1922 corbett article on langford

Well if Corbett was a master of psychological warfare he certainly came second when he picked on Johnson.Ringside reports from the Jeffries ,Johnson fight, state that Johnson got the better of Corbett in every vocal exchange
Corbett was Jeffries chief second ,and beleived that Blacks could not fight effectively when they were angry,consequently he subjected Johnson. to a torrent of unceasing racist abuse for the duration of the fight.
Johnson ,however did not get angry he replied to Corbett's insults with polite little rejoinders ,that further enraged Corbett, Corbett began to lose the plot and increasingly got more frenzied in his abuse ,in the 12 th round , with Jeffries mouth cut and bleeding and his nose broken, Johnson leaned over the ropes and said to Corbett sarcastically " I thought you said you were going to have me wild?" Corbett was beside himself.

 

Burns was on a £30,000 guarantee which was deposited by Mcintosh ,Burns close friend ,BEFORE THE FIGHT TOOK PLACE.:good

The last time you spun this one ,you said Burns had Yellow Fever, as others posters began questioning you on this you systematically diluted the illness from Yellow Fever ,to Jaundice ,to unwell

 

There was no guarantee of the money until the fight happened, McVey. Burns was not pre-paid for this fight.

Burns was ill and at a low weight. It is fact that he begged HD McIntoish to delay the fight so he could get well. McIntosh said all the tickets were sold and the fight must go on, so Burns entered the ring at 168 pounds. These are facts.

Do you deny that Burns was ill at at a low weight for this match? Or will you conveniently skip the reply to this question as usual?

Keep Laughing. Your select favoritism of quotes and in-ability to accepts truths undermine your credibility.

 

Johnson scaled 192 lbs Burns ,168lbs,so Johnson's win is devoid of credibilty or merit?
Ok I can live with that ,but ,hold on a second.Here is a statistic for you.
Bob Fitzsimmons 167lbs Jim Jeffries 206lbs.
Here is another Fitzsimmons 37 years old and inactive for two years ,Jeffries 24 years old.
Burns 27 years old and had defended his title 6 times that year[ 1908], the last only 3 months previously a ko over Bill Lang .
Indeed Burns up to that time was the busiest Heavyweight Champion .
To summarize.
Jeffries weight advantage over Fitz 39 lbs,age advantage 13 years.
Johnson weight advantage over Burns 24lbs,age advantage NONE Johnson was a year older at 30.
So Jeffries beats a Fitz who was 13 years older than himself and 10 years older than Burns was when Johnson defeated him.Plus Fitz had not fought in 2 years.
Johnson meets a prime Burns who has been very active, in posting the most succesful defences of the title at that time.

Burns was ill? Sure he didnt have Yellow Fever? Scarlet fever? Swamp Fever? Black water Fever?.The day after the fight Burns went to the races and dropped a packet , very irresponsible of him to go out infecting the general public with his "Illness"
Keep trying M
God Loves a trier:good

 

If it helps to resolve your argument, I think both Johnson and Jeffries are incredibly over-rated.

 

Fitz was in his prime for the first Jeffreis fight, and proved it on his come back to beat contenders to earn the re-match. Besides everyone in that time line felt Fitz was better than Burns. Even Burns himself said so.

Burns was ill for the Johnson match, at a low weight, and never got a re-match even though he was clearly better than the hacks like Ross or Kaufman that Johnson gave title shots too.

It seems like you either can't comprehend my points or worse yet have blinders on to shield your eyes from the truth. I think its a bit of both to be honest. Maybe this will help...yu are a fl.

If you want a real debate on this topic, start a separate thread if you dare.

 

Well ,I think that is a point of view,not one I suscribe to but as valid as any other.

 

How can a man of 37 who has not had a fight for 2 years be in his prime ?

Dont make yourself look any more foolish than you are.

"Hacks Like Ross and Kaufman"? How About Bums like Munroe and Finnegan?
Burns did not win a round and was virtually crucified in that fight,being rescued by the Police, how did he merit a rematch?
Dear old Mendoza, thanks for the entertainment:good

 

How can a man 37 be in his prime? I suggest you read what Fitz did after Jeffries first defeated him. He killed a man in the ring, then blew out Sharkey in 2, and hammered Ruhlin in 5. Fitz was a freak, and was most certainly in his prime before the 2nd Jeffries fight. In fact you could say he was deadlier than ever.

Ross and Kauffman were rip off title shots, and Johnson carried them the distance. Ross was Ko'd what, 5x times before meeting Johnson?

When Jeffries fought Munore ( Munroe later went the distance with Johnson despite being grossly out of shape ) he slaughtered him. The same thing for Finnegan. The two fights here lasted a combined three rounds.

You see, when Jeffries was matched vs a tier two or below guy he took care of business and Ko'd them. When Johnson was matched vs a 2nd or 3rd rater, he took them the distance.

I see a stark contrast here Mcvey. You continue to debate me with your ears wide shut. No worries on my end. I doubt anyone who reads this takes what you are saying in this thread seriously.

But back to point. Do you acknowledged that Johnson beat a far less than 100% 168 pound Burns who was at a low wait and recovering from a Jaundice or not? Do tell, there are plenty of poverbial rakes for you to step on.

 

The" Hacks" Kaufman and Ross.
Kaufman was 191lbs.Had beaten
Flynn by ko
Schreck by Ko
Jack Twin Sullivan by dec
Barry by ko
Ross by NWS.
His record when he fought Johnson was 19-1-0
Ross was 214lbs
He had beaten
Gardner by ko
Schreck
drawn with Barry,
And 3 months prior to meeting Johnson ,he had floored Hart and had him on the verge of a ko ,when he hit Hart while he was down and was DSQd.
Both these challengers were better than Munroe and Finnegan.
READ THIS.NO MAN WHO IS 37 AND COMES OUT OF RETIREMENT AFTER 2 YEARS, IS IN HIS PRIME.
PS The Sharkey that an old Fitz blew out in 2 rds , was that the Sharkey who twice went the distance with Jeffries,and over a total of 45 rds gave him life and death?atsch

 

Finnegan against Jeffries lasted 55 seconds,Finnegan went down and began to cry.Boxrec gives Jeffries a 60lbs weight advantage here.
Finegan's record when he fought Jeffries was 1-2-2, he ended up with a proud record of W1-L 3 D 2 ,and you have the gall to call Johnson's defences against Ross and Kaufman rip offs?
Finegan "off again on again" as Bert Sugar referres to him is universally accepted as the most disgraceful ,cynical ,underserving challenger for the Heavyweight Title that was EVER FOISTED ON A GULLIBLE PUBLIC .
He makes Fraziers defences against Stander and Daniels look like exercises in fool hardy bravery.
Stop now before you embarass yourself further


I'm not debating with you M ,you can't debate with a bigot.
Tell you what if you think your argument is the more persuasive why dont we put it to the Forum?How's that?

 

Ok, if Bert Sugar say it, than it must be true. Anyone with a brain knows that Jack Johnson's title defenses were jokes, as the best contenders were skirted when Johnson used the color line against them. You could also argue that the best white contender in GunBoat Smith in fact TKO'd in in a 4 round exhibition match.

The other guys he took the distance, drew with, suffer knockdowns vs, or failed to impress in victory. Live with that fact. In fact you often make excuses for your wife beating cyber hero by saying he wasn't in shape, and did not care. So I wonder why do you?

One bad title defense opponent is par for any champion, and this includes Ali, and Louis who had there share of Finnegan's. Jeffries meet the best while he was champ, and returned at to face Johnson. If you want to use a more credible historian than Sugar on Jeffries competition as champion, Nat Fleischer said Jeffries beat the best competition.

By the way will you ever answer my question if you think Burns who was ill with a Jaundice and a mere 168 pounds was at his best when he meet Johnson? Duckage, thy poster name is Mcvey.:deal

Finally how dare you accuse me of being a bigot. This crosses the line. You can't win with words, so you have to make things up. Anyone who has the patience to read though your drivel knows you are obviously a low IQ man who can't form a paragraph, can't read, doesn't understand logic ( or boxing ) and thinks he knows something about boxing because you regurgitate a favorite one liner from a book or two. Gloves are now off McVey. If I choose I will make a habit of correcting your un-readable error infested posts for the fun of it.

END.

 

I dont accuse you of being a Bigot ,I tell you openly you are one, and, if you were standing in front of me I would happily confirm it for you.
IQ ratings are rather contentious ,but if you want mine it was measured at 137.at college,in 1967.No big deal either way imo.
For you to aver that I can't form a paragraph,can't read ,and do not understand logic is highly amusing,coming from some one who can't spell ,phrase , punctuate, or debate without whipping themselves in to a frenzy.
I offered you the chance to put our little exchange to the Forum,the offer still stands ,if you think you have the high ground ,regarding logic and objectivity ,why dont you test it?
It's pleasant that you think enough of me to decide to monitor my posts in the future,may I dare hope that you will make me your life's work?
Its intruiging that you can post a reasoned objective thread regarding Louis or Frazier for example ,yet the very mention of the name John Arthur Johnson ,sends you into a paroxysm of bigoted ,biased,bumptious , baying ,balderdash.
ps [That's called alliteration].I threw that in just for you. Mr Pompous :good

 

You are a liar, a low IQ man, and likely a reverse racists. Why must you jump on objective reasoning? I made it clear I think Johnson is over rated in the boxing ring, a shameful wife beater, and pimp. If those guys are you heroes so be it.:good Now I am starting to see your true colors.

Its too bad we could not meet. I know who I am, and I have little doubt the contest would end faster than your alleged 137 IQ ( that is borderline genius by the way ) could finish reading this paragraph.

Yes-- I think I will enjoy correcting you when you post here.

Sure start a debate on a mutually agreeable topic. This out to be a hoot.

Ta-ta.

 

Ever think about going over your, posts prior to submitting them?
Maybe correcting the spelling howlers and grammatical mistakes?
137 is not borderline genius actually,my partners IQ is in the 140's and my best friend is a member of Mensa,as I explained to you ,or tried to IQ, numbers have largely been given a back seat when assessing intelligence.
You raised the IQ subject ,I merely replied to it.
I dont consider myself particularly bright ,but I have a sneaking suspicion ,Im considerably more erudite ,and intellectually qualified than your good self.
Your fatal Achilles heel is you lose all rationality when some one disagrees with you,I first noticed this when you used to come on this Forum under the guise of Dr Z, pontificating to all and sundry.
As I remarked on other subjects you can be objective ,but not on your favourite hobby horse.
Beating me in a debate is something you will not do all the time you have a hole in your rectum.
Get yourself a life M,its not worth all the stress you put yourself through ,trying to be some self appointed Boxing pundit,you are just another poster like the rest of us ,and for God's sake try and curb that pompous bigotry.