Did Jack Johnson duck Langford ?

He'd already beaten him so it isn't a pure duck.

But the risk reward ratio wasn't here when he was a champ and Langford was a challenger so I think there is definitely an element of ducking involved.

 

Johnson was getting more money for beating up white hopes than he could get taking on Langford who was a more dangerous proposition.
White promoters scoured the country for white challengers they weren't interested in pitting two blacks for the title as they,Cofforth,Curley and Rickard, said they would not draw.
If Johnson had faced Langford in the same shape he was in for most of his challengers he would have stood a good chance of being defeated ,if he was in shape he beats Langford,imo. Johnson didn't duck him per se ,he signed to fight him twice, once in the UK before he became champ but he reneged on the contract once he had the title asking for more money,[ he was offered£3000,] but demanded the same purse as Burns had got [$30,000] for defending against him. Johnson also verbally agreed to fight Langford in the US with a proviso that Langford produced a cash binder ,Langford and his management failed to come up with the $$, and the match fell through.

Hugh McIntosh offered Johnson a two fight deal in Australia against Langford and McVey Johnson at first refused as the $$$wasn't good enough.McIntosh upped his offer and Johnson accepted.
Johnson then jumped bail and became a fugitive from"justice".McIntosh then withdrew his offer.
So while Johnson preferred the easy defences against white challengers that the White public wanted to see ,he didn't rule out fighting Langford or anyone else if his price of $ 30,000 was met.


So imo, you can't say he ducked Langford.
You can say the White US public did.
For what its worth the foremost expert on Sam Langford, Clay Moyle, whose biography on him was very well received picks Johnson to to beat Langford.

 

Langford was approximately 20 and 156 pounds when Jack Johnson won a 15 round decision over him, hardly a heavyweight at the time.

Langford was viewed as the #1 or #2 contender from Johnson's title reign ( 1908-1915 ), fully matured at 170-190 pounds. Johnson did not dare fight that man and if he did, I suspect Langford who had both skills, and power would have knocked him out.

It's a clear duck. I go back and forth on which duck is worse. Johnson's avoidance of Langford or Dempsey's avoidance of Wills.

You could argue Langford.

 

Definately

In the modern era they would have stripped johnson for this shameful duck

 

I feel you hyperbole a bit in that post but there are parts of it I agree with.

Without doubt he was the most dangerous challenger out there with his combination of speed, timing and power. But I don't think Johnson was scared.

There was every chance he would lose, which is why he tool safer fights for more money.

But it's certainly not a foregone conclusion that Langford would have beaten him. I'd still favour Johnson.

 

So does the foremost expert on him.
What would you do fight Langford for $5000 ,or Jim Flynn for $30,000?
I know it's a toughie isn't it?

 

Johnson loved money. I think he was fearful of losing his title, which is how he made and enjoyed his lifestyle. Otherwise, he fights Langford.

The examples of a low output, non-power puncher, with a suspect chin when tested beating an attacking oriented fighter with more power and the better chin at heavyweight, are rare at the highest levels.

Langford was extremely strong for his size, and a good infighter. Don't assume Johnson can simply clinch him when he pleases.

 

Langford was the more experienced fighter with 51 fights to Johnson's 40.Langford scaled 156lbs Johnson 185lbs .
Langford's best weight was around175/180lbs so 23/24lbs more. Johnson's best weight 208lbs so 23lbs more.

Both improved ,Johnson had the added advantage of the extra confidence of being champion.Langford pulled out of a proposed match with Al Kaufman whom Johnson obliterated.
I've already shown that Johnson signed to fight Langford twice and made a verbal agreement to fight him on another occasion,all three fights fell through the first match because Johnson reneged on a contract to fight Langford at the NSC Covent Garden.Johnson had agreed to the fight before he challenged Burns then ,as champion he realised his earning power had gone up considerably ,he had fought Burns for a pittance just to get the title,once he got it, he demanded the same purse as Burns had received against him.You can reasonably say he should have kept his word ,I would have ,but he was already 30 and had been fighting other blacks for chump change and saw it as his time to cash in.
The other two matches that did not materialise were not down to Johnson.
Neither were the two matches that he signed to defend his title in against Jeannette for the McMahon brothers,the local authorites pulled the plug on them.

There is a lot of talk about Johnson being offered big money to defend against Langford in Australia ,I've covered that. There is some pie in the sky about a title defence in Russia in1914 ,yeah right:hey.
So for me Johnson didn't duck either Langford or Jeannette he went were the $$$$ was and he was fortunate it was in defending aginst white challengers who weren't anywhere as good as the dark trio of Jeanette , McVey, and Langford.
To give any of those three a realisticaly good chance against Johnson I think we have to assume that Jack would be out of shape,and I don't think he would be if he was facing any of them. Facts are he was Jeannette's master and dropped him multiple times in their series,He thrashed McVey three times koing him in their last fight and according to Langford gave him the only real beating he ever took putting him down for 2 long 9 counts ,cutting his eye, and breaking his nose.
Langford is a p4p ATG, none of the others mentioned are imo, but prime for prime he doesn't beat Johnson.

A duck for me is Canelo v GGG!

 

Fleischer wrote that Johnson was head and shoulders better than McVey, Jeanette or Langford. However all four were head and shoulders above all the white hwts from that time period.

 

The examples of 156lbs age 20 beating 185 age 28 are very RARE. I can not name one in the history of the heavyweight division! Can you? In addition to this enormous gap in age and weight, Johnson had been boxing for at least 5 years longer!

However, finding a person at 175-190lbs beating another person between 190-208lbs both in their primes is common among heavyweight history!

I'll assume all readers here get those points.

Johnson's best-filmed performance was at 190 pounds, and almost all of his best wins are below 200 pounds.

You got that one right. The French tried to strip Johnson for not fighting Langford, but could not take away his lone belt internationally.

 

Harry Wills fought nearly 50 times while Jack Dempsey was the champ. He lost one time during Dempsey's whole reign, to Bill Tate on a DQ, who he floored when the referee yelled break. He'd already stopped Tate a handful of times and was about to do it again when the fight was called.

Wills was by far the dominant top contender during Dempsey's reign, and Dempsey refused to fight Wills because he was black.

On the other hand, Jack Johnson floored, dominated and decisioned Sam Langford in defense of his Colored Heavyweight Title ... before beating Burns for the World title.

Sam Langford wasn't considered a serious challenger for Johnson's world title until after Johnson beat Jeffries in 1910. Should Johnson have fought Langford instead of someone like Frank Moran and Jim Johnson, sure.

But it's a big leap from refusing to ever fight someone who is arguably more dominant than you are (Dempsey refusing to fight the more dominant Wills) ... and saying a guy was ducking you because he didn't kick your @ss TWICE. (Langford and Johnson)

Jack Johnson kicked a lot of guys' @sses once and never fought them again. He wasn't ducking all of those guys he beat once, either.

Dempsey, on the other hand, never fought Wills.

 

Nat was chummy with Johnson and liked his style. Charlie Rose who was around the same time as Nat, and possibly a bit less biased felt Langford was better than Johnson.

Nat had one amateur fight and quit boxing. Rose was a decent boxer in his day and had a hand in managing or advising over 80 boxers.

You could say his credentials in some areas are even great than Nat's.

 

Like Canelo today choosing Khan over Golovkin.

Makes business sense but it doesn't enhance a legacy.

 

Not a duck. He exercised the privileges that came with being the HW Champion. More of a statement. Johnson was all about that.