I've gained a lot of respect for old Jack, in the time I've been on here, learning much about his life and times. Whats your view on Johnson, in general.? Do you think he gets his due respect on the boards, or is he perhaps over rated in your opinion.?
There's valid criticism, but he gets nowhere near enough credit for his pretitle run, him and Tommy Burns really cleared out the division between them, and Johnson beat Burns easily. He's a fighter where I think a much broader range of rating is justifiabe than many. There's a lot of ambiguity on how to rate some of his key wins, like Jeffries on his comeback, and a young Sam McVea. I don't think he cleared out an especially strong era, but the decisive nature of a lot of his wins helps his case. In terms of footage I think you get a better idea of him watching him when he was past his best against Moran and Willard. In the earlier fights we have on film he was really just toying with overmatched opponents.
More underrated than overrated today I would say. Between his earliest wins over contenders, and his loss to Jess Willard nearly fifteen years later, he had an incredible run of form. He also proved himself against every size shape and style of fighter imaginable.
In his case it created a distorted picture. The surviving fights showed him beating up on smaller men, when in fact he smashed a lot of big heavyweights.
Anyone who has him top two is overrating him, anyone who thinks he is not great is underrating him and anyone who has him anywhere in between has him about right. He mostly gets his due.
What does rated correctly mean ? Does he look slow when previously we thought he was fast ? NO. Does he look weak when we thought he was strong ? NO Did he get hit far more often than we thought ? NO Did he show poor stamina ? NO So it's a matter of styles and a matter of available footage. We have three films of a prime Johnson; Burns, Ketchel and Jeffries. Two smaller men and one older man .. he dominated all three men in distance scheduled fights and fought in a distance manner .. he suffers criticism of only fighting smaller men when in reality up to Louis he fought the best big men of any champion . We just don't have it on film but there is a ton of recorded coverage as Pollack's excellent book began to detail. My point when rating Johnson is a matter of his style which he used to dominate an era vs his skill set .. his sytyle would have to be modified for a altered sport .. the question is if he had the skill set to translate , his speed, strength, athleticism, stamina, ring IQ were all outstanding .. I see him easily making a transition ...
The best comparison that I can think of, in the post World War II era, is Larry Holmes. He was beating the top contenders in droves, over an improbably long period of time, and often dominating them. The argument against him, is that he missed some of his most important challengers, or rather fought them at the wrong time. He beat Jeffries, Langford, McVea and Jeanette, they just weren't the best versions. That is a Mayweather trick.
The versions of Langford, McVey and Jeanette he defeated are very underrated .. they were all more experienced than revisionists make them out to be , they were all kicking some serious butt in thew ring when he fought them .. Langford had over fifty fights as an example .. while they may not have been at their own primes they were legitimate challenges .. post Jeffries, the 32 year old Johnson , past his own prime took the liberty of milking the title ..
I think his run of good wins really went from 1903, or maybe 1902, and really ended with the Jeffries win in 1910, after that he defended his title erratically and not against the best opposition. 7 or 8 years is pretty impressive, but I do think he cleared out the division when it was fairly weak, with Jeffries and Fitzsimmons being finished before he fought them, and the Black Triumvirate not yet at their best. Langford was a world class fighter, but just not a Heavyweight when Johnson beat him. I don't think it was really much more notable than wins like Frank Childs, Joe Butler, and George Gardner. I think the Denver Ed Martin win gets very underrated
Random fun facts for you. He argued with anyone who wanted the south east corner of the ring and delayed his fight with McVey for it. He had once put caged rabbits he was given as a pet in his corner for luck and he ran with a gang as a youth, similar to Holyfield his Mum thrashed him when she found out he got beat up and promised to continue to do so till he won.
ah you judge poor Harry on the footage of him at 37 years old let’s pop film of Dempsey at 37. Oh wait there is none