Who were the best ten heavyweights during Johnson’s title reign from 1909-1915?

Depending on the criteria, here are how i see some of the guys who could be in contention (no order): These are guys who are often undersold as undeserved title oppoonents, but maybe, just maybe, they were a little better for a while than we think.


1. Al Kaufman - He had a good run leading up to his 1909 title shot. After losing to O Brien (who was a world title holder), Kaufman had a nice win streak with victories over Garnder, Schrek(who beat Johnson's last conqueror) and Sullivan who was considered one of the top fighters, followed by Jim Johnson, Jim Flynn, Mustain and Jim Barry. Right there is a golden run which (for its time and assuming parity of era without reference to sizes) is probably every bit as solid as any win streak Vitali has put together and arguably Wlad also. This was followed with an ND to Ross and being outclassed by Johnson. It seems that this finished his career, and he did not have a competive fight for 12 months or so, but for the 1909 shot he was in good lead up form and may have been better if not so totally outclassed. At 6 ft 1 and roughly 200 lbs, he would have to be right up there.

2. Frank Moran - Another 6ft 1 200 lber, Frank could be a little underated. Obviously not a star, but he did go the distance with Willard, Morris, Gunboat Smith, McCarthy, Dillon, and he had good wins over Cofey, Wells, Madden and Cowler

3 Jim Flynn - obviously he seemed to get more title chances than one would expect (he was like a john ruiz or Andrew golota of his time), but it is often forgotten that he had great wins like Gardner, Ross, Sullivan, Jim Johnson, and Kaufman, not to mention a draw with Langford, Dillon and others, with many great performances even coming after prime, such as a Jack Dempsey KO Victory. He was probably quite a bit better than people are willing to give him credit for.

4. Battling Jim Johnson is definitely given a rough deal today, imo. Before meeting Johnson, He beat Cowler and Big Bill tate and drew or ND'd with Jeanette, Langford and McVey. In fact, even after meeting johnson, he continued to draw or ND with Johnson, Jeanette, Langford, McVey, Dan Flynn, And then in the following year, you could add Harry Wills and Jack Thompson to his list of NDs. He was admittedly losing on points occassionally to the likes of Langford, Wills and Co, but there is no shame whatsoever in that, is there. And he was still ko ing the likes of Arthur Pelkey. It wasnt until the end of this year that he started to slow down his number of fights and he declined, with a loss to an untalked about great white hope.

5. Andre Anderson. To be honest, this is the first time i have even taken any notice of his career, so i am not sure on typing how good or bad he was. his 1915 debut year was mixed, the win over johnson and Palzer cancelled out with a loss to dillon and Fulton. Still, Exceptional quality fights for an inexperienced fighter. The 6 4 240 lb frame would have made him an interesting proposition also.

year 2 seems a bit settling, and the Weinert loss was disappointing. But this was followed by two solid performances, a ND with Bill Brennan and most impressively, an ND with Dempsey where he knocked Dempsey down and had mixed reviews about who won the fight. Strange we dont heare quite a bit more about this one actually. Anyway, the rest was a fairly uneventful career, and his KO by Fulton seems to indicate that he never really quite reached the top, so i dont think he can be considered in this list. despite taking Jeannette the distance but losing to langford. Of no real meaning, but it is interesting that he also went on to lose to Farmer lodge who is famous for being a victim of an old Jack Johnson(from memory). I wonder if this suggests that the Farmer was not as bad also as some usually assume. Anyway, in all fairness, he probably doesnt qualify as a top fighter of the period.

 

The reply was to Seamus,end of.
Thanks for the spelling correction.
ps .There is only one i in Dillon,and no e in Clark.

 

Based on your requirment that we assume the fighters to be at their peak, Jeffries would have to top the list.

The rest of it would be largley made up of people who Jack Johnson foiught before he won the title.

 

I guess I would have to go for:

1. Jeffries
2. Langford
3. Wills
4. McVea
5. Jeanette
6. Smith
7. Willard
8. Martin
9. Fulton
10. McCarthy

 

Jeffries was active in that period, if only because he fought once, and you would have to agree that he was better than anybody else on that list at his peak (my interpretation of your criteria).

Fulton also was active during that period, even if he didn't become a force until a bit later.

 

Well i am definitely getting confused, I agree with Janitor, Jeffries was active in this period, and at his best, he was the best, although his best did not fall between 1909 and 1915.

Incidentally, and i will cop flak for this, I would not necessarilly be taking prime Sam Langford against Old and inactive Jeffries. Jeffries couldnt beat Johnson, although i have heard that he put up a better fight early on, before tiring than he is given credit for. It is actually unlikely that the very small Langford lands enough and stays away from Jeffries enough, to beat him. It is a whole different ball game to Johnson, and you would expect Jeffries to not only absorb the powershots, but to land with far more ease than he did against Johnson and muscle up much better in the clinches than against Johnson.

 

Johnson has arguably the best pre title run in history. I think an argument can be made to say jeffries was the best challenger based on perception and betting odds. But johnson failing to defend against langford, jeanette, mcvey, wills, smith that is bad imo. After these 6 an argument can be made for a lot of people I believe, definitely atleast fireman flynn.

 

1. Langford
2. Smith
3. Jeanette
4. Willard
5. McVey
6. Wills

After that it gets murky.

 

It is a little unfair to criticise Johnson for his title reign. His reign as a serious fighter finished when he fought Jeffries for the big money. Johnson then had a 2 year retirement where he didnt fight or train properly. Before this time, he fought all of the major challenges that were out there, and there simply was none left. It is just bad luck that some of his actual title challengers who got the chance never went on to anything after Johnson beat them, so easily.

Even after the 2 year retirement, he then had another 18 month retirement. (or semi retirement). So he had pretty much just 1 half hearted fight in nearly 4 years. He then fought just once a year.

Johnson is criticised for not fighting a lot of fighters, most of whom he had already defeated anyway. In fact, when he lost to Willard, there was not really a decent fighter in the world, i can think of , that he had not beaten already. Hindsight is a great thing, but let us not forget that Wills was no challenge, having been beaten by Langford and McVey.

Jeanette had losses to Langford and Thompson in the time frame, so he was not first in line. Langford had Just lost to McVey and drawn with Jim Johnson, so he was not really a standout and it seems as if he was outclassed last time they met anyway. Those two results dont really jump out as saying he must be given the shot (yes i know he deserved it particularlly with hindsight). McVey, who had the series with Langford and drew with jeffries, may have had the best case, with the win over Pelkey and his size. it is presumably Willard's size which got him the gig. Interestingly, mcvey fought Johnson in Cuban exhibition fight, just before Willard. One has to wonder whether a Johnson McVey fight was in the works and spoiled by Jess. Actually with Harry Wills emerging as a clear leader of the crowd (coloured anyway), you would have to think that a jOhnson Wills fight was also not too far away. Both would have been very interesting.

I am getting off topic, but if Johnson had continued to win, it is interesting to think of who might be given title shots. An old Gunboat Smith might be a chance. An easy but popular Georges Carpentier certainly. And when Fulton beat Langford, i could see Johnson Fulton being made as soon as possible.

 

Ground Hog Day


According to you, not this thread, let's be strraight here.
Same **** , same agenda, different thread.

 

It is completely fair to criticise a man I hold as the 4th greatest heavyweight in history. His championship reign is not the 4th greatest which is why i'd criticise it.

It's simply a result of how high I rate this man.