If promoters won't pay him 30, 000 than an easy solution is to fight for less. Pretty simple really. He fought for far less than 30,000 earlier in his career anyway. If people would stop defending the indefensible I wouldn't need to bring up Johnson and other duckers like Sullivan, Dempsey, and Willard. - Cojimar 1946 QUOTE="mcvey, post: 19679346, member: 7828"]When he wasn't champion! Has anyone ever told you, you aren't strong on logic? If you would take the trouble to read the excellent biographies of both Jeffries and Johnson you would be a sight better informed on a subject which seems to be your only raison d'etre on this forum. Here's a novel idea ,why not comment on the subject of the thread? I'm sure the OP would be suitably gratified if you would deign to do so from time to time![/QUOTE] McVey, Cojimar 1946 is correct. Try embracing the facts... Johnson was the lineal champion in 1909. He ran from Sam Langford period! Also, you claim to know the purse amount from Jack Johnson vs Jim Battling Johnson. Okay, tell us the exact amount. Or admit you lied and aren't sure. It's not $30,000, now is it. Johnson could have fought ANYONE in France. Langford, Jeannette or McVey would have been a bigger purse for Johnson, I think. But he chose Battling Jim Johnson and escape with a draw where not one of the three judges felt he won, but one felt Battling Jim did!