Hart v Johnson - post fight report

Trenton Times 29 March, 1905

Negro Lost to a "Washwoman"

Battle at Conclusion of Twenty Rounds.

San Francisco, March 29. — Marvin Hart will have the chance of meeting James J. Jeffries for the heavyweight championship next summer. The rugged Louisville fighter secured the decision over Jack Johnson, the negro heavyweight, in a 20-round bout at Woodward's Pavilion last night, but
neither pugilist showed any championship form. Hart was the worst punished of the two, and had the negro fought a fight which he showed himself at times capable of he should have won handily. Referee Greggains gave the decision to Hart because of his gameness and aggressiveness. The spectators were of the opinion that Johnson was suffering from a streak of bright yellow. Whenever he did fight. he made Hart look like an amateur. The Louisville man's aggressiveness seemed to rattle Johnson and his courage would ooze. There was not a knockdown in the whole fight. and with the exception of the ninth round there was little of pugilistic moment. The last ten rounds resembled each other, Johnson pegged away with straight lefts and rights, which cut Hart's face, while the Kentucky colonel walloped away with right swings to the body and head. Referee Greggains, speaking of the mill, said: "Hart won because he was aggressive throughout the fight. He wanted to fight continually. Johnson, in my opinion, dodged it." Johnson was a 2 to 1 favorite when the fight began. After the first few rounds Johnson let Hart do most of the leading, except in the ninth round, when with lefts and rights the negro - punished Hart badly. Johnson showed the best form in the first round and landed several hard rights on the body in the clinches. He also drove a couple of swings home on Hart's head. The second round was more, lively, with Johnson showing the best form. He smashed Hart's kidneys, which caused the Louisville man to gasp. Johnson landed left and right hooks to the jaw as the round closed. Hart put two hard right-lefts to the heart during the round. Hart was aggressive in the third round, but was unable to land any effective blows. Johnson kept away and apparently did not extend himself. The men worked into several clinches in the forth round and there were one or two hot exchanges, but without any damage. Hart tried to work in close during the fifth round, but Johnson blocked his leads. The sixth round started like a real prize fight. Hart rushed, but Johnson put him back with a straight left and followed it with another, which was the hardest blow struck during the fight. They came into clinches, Hart trying to get in close. Round seven was Johnson's. He hooked his left to Hart's jaw repeatedly and as the round closed he snapped two rights to the jaw. The eighth and ninth rounds were lively and Johnson's admirers thought that the negro would surely do the trick, His boxing superiority and strength were evident. He did, some quick two-hand punching and Hart bled freely. Hart was still aggressive and sought to land some hard blows in the clinches, but got several hard wallops for his trouble. Johnson jammed him in the corner in the tenth round. There were some good exchanges in the eleventh round and Hart was still eager and game. The negro slowed visibly in the next three rounds and seemed perturbed at the way Hart was assimilating punishment. The bourbon kept wading in and in the fifteenth and sixteenth rounds drove Johnson around the ring with fierce swings to the head and body. Johnson showed better form in the seventeenth round and hammered his opponent hard and often. Hart was tlred at the close.
Hart was the aggressor in the last three rounds and Kept piling in with hard rights to the body. Johnson acted as though he was tired and his seconds kept calling him to hit it up. Hart made a target of the negro's ribs. The fight closed with little doing and the referee, because of Hart's aggressiveness, gave him the decision.

 

over time yes. I'm just gonna shove everything I find into this thread.

anyone who already has good solid info on here can post their stuff in here also.

Here's another review I've just found:

To bring my posting history kicking and screaming into the 21st century thought I would talk about the fight between Marvin Hart and Jack Johnson. Now as most of you know Hart received the verdict in this one but the decision is seen as controversial in many quarters and having read the round by round report of the fight recently I have to say I can fully see why people would think Johnson deserved to get the nod as he certainly appears to have had the better of the action and certainly showed the better form in terms of technique and skill but against Hart that is perhaps no shock.

However in reading about the fight I have to ask if Johnson ever stood a chance. The referee for the fight Alex Greggains apparently told both fighters before the fight in the instance the fight went the distance he would score the fight on aggression. This was not particularly uncommon at the time but was apparently prompted by a previous fight in the city Johnson had with Sam McVey in the previous year where apparently Johnson did little to nothing throughout before taking the decision to knock Sam out, most in the crowd for this one were angered by Jack’s passivity but even more so by the perception he could perhaps of done this whenever he wanted for any of the previous 18 rounds.

Given this it was perhaps inevitable the organisers would put measures in place to try and ensure Jack did not make a similar showing but it does pose a question whether this was an example of the white powers that be trying to stack the dice against Johnson because whatever his many faults few if any could match Hart for sheer aggression and were the fight to go the distance it was always unlikely a fighter like Johnson who was known for his skill rather than aggression was going to get the nod were the fight assessed solely on this criteria.

Obviously when assessing the real old timers it is often necessary to look at the verdict of the newspapers the day after and whilst most of these agreed with the verdict there were some dissenting voices and obviously even the papers of the time were not immune to prejudice and so maybe their endorsement of the official decision has to be taken with something of a pinch of salt. Do those who are familiar with the fight think the decision was reasonable and do they feel pitching Johnson in with a fighter known for his almost limitless aggression and telling him the fight would be scored on this alone was an example of the powers that be trying to shaft a talented but wildly unpopular black fighter? Does also pose the question under such circumstances was Jack foolish to display such a lack of aggression because one has to think against a brave but limited fighter such as Marvin with a little more devilment in his work he could perhaps of taken the decision out of the referees hands.

 

an article about the article in the san francisco chronicle the next day

One of the biggest criticisms I run into about Jack Johnson is a question about his near prime loss to Marvin Hart. I wonder how many of those critics have read the actual newspaper reports? If one takes the time to study the newspapers it is clear that had the fight been judged by modern boxing judges Johnson would have gotten the decision. The Mar 29, 1905 San Francisco Chronicle reported “Johnson shows himself strong on points.” The Chronicle also noted “There was a great deal of racial prejudice…Johnson’s clean hitting, his cleverness at blocking, and all his work was allowed to pass with scarcely a murmur, while every blow landed by the white man was cheered to an echo.” The paper also reported “Johnson did more actual fighting in this fight than in all of his other fights in San Francisco put together.” However the referee, Alex Greggains, the sole judge of the contest, gave the fight to the white man on “aggressiveness” no matter how ineffective he had been. Johnson said in the post fight interview, “I was robbed. That’s all there is to it.” Johnson said he “dislocated” his thumb in an early round but still thought he “was the winner at every stage.” The National Police Gazette which was the Ring magazine of that day wrote, April 15 1905, “In the first ten rounds Johnson easily demonstrated his superiority. After that Hart made a better showing but he did not have the better of the going and a draw would have been a present to him.” Johnson deserved to win and would have easily won on points by any modern boxing observers estimation of the fight.

 

Nor did I until i've read it in these paper reports!

 

Consensus seems to be that under modern or even round scoring johnson would have won.

Seemingly the referee took it upon himself to declare the winner as the man who pressed the action (was this common?)

Which makes you wonder, if a counter puncher successfully counter punches and defends to a high ability whilst controlling the action, whenever he pressed it, can that fighters be criticised?

I mean under this scoring hatton would be up on points against floyd, chavez would have shut out whittaker etc.

I'm gonna dig deeper and whilst i'm no way convinced johnson deserves credit for fighting this way in a fight specifically favouring aggression, i'm not pure how much he can be validly criticised.


I'm watching a documentary on him now and his killer instinct is clearly there against burns and jeffries but he was certainly not an aggressive fighter. I have more credit for his head movement however.