Gene Tunney's heavyweight resume

Johnson beat Hart though. It was because they agreed the black fighter had to knock the white fighter out to win the contest and because Hart survived he was gifted the win. In reality he didn't win.

 

From what I read 20 lynches were carried out by the KKK on black men after the fight. There might have been other incidents to be fair.

But why would DC African Americans stab whites together because an African American beat an ex-white champion. I'm 99.9% that boxing had nothing to do with boxing results

 

No it isn't. It's about racist cowards, being cowardly ****s

 

Do you think Jack Johnson to you your words cowardly by using the color line as an excuse not to meet his most qualified competition when he was champion fro 1909-1915, pulling out of a signed contract to fight Langford for his lineal title, and skirting him, Jeannette, and Mcvey?

Johnson is on record saying he wanted to be the only black heavyweight champion.

And what about Joe Louis? Just two of his 26 title defenses were vs. black men, one of whom could hardly see.

Your reply will tell me everything.

 

No he did beat Hart. There was no such clause that Johnson had to win by knockout, and like I told you his effort in this fights and many others was poor.

 

Yes he did beat Hart, who wasn't in Johnsons class. This is one of the most obvious roberies in boxing history

 

For what type of money? Jeffries did offer Johnson a fight by the way. Johnson visited Jeffries bar and asked for a fight. Jeffries said he didn't draw flies ( $$$ ), but offered him a private fight in the basement of the bar. Johnson quickly walked out.

I suggest you read the reports, Johnson in his big moment didn't perform well vs Hart. Many reports suggest he lost.

I have zero doubt Johnson did himself no favors acting the way he did. The color line did not apply the same to all fighters. For example Peter Jackson was a well liked gentleman and the British empire champion. Sam Langford had his share of fans. Johnson embraced the worst type of negatives, he beat his wife to an inch of her life, and had trouble with women all over the world before he became champion. He also assaulted a sickly 120 pound man. Are you aware of this stuff?

 

Please post proof of a robbery. I suggest you get Adam Pollack's book, which goes into detail as to why Hart won. He simply out worked Johnson. There some rounds where Johnson threw less than 3 punches. Johnson himself admitted he lost, I have reposted an article that quoted his words many times. Johnson himself never claimed robbery in his auto bio. One more time.

CharlesBurley, Read below:

Boxing Illustrated re-pritned article.
Dec. 1963 article "The case for and against Marvin Hart" reprinted in the June 1989 issue of Boxing Illustrated:

Johnson, in his autobiography In The Ring And Out says surprisingly little about the fight, and such remarks as he did make are caustic: "The fight was not an auspicious one for me, as Hart got the decision, owing, as Tad, the famous sportswriter says, to the fact that in his excitement the referee pointed to the wrong winner.

This content is protected

" It may be that Hart deserved the verdict but statements before the fight tend to indicate the odds were stacked against Johnson before the fight had even begun. " - Former banned poster and Jhiad like Jack Johnson supporter. The poster knows as Mcvey, Tonto62 and Rainer. Dec 23rd, 2019

 

Johnson definitely wasn't ready for Jeffries in 1904 or 1905.

 

This is simply untrue. Published historians who have dug far deeper than you are evidenced to have put this result in its proper context. There was a different ruleset and different set of expectations on what made a winning fight in that era. Not to say that it wasn't a controversial decision in some circles, but so are many, many decisions in the sport. It is not unique in that.

Sorry but the world is a much more complicated place than simply opening your window and shouting that everybody is a racist.

 

Basically.

 

No one here has seen Johnson v Hart.
Impossible to know how much of a 'robbery' it was if you never saw it.

 

Meh I don’t find anything questionable about that win. Scarlet was wearing his shorts up absurdly high and contrary to popular belief did not have the fight going all his way. Dempsey did stagger Sharkey a number of times in the early round and his relentless attack was beginning to get to Sharkey later.

Sharkey made the biggest mistake when he left himself completely open in a fight. More than that he left himself completely open against Jack ****ing Dempsey!

 

Not likely, Johnson poor showing vs Marin Hart in 1905 suggests that he wasn't ready, Was there any demand for a rematch in 1909?