Highest Jack Johnson Rating?

No. I am simply saying that Johnson defeated Jeanette on 1-16-1906
when Jeanette had a 7-4-1 record ( 12 total fights ).

My point was Johnson beat Jeanette on Jeanette's 12th pro fight. He also beat him on his 16th, however the first win was on the 12th.

Given Jeanettes turning pro at a later age, and Jack Johnson massive experience edge when the two fought, Jack should have whiped him.

 

Just like Holmes should have whiped witherspoon?

 

The Witherpsoon who meet Holmes was far more advanced than the Jeanette who meet Johnson.

 

Without haveing seen the fight I don't see how you can make that statement with any certainty.

 

I've Johnson at #9 with possible scope for putting him as high as Top 6. Ahead of Dempsey and behind Holmes.

 

... I really rate Johnson of course, but can't quite see him ahead of Liston, Frazier or Tyson (there'd be a good argument for it, though. Perhaps). Right here you go:

1. Louis
2. Ali
3. Holmes
4. Lewis
5. Marciano
6. Liston
7. Frazier
8. Tyson
9.

This content is protected

10. Holyfield

 

Here's what we can look at. Jeanette started boxing late age 25. He had no amatuer career, and began his pro career 0-3.

Witherspoon had more experince in terms of total fights and more quality gym work. So of course the Witherspoon who meet Holmes was more advanced than the Jeanette who meet Johnson.

 

He was beaten by Choynski when he was green, he was beaten by Willard when he was old and overweight and it still took 20+ rounds.

 

He's in the top five.

 

Based on resume, I can't understand any ranking of Tyson ahead of Johnson. Johnson enjoyed tremendous longevity; Tyson ultimately was a flash -- albeit a brilliant one -- in the pan.

And you have to consider the era. Even between Johnson of the first decade of the century and Louis 30 years later, there was a profound shift in boxing procedure and training. People see the low guard and staccato action and immediately dismiss fighters from that timeframe. It isn't a fair comparison.

Further, in terms of opponent selection, Johnson did not have free will in that regard. As champion, he had the option to fight for big dollars against White Hopes -- whether promoted by Tex Rickard or someone else -- or battle for peanuts against a black fighter. The societal rules were much, much different, as his struggles against the Mann Act attest.

It's never fair to criticize a fighter for working to his financial advantage, and Johnson chose his opponents logically during his actual title reign.

Fortunately, his time on the Negro circuit is more than enough to justify his greatness. Like everyone else, I rue that a rematch with Langford never happened, but even so, Johnson earned his spot somewhere in the top 6 or 7, however you view it.

 

:good

 

Marciano deserves a high placing due to his career record, plus the fact that he wasn't poetry in motion but frighteningly effective nonetheless, always finding a way to close the show and win (whether or not he was geting outboxed).

Third is a bit too high for Rocky, though. Holmes and Lewis both supass him fundamentally, in terms of more overall title defences, depth to their record and would fare a good deal better in head-to-head matchups. I'm sorry but can't see those two being out of the Top 10 and Tunney being there, Foreman at #3 is very much stretching it IMO. Most of the rest of your list is fine, good effort overall.

 

I just think both fought in unchallenged times. Top ten ATG is not where Holmes or Lewis fit because of this.

 

I put him really close to the top. Great resume, longevity, and incredible skills Never had the crowd on his side, or most of the country for that matter, but no one could argue that he was ridiculously dominant in the era he operated and never had a shortage of opponents because "white" America was trying to find anyway they could to dethrone him.