30 Minutes of Jack Johnson vs. Jim Flynn

There is some Dempsey clips sparring also.......possibly a few seconds sparring with a figure that resembles in boxing form George godfrey .

 

Great find .. clearly shows that Flynn was not taking any sort of brutal beating, delivered as much as he got, was the fresher fighter and just how often Johnson held on in a fight .. he's be disqualified pulling that in a bout today ..

 

Oh bull**** you ****ing tool.

 

This is why HEGrant is one of the best posters here. We all have our favorites, right, wrong or indifferent, but in his case, he has an open mind.


'Fresh eyes here. Flynn was doing better than history tells us and Johnson as Adam Pollack and several at ringside wrote was trying. He wasn't in his best shape ( one thing we can all agree on ) , and that's a no-no in an outdoor fight in the July desert. Had the match continued, we could have had a new lineal champion.


With Johnson, his legacy greatly outweighs what the films shows us. I double dare anyone to score the shown footage between him and Moran. Close fight with Moran being ( who was not paid a dime for the fight ) being the better on the outside, and Johnson being the better on the inside. Moran wasn't very skilled, and I don't; see him knocking anyone decent on his resume.


Years back, before the Johnson vs Willard film was " rediscovered " it was said that Willard ended it with a big uppercut. Then the film resurfaced, and it was a right cross.

 

That's a great website thanks.

The Greb-Tunney I fight film was awesome. Very good quality for that day and age.

 

Assuming Grant and Mendoza have actually watched that fight, Im still waiting on Grant's actual rundown of the action. Because aside from Donald Mendoza Trump over there, who never saw or read about a Jack Johnson fight that Johnson didnt lose, you happen to be only second person Ive ever heard actually try to intimate that Johnson lost that fight, was losing, could have lost, etc. Johnson fought that fight the same way he fought Burns, Ketchel, and Jeffries and was just as dominant. So to believe he was somehow tiring or somehow on the verge of losing beggers belief and leads me to believe that you also think Burns, Ketchel, and Jeffries did uncommonly well against Johnson also. Either youve gotten ahold of some bad crack or youve been attending too many Trump rallies because your perception of reality is no better than his.

 

The referee said Johnson did as he liked with Flynn and effectively neutralised his power, and even the rabid Flynn
supporters did not claim he won any rounds ,so how he was holding his own ,"delivered as much as he got" is beyond me.

 

Its beyond ridiculous. Oh, and Im still waiting for these two clowns to take me up on my challenge in regards to my collection. They wont though because they cant. Thats where Grant lost all of his credibility. Lying in order to pretend he had something on me. When you have to lie you are desperate. Period. I have come to expect this from Mendoza, who has been caught lying so many times its not even worth reading his posts. But once upon a time Grant was actually a decent poster. Now he comes on here with his hyperbolic horse**** about Johnson being on the verge of losing to Flynn and then tops off that **** sundae with a story that he knows all about my collection. What a ****ing clown. As for the actual fight Adam and I can agree to disagree. Im not distilling my opinion from what Ive read Im basing it on the actual fight. He may be as well and this isnt a knock on him but I disagree. Johnson had the fight clearly in hand. He was clearly playing the long game. Flynn was the one who was battered and bloody and also frustrated. When you watch boxing you have to ask yourself who was fighting their fight. Was Flynn? Hell no. He had done no damage to Johnson and had hardly even landed. He was aggressive and energetic but was it effective? Absolutely not. On the other hand Johnson was always a lazy counterpuncher who minimized the action for long fights and scored strategically to stay ahead. Can anyone say he wasnt doing this? No, you cant. Johnson was fighting his fight, frustrating Flynn, scoring, laying back and reserving his energy. Any fantasy that he was exhausted is just that. Take this exercise: Watch just the first round and just the last round. Does Johnson appear to look any different, fight any different, or be more tired in the last than first? No. So where does this nonsense that he was exhausted and on the verge of losing come from? Who was the guy who fouled out? Flynn. Flynn had been warned and he knew full well that such a strategy would get him DQd, he even publicised it before hand. Do you seriously think he just decided that was the next best strategy to victory? No. He obviously knew he was losing, he knew he couldnt win, so he fouled out. The mental gymnastics needed to extrapolate the idea that he somehow was going to start surging forward in light of everything we know about him, Johnson, their past and future fights, and most importantly how this fight actually played out is completely unrealistic. Sorry guys, but if anyone doesnt know what the hell they are looking at its Grant and Mendoza. While I disagree with Adam I understand the point hes making and I believe hes giving too much weight to the divergent opinion. I feel this way because there was a large swath of the press, some of whom had been quoted here in support of Flynn, that hated Johnson and believed whole heartedly that Jeffries did well against him, Burns did well against him, and Ketchel did well against him. So its not unreasonable to suspect that maybe the majority of those reports which dont jive with anything we can actually see might have been blinded by their bias against Johnson.

 

I have to say H. E. has done himself no favours with this thread.

 

What a joke you are. Several people were there at ringside that said Jack Johnson was tiring. You were not there! And the shown footage shown shows Flynn doing much better than the stuff you typed in before this video came up. Hmmm...
The more film that people see, the less your initial words mean on a fight where you assume people can't view it. We can see the bias already.

Johnson does much better vs Burns. No doubt there, and aside from the knockdown better vs Ketchel too. But vs Flynn he was actually in there with a bigger man ( if 5'9" tall below 200 can be considered big ) than Ketchel or Burns, and had to clinch often to stop the action and fought in spurts. Langford knocked Flynn out cold, and if he was in there, he'd KO'ing Johnson in 1912.

Oh, I offered you a challenge. Pick a mutually agreed upon the 3rd party and you and I can email your fight list. It will match unless you spend a lot of time editing things out. Hahaha. You never agreed. Gee, I wonder why.
By the way, I'm not voting for Trump. He's very dangerous, and Clinton is Lady Macbeth in the flesh and a complete sell out even to anti-USA nations. Her Quid pro quo is scary too. I'm actually voting for Johnson if you need to know, but he'll never win.