Did Jack Johnson Deserve A Title Shot From 1902-1904?

His tour around the time of the finnegan fight, where he was able to fight fights/exhibitions against low level opponents without having to lock himself away for training for months on end, and fight every single night, was obviously financially successful. Certainly more successful than one off title defences against fighters who were very good fighters but not given any chance by the public to beat him thus he would need to do the work and training, but would not be well paid for him.

In jeffries own words he stated that even the well paid Johnson/Jeffries fight was not as good a pay as what he received for his theatrical tours.

 

Considering that Jimmy Jeff was stepping down around 1904 due to no viable contention availabe, yes, Jack Johnson could've gotten a crack way sooner than his original shot in 1908.... Also, back in the old days a few losses here and there meant you were learning your trade and, on the whole, seeking elite competition... Unlike today in which a young pro losses a fight after 20 pro wins, he's considered damaged goods in a marketing sense.....

MR.BILL

NOTE:

I am disturbed that Johnson fought a 20 round draw with Hart in 1907...... Hart is often blown off amongst the great, as he should be, but he did last 20 rds with Johnson...... HMMM!

 

Johnson lost twice to name fighters in 1901, so the year 1902 is OUT. Even the poster Mcvey would have to agree with that.

He built up some credibility in 1903 by beating a 19 year old in Sam McVey, and Ed Martin who had a glass body and jaw. Ed Martin was KO'd early quite a few times. Still by 1903, Johnson was not a bigger name that say Fitzsimmons or Corbett. By 1904 I think Johnson should be viewed as a top contender. And he was. In 1905 Johnson had a golden opportunity and was matched vs. Marvin Hart. Some papers of the time billed the event as an elimination match for a potential fight with Jeffries. Had Johnson defeated Hart, perhaps a promoter would have offered a large enough purse for Jeffries. As multiple news reads will tell you, Johnson had a lack luster performance vs. Hart. Hart won, but the public wasn't interested being matched vs. Jeffries because Hart had about as much chance as Munroe did, and the money for the match was not there.

Jeffries incidentally did fight a black fighter as champion. He meet Hank Griffin who defeated Jack Johnson in 1901 in a 4 round affair, and floored him multiple times. This proves if the money and situation was right Jeffries would fight black men as champion.

I think at the Johnson was qualified for a title shot for a 1.5 to 2 year window. Mid way 1903 to the Hart in 1905 loss. This is a rather narrow window, and like I said above it slammed shut based on his performance in the Hart fight.

PS: Johnson once approached Jeffries as champion for a fight in a bar. Jeffries told him he could not draw flies in the ring, but said he would offer him a bar fight on the spot. Johnson tucked tail, and left. Had Johnson fought on the spot, he might have built up some notoriety.

 

Pretty much what everyone thinks: jeffries spent a year and half ducking johnson.

 

I don't think Hart's lasting 20 with Johnson is too great a shock. Grit and duability (and a hard (if unwieldy) punch) were among his assets, and Johnson was known as a cautious fighter who didn't much mind if his opponents went the distance.

I think Johnson-Hart should have either been a draw or a Johnson win; today it should have been a win, but then -- with empasis on ending strong and aggresivenes, and the fighters understanding this was the case -- a draw probably would have been right.

 

I am a little bit surprised by the amount of criticism that Johnson gets for the Hart loss (if it was a loss).

The truth is, that he was fighting quality opponents, not verry far apart, over a long period. Sombody had to trip him up at some point.

What if Hart was just his Ken Norton?