An odd result for a pirme Jack Johnson?

Am glad you agree with me :good

 

Johnson weighed 185 for Langford , and put on 20 lbs of muscle later,he was short of his peak,as was Langford ,[though he had ,had 56 fights].Johnson was quite capable of drawing ,or going the distance with very moderate fighters ,he had a very cynical attitude towards the fight game and training.How he won was not important to him nor was pleasing the public.
I am sure you will be able to put a negative spin on this at some point M ,dont despair at the apathetic response from most posters ,you appear to have found an ally in Seamus!

 

Does anyone have any idea of the standing of 'Maines' boxing rules for the period. Having lasted the 10 round term, whats the possibility of a 'drawn' result being listed.. regardless of either mans superiority in battle??? No newpaper result? No press/journalists result? Just a thought......

 

"Defence allways wins in the end ,if its good enough". " I often spent half a fight padding backwards ". Jack Johnson.
After winning the title Johnson NEVER scaled under 200lbs,he stated that his best condition was against Jeffries when he weighed in at 208lbs, some 23 lbs HEAVIER than for Langford. Started with the spin?

 

Bottom line is that Johnson had what many at the time called a boring, lackluster style. He was not a big puncher, not much of a finisher, and had a cautious, defensive style that was more about neutralizing his opponents than beating them up. His skill was appreciated, but his style was not. He had a lot of inconsistent performances. In one fight, they would rave about his skill, but in another, reporters would moan about how boring he was. According to reporters at the time, he did not compare favorably with the more aggressive and active puncher, Peter Jackson, who years earlier had garnered a lot more favorable publicity than Johnson did.

 

I think apollack puts a nice interpretation here. However, I must go one further and restate that it astounds me to what lengths Johnson apologists must go keep his legacy untarnished. He simply was not heads and shoulders above his contemporaries but rather competitive with them. Those who rated him so high during and right subsequent to his title reign also were too influenced by his defeat of at thoroughly depleted, thoroughly out-dated Jim Jeffries.

 

I think that is a fair and objective statement

 

I don't think that is a fair, or objective statement.

 

It could simply be that Dunning got a draw for finishing the fight on his feet.

That was often the contract terms back then. For example Tex Cobb would have been awarded a draw against Larry Holmes under the terms of such a contract.

 

One or two posters have man love for the Klits and Jim Jeffries. If you have any truths or facts regarding this fight PRODUCE THEM.Randy Roberts ,in his book" Papa Jack ",thinks that the fight MAY have been a "carry job".NO TRUTH, NO FACT so INADMISSABLE.Just like your inuendos ,that's called evenhandedness.

 

A lot of what you call "excuses" were day to day circumstances of the fight game of the period.

Things that should really not come as any suprize to you.

 

Interesting theory ... now let's expand on it ... how many other heavyweight champions had to fight the color line and navigate ridiculous racial bais ... the answer , none ... are you denying fighters like Johnson, Langford, Gans and so many others did not regulary carry opponents as part of doing business ? Corbett, Jeffries, Willard , Dempsey and Co. never had such challanges so it's not an apples to apples comparison ...