This one puzzles me .... Johnson-Hart-Burns-Johnson

Aside from viewing the Johnson vs Hart as a robbery (just imo), there is still the question of exactly how hard could Johnson actually punch?

While Hart was durable, it seems a bit strange that Johnson couldn’t or wouldn’t get him out of there.

In round 9 or 10 of their fight it seems Johnson put some effort into KO’ing Hart but couldn’t quite seal the deal.

Johnson’s cautious style might be part of the answer as to why he didn’t secure KOs in fights in which he seemed more than capable of getting the knock out.

However, I’d think a man holding the boxing IQ that Johnson did would also understand that electing not to take an opponent out as and when the opportunities presented could in fact lend to greater risk later in the fight.

I guess to come out of a fight totally unmarked, Johnson had to fight exactly as he did - making defence his highest priority While it doesn’t impugn his courage or durability, Johnson did not like or see the sense in taking any punishment at all.

Though 5 years later and near 20 lbs heavier, I see the power in Johnson’s punches vs Jeffries as highly impressive - the force behind his shots being unmistakable.

Was he really that quirky a fighter to turn his power off and on due to caution and/or only when arbitrarily inclined or has Jack been given a little bit too much credit for holding his punch in reserve?

Interestingly, both Johnson and Hart claimed that they damaged their right hands during the fight - in rounds 5/6 and round 2 respectively. Possible but also impossible to say for sure.

I guess the much smaller gloves of the day made fighters more prone to hand damage and/or them not punching for all they were worth lest they incurred hand damage.

Not at all a fail safe indicator but Johnson had the physique that implied that he could likely punch quite hard - particularly given his back/shoulder musculature.

Interesting tid bit from Adams book that I had forgotten - after winning the fight, Hart rationalised himself as deserving a shot at Jeffries since he (Hart) had beaten the guy (Johnson) who Jeffries had been side stepping for so long.

Speculated agendas and motives aside, just taking the outcome in its own right, Hart being awarded the decision definitely provided as a quick release of the mouthing pressure on Jeffries to drop his colour line and fight Johnson. No question on that, imo.

Though not as easily as he did in 1910 but if Johnson had matched Jeffries in 1905, I think he would’ve beaten Jeff.

Besides being a superior fighter overall, I think Johnson also had just the right style to get the better of Jeff.

Bit of joke and quite rich for Jeff to fight the likes of Munro in 1904 only to exclude both Hart and Johnson going forward as not being worthy of his presence in the ring - let alone Jeff being okay with rematching and beating up the inactive relics of Fitz and Corbett in 1902 and 1903 respectively - and the trouble Fitz gave Jeff in their rematch countered the suggestion that Jeff was somehow a greatly improved fighter, imo.

 

If the Johnson v Jeffries fight had been over 12 rounds ,and refereed by Greggains,he would probably have given the decision to Jeffries!

 

And that’s not much of an exaggeration, if at all.

Apparently the white spectators at Johnson - Hart also jeered Jack for his “roughness” on break aways.

I mean, did they want Johnson to be aggressive in there or not?

What a load of bollocks!