Next in the series after James J Jeffries In three categories Best win: In terms of quality of opponent, and manner of victory Most important win: In terms of historical significance Most spectacular performance: More for when we get to ones with footage, but not really the quality of the win, just a great display of the champion's ability. My picks Best win: Jack Root, honestly, even with the questionable nature of the win, I was very tempted to go for the Johnson fight, but in the end I went for the more clean victory, and I think Root is his best win. Most important win: Jack Johnson, I think this win, whatever it's merits, was more important than him beating Root for a claim to the title Most spectacular performance: Jack Johnson, honestly even just giving Johnson a good fight, especially considering Johnson's dominance over much higher regearded fighters, is easilly the most impressive thing he did
Yeah, I meant clean as in no question he won it. There's not a ton else to choose from, boxrec gives him some short news wins over decent names, and he got a controversial decision over Ferguson (though what I saw people said it should have been a draw rather than Ferguson winning)/
To be fair I think Gus was pretty much done by then.Regardless of the merits of the decision I pick the Johnson fight the fact that is was close and debateable at least gives Marvin that," moment in the sun."
Best win Johnson Hart was the only person to beat Johnson anywhere close to his prime. The idea that the fight was a robbery has fallen on fertile ground, due to the politics of the day, but the truth is much more complex! Most important win Root Simply because it gave him the title. Most spectacular Johnson For the reasons stated above.
The immediate next-day post-fight reports from all of the local papers are in my book, In the Ring With Marvin Hart. Johnson won the fight in terms of science and number of clean blows landed. He had the better defense, landed more clean blows, and when he fought hard in spurts, often sent Hart back to the ropes. However, Hart kept coming on no matter what, throwing more punches, throwing harder, and clinching less. Johnson would spurt, then back off and defend for a while. Johnson only fought hard when Hart landed a good one or forced him to do so, but when Johnson fought hard, he was far superior. But then he would relax and take breaks again. At the end of the fight, Johnson was unmarked, but Hart's face was cut, bloody and puffed up. At the time, Johnson claimed that he was robbed. Hart won in terms of sheer indomitable aggression, nonstop activity level, exciting style, and power. At least that is how the decision was justified. Johnson probably should have received no worse than a draw. The fight was held in San Francisco. The San Francisco Examiner, Call, and vast majority of the fans (most of whom were white) wholeheartedly agreed with the decision. However, the Chronicle, Evening Post, and Bulletin all questioned it (in varying degrees), feeling that Johnson either deserved the fight or no worse than a draw. It seems pretty clear that referee Alex Greggains had said that if there was no knockout, that he was going to award the fight to the man who was the most aggressive and tried to give the fans their money's worth. Of course, that gave Hart a distinct advantage in the scoring because there wasn't a fighter alive who was more aggressive than him, and Johnson was an effective defensive boxer with not the most entertaining style, and the reputation for putting the fans to sleep. Everyone agreed that Hart was more aggressive than Johnson. So that basis was used to justify the decision. The reporters who questioned the decision felt that race played a factor in the fan support for Hart (as well as entertaining style and fact that Hart was the betting underdog), which probably influenced Greggains. They cheered everything Hart did, but remained silent when Johnson did well. It clearly was considered a decision that was open for debate and was considered to have the stamp of controversy attached to it. apollack, Oct 7, 2011 Report #41 Like + Quote Reply I'll settle for this explanation!
