "fixing" in his later fights. Do historical buffs place any signifigance on these things, or is his top 5 rating all time deserved?

tzyuforever wrote:I was just looking at Jack Johnson's record for the first time really, and noticed several memos about possible "fixing" in his later fights. Do historical buffs place any signifigance on these things, or is his top 5 rating all time deserved?

His historical rating isn't based on whether in his mid-late 40s he had a couple of fixed fights.

dempseyfire wrote:

tzyuforever wrote:I was just looking at Jack Johnson's record for the first time really, and noticed several memos about possible "fixing" in his later fights. Do historical buffs place any signifigance on these things, or is his top 5 rating all time deserved?

His historical rating isn't based on whether in his mid-late 40s he had a couple of fixed fights.

Ok what if a fighter past his prime today partook in that behavior? Would it affect his HOF status. Seems to me that it would.

I bet it would if it happened in the last 40 odd years

tzyuforever wrote:

dempseyfire wrote:

tzyuforever wrote:I was just looking at Jack Johnson's record for the first time really, and noticed several memos about possible "fixing" in his later fights. Do historical buffs place any signifigance on these things, or is his top 5 rating all time deserved?

His historical rating isn't based on whether in his mid-late 40s he had a couple of fixed fights.

Ok what if a fighter past his prime today partook in that behavior? Would it affect his HOF status. Seems to me that it would.

hell yes. could you imagine if fighters like jones or mayweather were involved in a fixed fight? not only would they be out of the hall, they would also go to jail. when the fighters from the "golden era" threw a fight, they are usually not judged by it.

PBF 'fought' the Big show :O

Robinson wrote:PBF 'fought' the Big show :O

good point :)

bjermaine wrote:

tzyuforever wrote:

dempseyfire wrote: His historical rating isn't based on whether in his mid-late 40s he had a couple of fixed fights.

Ok what if a fighter past his prime today partook in that behavior? Would it affect his HOF status. Seems to me that it would.

hell yes. could you imagine if fighters like jones or mayweather were involved in a fixed fight? not only would they be out of the hall, they would also go to jail. when the fighters from the "golden era" threw a fight, they are usually not judged by it.

Free Thomas Williams!

Not to mention some champions in the past have held on to the title for years with out ever facing a contender, without ever defending it.

I suppose throwing fights is part of the good ole days.

Not to mention some champions in the past have held on to the title for years with out ever facing a contender, without ever defending it.

I suppose throwing fights is part of the good ole days.

I dont necessarily hold such things against Johnson, considering "back in the day", alot of fights in one way or another were crooked or fixed; some guys would hold off on eachother so that the longer the fight went, the more money they got from the film rights, or that they could do business with eachother again and again, sometimes it was to give the crowd their monies worth, or quite simply an act of mercy or respect, as some fighters even up to fifty years ago or so would take it easy on one opponent because they were inexperienced or what have you, and show no mercy for another; case in point, the Burns-O'Brien fights where I think it was 1-1-1 with O'Brien supposedly in the last encounter offering Burns alot of money if the fight went the distance, to where Burns double crossed O'Brien who didn't train expecting an easy fight, and beat the holy hell out of him, because Burns felt that he was robbed in a previous fight that they had.

Those were the good ole days

Papa Jack is over rated in the ring and under rated out of it.

Question for all the experts on Jack Johnson here:

What did Johnson do when you threw a left jab at him?

Glove blocked
Parried
Clinched
moved out of range
or all of the above and countered.

Or he could just jab at the same time and chances are he would be
bigger than his opponents.

Would you please tell me mr Gran

Thank You

Granberry, Where do you Rate Jack Johnsen, in your list of HW's ?

Above ali

Robinson wrote:Above ali

HaHa that Goes without Saying with Granberry no doubt

Won't be surprised if he Rates Audley Harrison above Ali.

Granberry , Serious Question.

Give us your list of Top 5 HW.s

and give us the Number where you Rate Jack Johnsen, (Ali if you dont mind too).

Jack Johnson deserves his ranking due to his historical significance. I'm not talking about his "outside the ring" significance of being the first black champion or his larger than life persona either. I'm talking about the fact that technique-wise he was WAY ahead of his time, and that so many fighters for generations to follow basically learned boxing technique from Johnson. He was definitely a pioneer in that aspect and to say he was overrated would be similar to saying Wilt Chamberlain is overrated, or Jim Brown is.

It is apparent that he had certain abilities and techniques such as his ability to parry, glove blocking and control in the clinch were things that came down to his size (compared to foes), physical prowse and ring 'smarts'.
Johnson seemed to like to clinch alot..perhaps this was to prolong the fight...but also this seems to me as the best way to control the opponent and wear him down with ones size advantage.

Like the Voice says above for his time it was revolutionary and seemed to cost him fans, for fighting in an unmanly manner. Though from all accounts he was similar as a boxer as the great Peter Jackson and perhaps borrowed alot from Corbett who appears on film to have a good balanced boxing style almost like a fencer as he jabs and shuffles to and fro with his attacks.

I suppose by modern standards alot of what Johnson does is not anything revolutionary but in his day...it was innovation.

observer1 wrote:

Robinson wrote:Above ali

HaHa that Goes without Saying with Granberry no doubt

Won't be surprised if he Rates Audley Harrison above Ali.

Granberry , Serious Question.

Give us your list of Top 5 HW.s

and give us the Number where you Rate Jack Johnsen, (Ali if you dont mind too).

you are wasting your time...It is like Moses asking God to go to the Promised Land.

Robinson wrote:I suppose by modern standards alot of what Johnson does is not anything revolutionary but in his day...it was innovation.

By "modern" HW standards, Johnson would be considered nothing short of a god.

Well there you go.

Nice painting.

Thats pretty damned good.