No Adam thinks Johnson deserved the verdict. Why do you doubt Fitzsimmons was at the Johnson v Hart fight,? Because he thought Johnson was robbed? If he had said Hart deserved the win you wouldnt have questioned it would you.lol Show me one quote from Jeffries whilst he was champion in which he implies he might defend against Johnson.
Johnson's rise through the heavyweight ranks continued the following year. On February 3 at Hazard's Pavilion in Los Angeles, he defeated "Denver" Ed Martin to win the unofficial "Negro heavyweight championship." Before long, he'd also beaten the three other best black heavyweights of the day: Sam McVey, Joe Jeannette and Sam Langford. By the end of 1903, the Los Angeles Times declared that "Jack Johnson is now the logical opponent for Champion Jeffries.... The color line gag does not go now." Even the Police Gazette, the most influential tabloid in the "sporting" world, was calling for Jeffries to fight Johnson. Jeffries continued to refuse, and on May 2 announced that, having defeated all "logical challengers," he planned to retire to his alfalfa farm. But first, he planned to referee a bout between two white contenders, with the heavyweight title going to the winner. That fight, between Marvin Hart and former light heavyweight champion Jack Root, was scheduled for July 3 in Reno, Nevada. In the 12th round, Hart landed a right to Root's solar plexus, sending him to the floor. Jeffries counted Root out, then held up Hart's arm and declared him the winner and new Heavyweight Champion of the World. After the fight, Hart declared that he would gladly meet "any man in the world in a fair fight," then quickly added "...this challenge does not apply to colored people." http://www.heavyweightaction.com/PDFs/Boxing Rankings 1882-1904.pdf
Johnson was definitely the standout challenger for Jeffries, but it would have had to be instead of Munro, or after Munro. It could not have been any earlier realistically.
The contemporary sports pages made Johnson the standout challenger after he ko'd Denver Ed Martin for the Colored Title,that was in 1903. 1903, the Los Angeles Times declared that "Jack Johnson is now the logical opponent for Champion Jeffries.... The color line gag does not go now." Even the Police Gazette, the most influential tabloid in the "sporting" world, was calling for Jeffries to fight Johnson. Jeffries continued to refuse.
Well, post Munroe This content is protected . Don't into what McVey says; he is agenda prevents him from accepting facts. In this case, I supply the facts and the link. The article is 1904, from the Spokane Daily. Jeffries mentions Hart, Ferguson, and Johnson as possible next opponents! The take away here is the color line is complicated, and if there was enough money or the right terms, Jeffries could cross the line. He did so as Champion vs. Hank Griffin, who was fresh off a win over one Jack Johnson. Had Johnson beaten Hart in 1905 and there was a Reno like purse, who knows what Jeffries would have done. No one here can say, but the below article indicates Johnson was a possibility. However, Hart won the match. Jeffries said he would fight Hart next is there was backing for it, people saw it a blow out. Alternatively, if you want to think the poster Mcvey, if Hart were black, he would accuse Jeffries of ducking him too! https://news.google.com/newspapers?...9VYAAAAIBAJ&sjid=7PMDAAAAIBAJ&pg=6313,5236972
B()ll****. Stop lying Mcvey. Jeffries never said this 1,000-year comment. Show me where he said this in print and content and I give you credit. It does not exist! The fact of the matter is Jeffries said if he were younger he would have won right after the fight. That is in context and print. I can reproduce it. See the difference? Jeffries had not fought in 6 years, was overweight and drank too much. A shell of the man he was, to quote Fitzsimmons who saw it, Jeffries was not a quarter of the fighter I meet. Also, stop whining like a stuck pig about the Hart loss. Johnson stunk out the joint and did not do enough to win. As I told you five times, his corner begged him to pick up the action; he did not! If you have anything in print after the Hart where Johnson said I think I won clearly, I will read it. I quoted Johnson directly in the Boxing Illustrated article. He thinks he lost. So get over it already. Moreover, if you want to be honest, Johnson struggled in draws and DQ's post-Hart, vs. fighters who were not even as good as Hart! Let me know if you want to read them PS: I urge you to read the link on Jeffries thoughts post-Munroe in 1904. You will see Johnson's name was mentioned as a possible opponent next.
Any newspaper could mention Johnson as a possible challenger! My post ,directly above yours, gives the Los Angeles Times 1903 stating "Johnson is now the logical challenger to Jeffries".What you wont find is Jeffries admitting that! lol My God! You really are in denial about this aren't you!" It would be hilarious if it wasn't so desperately sad!
On the train going home Jeffries replied to journalist Fred Snelling saying ,"in your prime you would have beaten him" Jeffries responded," no I couldn't have licked him in a thousand years I couldn't have reached him" July 5th 1910 The Times. I was overjoyed at the idea of finally fighting a man in my league. I must say up front the man in no way disappointed me; from the opening bell of the fight,his performance never failed to be interesting for all concerned.I nonetheless ,never doubted for a second that I could bring him down. I knew from the start that I was completely dominating him and so did everyone in the crowd. I was so sure of my victory on points it never for a moment crossed my my mind that I wouldn't get it.Imagine my surprise and disgust when the judge gave the win to Marvin Hart." Jack Johnson,page 361. " I was so outraged that I swore never to fight on the West Coast until the system in place had been changed .Jack Johnson. My Life & Battles. " I was robbed that's all there is to it.I fought a good fight and am satisfied with the showing I made.I got the worst of it.Had I had my way I would never have stood for Greggains at any stage,but it was all Abrams say ,and I had to suffer....I put up the best fight I knew how and was satisfied that I was the winner at every stage." Jack Johnson. "Hart is a big tough fellow very awkward, and hard to hit.I will leave the verdict to those who saw the mill and let them form their own opinions.All I can say is I was robbed.After fighting until I reached the top,I have been thrown down by an unfair ruling."Jack Johnson "Marvin Hart is a fighter who keeps coming all the time and these tactics enabled him to predispose Referee Greggains in his favour.He had got by Johnson's long reach once in a while,kept boring in and if he failed to do any damage to the negro as Johnson at the finish was unmarked,he at least succeeded in cutting out the pace ,that counted in the end."Police GazetteApril 29th 1905. When Greggains pointed to Hart as the winner at the end of the contest ,pandemonium reigned supreme throughout the auditorium,but if a person looked at the contest from an unbiased standpoint and carefully weighed everything in the balance,he would be compelled to acknowledge that the worst Johnson should have received was a draw. Looking at it from a scientific angle,the colored man should have been declared the victor. It is true Hart did all the forcing and was ever on the aggressive,but his blows rarely landed on a vulnerable spot and he never had his opponent in distress . On the other hand,Johnson outpointed and outboxed him from start to finish and on several occasions forced the white man to break ground with such alacrity that the ropes alone saved him from going into the audience." The San Francisco Bulletin. " The Bulletin felt that racial prejudice was not only behind the fans support for Hart but the referees decision". Adam Pollack . There you are Mr Bigot .Happy Now? I forgot also present was boxing writer Bohun Lynch Daily Telegraph
So he went for three years without defending against the nr 1 contender? And two of them without defending against a ranked opposition at all? Quite a bit worse than Patterson in terms of defending against the best.
Jeffries has a great resume. Unfortunately it’s marred by the color line. Much like Dempsey. Had Jeffries fought Johnson and won in 1905- he would still be recognized as a top 5 hw of all time to this day. No single loss - has affected a legacy more than Jeffries 1910 loss to Johnson. Against common opponents with Johnson - Jeffries fares much better. Jeffries fought quality opponents and defeated them multiple times Corbett, Fitzsimmons, Sharkey. Jeffries fought several quality black fighters on the way up and won decisively. Jeffries should of stayed away coming back after 6 years is one of the greatest sports blunders of all time. He got what he deserved though, he didn’t fight his top contender at his best, for the wrong reasons, then came back for the wrong reasons and got thrashed.
You must be BRAIN DAMAGED. The newspaper I linked was quoting Jeffries himself in 1904, who mentioned Johnson as a possible next opponent. Do you see the difference? https://news.google.com/newspapers?...9VYAAAAIBAJ&sjid=7PMDAAAAIBAJ&pg=6313,5236972
Where is the link to this alleged quotation? Where can we read the article? Your credibility, which when it comes to Jeffries and most accomplished white heavies is near zero is on the line.
Bokaj, Jeffries cleaned out #1, #2 AND #3 from 1899-1902 and should be applauded for doing so. 1904 was his last fight. He said he'd fight Marvin Hart #1 in 1905 if there was demand for it. There wasn't. By contrast, Johnson never fought a top 4 guy as champion from 1909-1914. An interesting point is Johnson himself rated Corbett, and Fitz, above Langford, Jeannette, and McVey, his top 3 contenders from 1909-1914 which he avoided. It is a fact that Johnson pulled out of a signed contact to meet Sam Langford in 1909. Joe Jeannette said, when Johnson became champion he forgot his old friends and drew the color line against his own people. " Johnson apologist can not spin these facts away. Simply sated, he didn't want to fight them and there was always an excuse. If a tenured champion doesn't face his top 3 highest rated opponents for years ( Not 2 ) but six years, he is not a proven champion. PS: I'll put up a thread on Burns next to see if he fought the best while he had the belt.