Jack Johnson gets a lot of flak for not defending against his best black challengers, some of it is undoubtedly deserved, but I believe racism,politics ,and financial considerations were all significant factors in those fights not being made. Irrespective of this, how would he do against the trio if all men were prime, fit, and focused? Below a young McVey with a rather slender Johnson, pre - title days. This content is protected Below,Sam has Jeannette on the floor in their historic Paris fight. This content is protected McVey, with a countenance that was said to," be able to scare back the rising moon". This content is protected Below the fearsome Langford, about to punish a clumsy Iron Hague for dropping him. This content is protected A younger Sam, below. This content is protected Jeannette right. This content is protected Joe again. This content is protected So, how do they do against Jack, prime for prime,and 100%?
He should be favoured; he was an incredible, incredible fighter. But if he fought McVey in January, Langford in March, McVey again in June and Jeanette in July, could we really expect anyone to beat them all?
That's an interesting counter question, may I add a rider to it? If anyone would be likely to do just enough to get the verdict , and still leave a couple of fights in the tank ,I think that would be " Little Arthur."
Fair to say, but that type of brinkmanship is just what might see him outpointed by one or another of these monsters.
Johnson, they may have improved after he fought them but so did Johnson. Johnson's pre title win was very dominant against all the best black contenders. I think usually the best man wins in boxing, usually, so yes I think he'd pull that off, I mean he sort of did anyway beating Jeanette and Mcvey countless times and dominating Langford I suppose it depends how much we think they improved, I have a feeling it's a tad overstated because Jeanette and McVey were already picking up world class wins when Johnson was beating them
He probably beats Langford up to about 1910, and looses to him after that. He probably beats McVea any time they fight. Jeanette is a potential spoiler for him at any time. So in summary, it is not so much a question of whether he could beat them all, as whether he would best them all in sucession.
Johnson was peak in 1910, he would have trained for a Langford fight and be near peak up until 1912, after 1912 Langford himself was past his prime. By 1915 both significantly past their best. The talk of Langford overtaking Johnson in terms of ability is the biggest myth on this forum, it never happened
On a side note, this is how I would rank them in terms of resume: 1. Lagnford 2. McVea 3. Jeanette This is how I would rank them in terms of the value of Johnsons actual wins over them: 1. McVea 2. Jeanette 3. Langford This is how I would rank them in terms of the threat they posed to Johnson at their peaks: 1. Langford 2. Jeanette 3. McVea
I think Johnson beats them all, and I may be in the minority, but I don't think they would be tough fights. As they improved, so did johnson, and thus things would remain the same. It wasn't like he barely beat them.. he totally outclassed them in virtually every way... You just don't make up that wide a difference.. when johnson also filled out and got better.
Langford gives him the toughest fight prime for prime, always. Wouldn't bet against Sam winning 3 or 4 out of 10 fights against Jack. Jeannette and McVey wouldn't be easy fights prime for prime either but I have Jack beating them both. What about Harry Wills?
In at least two of the three fights there would be a draw which 100 years later an army of apologists would explain away with their oft-used arsenal of excuses... poor shape, handcuffed, drunk the night before, staged, was not engaged in the fight... Nothing new here.
Except that Johnson reign and pre title resume are still better than many people after him.. even your beloved Liston...