Let's be real. Johnson couldn't have looked less dazed if he yawned, lit a stogie and danced a jig while Ketchel was counted out. Whether or not the KD was real, he ended the fight in a nanosecond afterwards and looked completely relaxed and at ease as he dusted his gloves and casual as **** lent on the ropes. Not being a Johnson fan as such I still can't believe there's any debate about how hurt he was or wasn't at the fights conclusion.
The first report is total nonsense as is pointed out in Pollack's book. 1.Johnson does not "dash at Ketchel at all, he waits for him to come in. 2. Johnson does not "lower his head he is standing erect" . 3. Nobody can say what the expression in Johnson's eyes was because, as he rises he has his back to the camera! 4.Johnson does not land 3 punches on Ketchel, he lands 2! 5.Johnson is not clinging to the ropes he is plainly standing there nonchalantly looking down at his ko victim ,so dazed that he takes the time to brush resin off his gloves! Johnson unable to stop his rush is the only accurate bit in this joke of a report , he stumbles over the prostrate Ketchel, carried by his own momentum. Something you attributed to Johnson being dazed and wobbly! SF Chronicle."Ketchel never had a chance to win but the bout had one of the most spectacular finishes ever. It was a sensational wind up to what had been a thoroughly one sided bout in favour of the black. our of the black." SF Call " Johnson won after reeling from a mysterious punch that fans failed to see.The champ quickly recovered and immediately finished Ketchel with a right and left,that landed flush on the jaw." The Examiner.Johnson so far outclassed Ketchel that he could have knocked him out in any round he wanted,including the 1st,had he cared to extend himself. The finish was so spectacular that a suspicious mind might believe that it had been planned for the benefit of the moving picture man. The Bulletin. The big crowd reviled the black man for faking his own knockdown to give the film men what they wanted.Over 8000 watched Johnson play with his pygmy opponent for 11 rounds until finally becoming serious about knocking him out. WW Naughton said Johnson's KD was unreal and stagey SF Bulletin.The popular impression was that Johnson deliberately allowed his much lighter opponent to stay on his feet long enough to make a good moving picture film,and then intentionally took a dive before finishing him ,thus assuring himself many extra thousands of dollars .This theory was strengthened by the statements of several of Johnson's seconds,who claimed that the champion told them not to worry if he were to fall or be knocked down. Also Johnson had wagered several hundred of dollars that Ketchel would not last 13 rounds. and was very confident about it,but also advised friends not to wager on a knockout before the tenth round. The Bulletin.The pictures would show how unconcerned Johnson's cornermen all were when he dropped to the mat. He practised it daily in his training quarters.This lends credence to the theory that when he went down with GunBoat Smith that Johnson was seeing if he could fool the public. Ketchel's weight was given out as 176lbs or more in New York,but some said he actually weighed 168lbs. The Age.Johnson was the master of the match from the 1st rd on and carried Ketchel so that he could make more money with the moving pictures.Jack showed he was a general on defense and pulled off a foxy trick in order to make a dramatic ending,playing possum and acting dazed so as to draw the deceived Ketchel in for the finishing blows.
Yes, those sources are out there. The problem I have is that you're only looking at one side of the argument. You're only looking for accounts where he is dazed. That's because this is what you want to be true. I'm sure at this stage you're not even going to pretend your approach to Jack Johnson is even-handed. So my question is, how do you know if it was the case if you're not looking into both sides? If, say, three primary sources report that he was dazed, and seven report that he was not, where does that leave you? Because the contrary sources are explicit. Explicit about Johnson not being dazed, but rather being "Fully recovered" and ready to pounce etc. At the very least there are two different narratives here. If you're interested in the truth, you're interested in both sides of the argument. What is the San Francisco Times though? I've not run across that publication.
Still photos especially older ones prove nothing. Does joe Louis in a still shot photo look buzzed vs Schmeling? We’ll be honest. No, he does not. But those who watch the films know he was. And those at ring side will report he was.
I quoted a book and two news papers. Plus one paper that had a post fight interview with Johnson that said he was dazed. And Ketchel himself pointing out that he was in bad shape post fight how many sources do you need? Also Johnson himself said he was hurt. Pretty clear cut. Fight reports can carry on quality. Nothing I posted was slim on material. which fight report that is primary disputes the above and what Johnson said?
Unfortunately ,for you, I posted the film footage which confirms Johnson as relaxed and composed while he stands erect by the ropes.
Well the book is binned i'd suggest. Unless you want to let in all the Jack Johnson bios which are going to say he wasn't buzzed. No read carefully - OTHER sources say the OPPOSITE. Why do YOUR sources prove the point and the OTHER sources are to be dismissed? I listed the ones i've seen in my life (without looking) in a post above. Note above: you are asking for PRIMARY sources for refutation but allowing a book in support of your own position. Do you see what I mean about a lack of even-handedness?
The book you quoted is chock full of inaccuracies,five of which I highlighted . Pollack included several fight reports in his bio that say Johnson was grinning when he went down, do you dismiss them? Johnson played cards the night of the fight. I posted newspaper reports the day they were printed,you are obsessed fella!
Ketchel wanted 40 rounds. Johnson said 20. The fight was a mismatch but on the level. And the knock down was real. The Ref confirms it. Johnson thought his jaw was broken. yep a middle with no amateur experience who fought like an amateur with less than 10 fights under his belt did this.
Ketchel actually wanted a 45 round fight? What relevance has that to the fight that occurred? Show a primary source that quotes Johnson as saying he thought his jaw was broken? Johnson bet hundreds of dollars the fight would end with himself the winner inside 15 rounds. He told his friends to bet accordingly. What is this no amateur experience BS? Ketchel had engaged in 55 fight pro fights when he challenged Johnson and had been fighting for money in saloons since he was a young teenager. What amateur experience did Johnson have ,and what relevance has it to the result? Just the two questions for you . Q.Does anybody here agree with your version of events? Q.Will you take up my challenge regarding how much Johnson received for fighting Jim Johnson or not? You said I was lying when I said I knew the amount he got,even though I told you which book, which chapter. and on which page the answer can be found. You keep asking for it, and I keep telling you I am perfectly willing to give you the figure providing you agree to leave here permanently,and should I fail to do so I will leave. So yes or no?
Still no response from you,though you will ask for the amount shortly once again. I'ts nonsensical,if you think I am lying and don't know ,then call my bluff and I will leave this forum for ever.Provided, if I can produce the answer you must do the same. Let's have an answer . YES YOU WILL TAKE THE BET OR NO YOU WON'T ? You're the guy who keeps requesting the answer!
In answer to the original question, no, he doesn't look dazed. Here, fwiw, is a list of adjectives I think are more apt than 'dazed'. Nonchalant. Unaffected. Calm. Alert. Contemptuous. And here, for balance of argument, are some adjectives that may be even less appropriate than 'dazed'. Comatose. Humble. Likeable. Feminine. Chinese. And I'm really not sure about that last one.
Johnson didn't want to go that distance. Couldn't even meet the opponents demands, even though he had 40+ pounds on him. Read the links I posted on Johnson, thinking his jaw was broken. He was wrong but, he did say it was never so sore...from a middleweight who hardly landed. LOL Ketchel wasn't skilled and had no amateur experience. This makes what happened even more of an issue. Many of Stanley's early fights were vs. nobodies. What heavyweight did Ketchel beat? 1909. Joahnon;s prime. TKO's in a 4 round ex match by gunboat Smith A raw novie Out boxed by O'Brien according to primary sources. He only had 40 pounds on him. And Dazed and down vs Ketchel. The heavyweight champion of the world. Ducking the best and having these type of results vs super middles and a very green man in Smith? Yep. Ketchel wasn't a skilled fighter, yet he marked up and knocked down Johnson, who later admitted he was hurting. I asked you to estimate Ketchel's weight. The third duck here? I have the news read and testimonials, what the heck do you have? Nada. Why should anyone dispute multiple news reads or books that say the same thing? You were the guy denying he was dazed fact. I think that topic is now buried, I'm right, you're wrong. What else is new? Not even 10 sources will change your mind. It's your dishonesty regarding Johnson vs. Johnson purse. Pollack said its unknown, that's good enough for me. Why should anyone take your word over his? Again there is zero upside disgracing, or wagering with you. You come back with different poster names. In time you'll be banned for the 3rd time. There should be a three strike rule here, and I'm thinking you were banned more than twice under different names. Ta-ta
Show me your links, I'll read them. If they lack an interview from Johnson or are short in detail, they won't be very good. Fair enough?
1.Since when does the challenger dictate the terms of the fight? 2. Johnson never said he thought his jaw was broken. 3.Ketchel had no amateur experience ? Neither did Johnson.So what? Ketchel had 55 pro fights under his belt and had earned his living as a bouncer since his early teens! 4.Ketchel's weight was given as 170lbs I have no further information on that, and neither have you. 5 .What information have I on the Ketchel fight? I have 5 books on Johnson and multiple contemporary news reports on the fight.Several of them speculating the KD was faked to increase the films receipts.Speculation you stated only began after Ketchels death, when in fact the next mornings papers were full of it, as I posted. 6.Geoffrey C Ward give the amount of Purse Johnson received in Unforgivable Blackness I gave you the chapter and the page where it is to be found.I never mentioned the topic it is you that keeps asking for the amount, I already know it ,as does Matt Donnellon and we communicated on it. You called me a liar and said I didnt know the amount I then told you I was prepared to tell you on the condition you left this site for ever,and that if I failed to provide it I would leave . When I told you this your rectum fell out and you refused to take up my challenge just as it did when I accepted your offer for a fight and you bottled out of it by coming to the UK on holiday and ignoring my requests for your flight details,and dates and not responding until you were safely back in the US.When I challenged you on your cowardice you replied"who wants trouble at an airport". When I visited the US I gave you my flight number ,time of my arrival and the hotel I would be staying in so we could settle things man to man.You walked! You had a bet with me that the Ruhlin vFitzsimmons fight was filmed. I said it wasn't and cited the following sources. Klompton,Gilbert Odd ,Adam Pollack. You weaseled out of this by saying a re-enactment was filmed and that counts as the fight being filmed ,it doesn't and everyone knows it, including you. You wonder why I despise you? Its because you are a lying, bet welching, bigoted First Class C .I'll let you fill in the three missing letters yourself ,though you will probably spell them wrong! NB you'll accept Pollack on this but not on anything else because he is a biased liberal ?lol ps My challenge stands, take it up, or once more be exposed as the coward you are !