Jack Johnson could beat Frazier (but it wouldn't be easy)

Tying him up inside and landing uppercuts is a good starting point if you want to beat Joe Frazier.
The next key is hitting him with a hook inside his hook. Frazier threw his off his left foot and that leads to wide hooks.

 

Yes!

I've often attempted (to varying degrees of success) to point out the similarities between Johnson and young Foreman at mid-range (even those strange straight-armed winging hooks to the body) while arguing that Johnson was actually better than Foreman at extended range.

He must have been quite a shock to people brought up on Corbett and Fitzsimmons.

 

He was years ahead of his time.

 

Except Johnson beat no one remotely in Frazier's class as a heavyweight. And Frazier beat the best heavyweight ever.

Using those strongarm techniques and bicep pinching against lilliputians and hammer and tong guys isnt the same as doing it against a prime Frazier. Not even close. Johnson likely to get blown up trying that game.

 

Nice breakdown.

Just on the uppercut. I remember reading an article contemporary to Johnson’s time describing that punch.

It described Johnson being able to throw it at impossibly close range - as you stated, chest to chest. Next to no space/room required.

It also stated that Johnson’s body language otherwise gave little or no indication that he was about to launch the uppercut, no shifting of feet etc., so it was well disguised.

Finally, to give it the extra power with little body movement otherwise, it was said Johnson wiggled his hips as he executed the punch to give it torque.

Now if one didn’t see it on film, they might allow for some romanticism in the description, it reads as almost too perfect -but, there it is on film, particularly throughout the Jeffries fight - exactly as advertised.

In close, there is one instance of poor Jeffries, battered and bruised, launching his own titanic uppercut only for Johnson to easily slip it with a slight tilt of his head - leaving Jeffries unimpeded fist to shoot high into the sky.

To add insult to the missed punch, as if to show “this is how it’s done”, Johnson immediately returns serve with his own searing uppercut that lands flush, rocking Jeff to his heels, causing him to stumble forward into Johnson.

I think Johnson’s power might’ve been a bit overrated (read: the ability to end a fight at anytime with a swish of the glove) but he did carry a lot of guys and there was no illusion in the savage manner Jeffries head was snapped back time and again. Some very nice power there.

 

Nice effort in putting your point across and you make some valid points. However, as we all know, both fighters are on their best night in these mythical match ups and , for me, FOTC Frazier is a nightmare. I cant see Jack coming out of it good

 

i dont see anything that exceptional about Joe. didnt you all see the Foreman fight?

Johnson in 12

 

Just because Johnson was able to do that with Ketchel and Burns doesn't mean Frazier could fall for that. Boxing evolved and Frazier was obviously the better fighter. Far better than the men whom Johnson fought. He was bigger and hit harder in comparison to Ketchel and Burns for sure. Yet I find most his points agreeable and he says it could in theory be done. He isn't picking Johnson to beat Frazier, he laying out how he would be difficult for mostly left hook only Frazier to deal with him. But if Johnson thinks he can avoid Frazier's left hook fired with relentlessly with stamina, speed and accuracy and keep Frazier at bey like he has done with small or old men he's got another thing coming.

 

And no doubt part of what makes Johnson's skills look so good is that the fighters of his time were clueless about how to respond to them, besides his obvious physical gifts over them.
Fast forward twenty or thirty years -- much less sixty! -- into a world in which fighters had long since caught up to Johnson's game and he may very well have looked ordinary.
So, it's a tremendous amount of speculation that runs the risk of overestimating Johnson's actual greatness based on him being decades ahead of his time and of underestimating him based on the quality of his competition that was no fault of his own.
Surely the safer bet is that Frazier prevails, probably by about round six, but GlassCityCobra makes a strong prima facie case for why Johnson merits a fair bit of benefit of the doubt, particularly relative to his peers.

 

In most of our footage of him, Johnson looks primitive. Often very primitive indeed. Frazier does not.

If Johnson wins, it will have to be a wrestling / dirty boxing match with a super permissive ref. And even then, it's not a given that he'll tire before Frazier.

 

I don't discount Jack Johnson chances here. He was big, quick had a good defense. Jack Johnson was fearless as well.
I wonder how Johnson would adjust to the speed of Frazier's attack. There was a different style of fighting at that time and don't think anyone was bringing heat like Joe Frazier in 1909. Not until Dempsey came along did boxing start to change.

Johnson could be effective ripping uppercuts with both hands. Frazier is there to be hit but...Joe naturally would slice some hooks over an uppercut the way he deposited Muhammad Ali to the floor.
Interesting matchup.

 

Not the same Frazier.

 

I give Johnson little chance in a 60's 70's rules. The game has change so much. Now had this fight happen in 1910, I can see Johnson tying up Frazier and stop any work Fraizer plans to do, and making it more a wrestling 1900's boxing match as was used in the day, (Gans Nelson anyone??). With a modern ref, there is no way Johnson would be allowed to get away with that.