1915 Jack Johnson Vs. 1927 Jack Dempsey

IF the 1915 version of Johnson comes into the fight motivated and in top condition he wins by TKO or decision. Too crafty and too good defensively--IMHO he'd frustrate Dempsey and tie him up in knots. However, a non-motivated Johnson not in top shape gets overwhelmed by the 1927 Dempsey's brute power and strength--KO in 5-6 rounds.

 

Lol, “please go away” says the one who pursued me via the PM route (his “lair”, lol).

The ONLY liar here is YOU - you’re just trying to copy my accurate labelling of YOU - retorting as would a small child. Haha.

Johnson absolutely OWNED Jeffries from start to finish. Jack simply chose to carry the big fella for the films and to twist the knife - and twist it he did.

Jeffries NEVER defended against a black man - ZERO defences - but, under heavy public coercion, he did challenge a black champion and got his a** absolutely kicked.

It’s locked into the history books, the actual facts, and no dribbling fan of Jeffries can change that. Ouch!

But of course we know, after the fight, your “hero” Jeff claimed he was drugged - you know, your wishfully imagined, courageous “cellar” man. Lol.

As identified on film, in round 4, Johnson had humiliatingly bent Jeffries arm behind his back yet again, - then Johnson cracked Jeff with a laser right cross - causing Jeffries to lurch forward and stumble into Johnson’s arms.

Yeah, Jeff was doing great, wasn’t he? Lol. The bell rang and Johnson clearly looked back at Jeffries heading back to his corner, knowing he had inflicted some major damage and had Big Jim easily.

Jeffies, head down, wiped at his nose - good chance the right cross was the very punch that likely broke Jeff’s nose.

You love your unsubstantiated quotes, don’t you?

These quotes are actually FOR REAL.

Mendoza, speaking whilst in his preferred lair, the PM bunker:-

This content is protected

This content is protected

 

Cheers Greg, I appreciate the kind words.

Posters like ‘Doza are a dime a dozen and only serve to waste the time of other, highly knowledgeable posters, including your own good self.

I might just ignore him now for the sake of all the excellent posters here otherwise- or be extremely minimal in any potential replies going forward.

 

Having one of Adam’s “In The Ring with..” books is like having a Big Book of magic spells - loads of incantations (primary source facts) at your disposal.

They’re a must addition to the libraries of every, would be, Grand Boxing Wizard.

Alas, while I have several, I don’t have the full set yet - I am but a mere apprentice.

Though I might leaf through to see if there is spell for turning a certain member into a frog. Lol.

 

Add Compton's book on Harry Greb and your library is complete or at least very good.

 

What a fight!

 

Yeah, I’ve definitely been chewing over that one for a while and even more so, very recently in fact - does Steve do “mates’ rates” discounts for forum members?

 

Ah, so that explains why reports described an unusual amount of ogling/swooning ladies present when the Mauler weighed in.

Kidding aside, I’ve literally read the claim that Jack Johnson would wrap layers of gauze around his old fella in order to turn Lil Arthur into Big Arthur under his tights to impress the ladies. I hope I’m not the only one to have read same.

 

Interesting posit.

Only asking to make sure I’ve got it right - you mean a better prepared and conditioned Johnson than the version that actually turned up in Cuba in 1915? That would require more assumptions but certainly could be entertained.

I’ve only taken Johnson exactly as he was vs Willard - but there was certainly scope for Johnson to come in somewhat better prepared and conditioned than he was - perhaps it might not have made a difference vs Willard who, if still not KO’d, would still likely outlast Johnson anyway.

However, for the purposes of hypothetical matches vs other fighters, a fitter Johnson than the one who presented in Cuba 1915 could make a practical differnce.

 

No but he'll chew your ass out if you state that Dempsey didn't duck Wills.

 

Yep--you got it--100% on the mark. (A better conditioned and prepared 1915 Johnson beats 1927 Dempsey--too smart and slick--he'd frustrate Dempsey and would outpoint him I believe rather easily.)

 

But that's Willard....

 

Why do you post the same thing over and over, get me to reply, opt out of a PM debate, and fail to produce anything when I ask in PM or here?

Now you reduced to posting my private messages?! They are private. That is against board rules. You obvisouly need me to reply and most definitely had your feathers ruffled by my factual replies on Louis and Johnson which is why you lamely go after Jeffries. Lots of poster gave me a thumbs up by the way on these threads.

Stop lying! And see if you are smart enough to place me on ignore. I doubt you are. By the way were you banned under another name? First post 2021, right? And sure you are not older than I, nor have you seen more boxing that I have. That is unless you lying again in your profile! I don't need to see you to reply and hope you don't.

 

The ONLY liar is you. Proven beyond a doubt.

I don’t hide behind different monikers or PMs.

Since you asked, are you the bs artist formerly known as Dr Z, btw? That would explain a lot.

I’ve shredded your each and every argument to pieces - even if I do say so myself - and I do say so.

Begone sad little man.