Heavyweight Boxing History With No Color Line

Something we should consider about this alternative history scenario is that some of those awesome black heavyweight contenders who were denied their chances at the championship may not have remained as awesome (ie. hungry) for as long had they won the big prize !

Peter Jackson might have beaten John L. but who's to say he wouldn't have eaten and drank himself fat and out of shape with the title just as John L. did ? Then enter a hungry young Corbett.

Harry Wills had great longevity and good activity when he was fighting with that hope of landing the title shot for close to 10 years, but had he won the title before Dempsey he might have lasted only a fight or two longer as the force we think of him as now. And an out-of-shape or contented Wills may not have possessed enough "eye of the tiger" to block a hungry Dempsey's drive to the title any more than Willard did in 1919 reality.

 

One big difference mate.. Jackson was NOT egosentric, full of bull**** and bravado, surrounded by money hungry monopolising wankers, acknowledged by pro-self newspapers as being a Champ or unwilling to fight legitimate fighters. Nor was he a fkn **** pot.

 

I dont know enough about Jackson to comment.

But I dont think any of us are completely immune from the danger of falling to the vices and pitfalls that would accompany success. I think the greek word for it is Hubris.

 

I think the standard word is HUMAN. :good

 

Well i guess the main difference is how we view Johnson. I believe a champion is a champion, and he without the colour line, he would have missed his Jeffries definer but would have compensated by asserting himself as the No 1 in the world and this would have been done the same way he asserted himself as the coloured champion, but spaced out over a much longer time frame to keep him sharp and focussed.

I acknowledge that Age does catch him some time, and Harry is the most likely benefactor here, but it is far from certain. If Old Langford KOs Harry, why wouldnt old Johnson?

Why?

A long reigning champion rarely needs to beat someone to get a title shot rematch, particularly if the lost title is a close fight.

Possible, but definitely not guaranteed.

I can see why. The guy was huge and very marketable. statistically (height weight and strength) he is far more impressive than Wills and arguably more marketable. If you run out of challengers (black or white) Willard is always going to be a good sell, because of his sheer size.

To be honest, i dont think he would have been too worried, he was bigger, and i think that it was the Willard win (despite his good record) that really gave Dempsey the killer image. I wonder how highly Dempsey would have rated without the Willard fight and if he had won the title from Wills on points instead.

Without the colour line, the incumbent champion still makes more money from appearances than fighting. Neither Langford, Wills or Mc vey will defend much more than what Johnson, Jeffries and everyone else defended. There will be no musical chairs (too much) with the world title. An upset like you mentioned is possible but not likely.

Possible, but wasnt Godfrey's problems morel like mob connections than with his colour.

I think that you are assuming that the black dynamite fight each other over and over without the colour line. i dont think it happens. I also think you underate just how good Johnson was even when he got older.

 

Good call.

 

That is not THE GEORGE GODFREY, just a 2 fight guy.

 

None of those had records consisting of 92 fights, 53 wins, and 28 losses ,being kod 12 times.

 

Its a pity the title wasnt goverend by any real rules in the early days. sulivan, johnson, willard and dempsey even braddock were all inactive by moderen standards.
However i dont think it automatic wills and co get there. in hindsight all we can say they were outstanding contenders who deserved a shot. its a fact that a lot of guys did a lot less than jackson, langford wills, jeanete and godfry to get a title shot (and lost) but it dosnt mean these dudes were cant miss champions. not by a long way.
I go so far as to say all the champs deserved the title. To say anyone else would take thier title is to say dempsey, sharkey, tunney and jack johnson did not deserve to be champions.

 

You say yourself it is a narrow margin. When this happens it comes down to the team that does the negotiating. In modern times, Ruiz got title shots galore whereas Tua (for example) struggled to get one. This situation has nothing to do with the colour bar, and Jackson is anywhere from a certainty.

Well Jackson is quoted as saying he had no qualms with Sullivan not fighting him, his problem was with Corbett ducking him. I agree with him. If Jackson gets his chance, it is against Corbett. I think he beats corbett, but it is no easy fight and definitely no guarantee, he has to do what he couldnt do the first time.

Corbett hid behind the colour line, but dont forget also, that he did try to schedule a fight and it fell through, Corbett was a smart guy, dont be surprised if the rematch still fell through, at least until Jackson had declined enough to struggle.

Without the colour line, Johnson doesnt get the Jeffries fight. He therefore doesnt peek then, as he needs to establish himself. I also point out that since he had already beaten all the black dynamite, it is likely that Jim Johnson is the one still that gets the shot at Johnson and Jim Loses. Wills is the best chance and he is timed for a win, but it took him a while to master Langford, I think that it would take him a while to master Johnson also (he would probably be thrown to the wolves too early as Johnson looks for opponent) so you would expect Johnson to be every chance at winning. I expect McVey, Langford and Jeanette would have still fought each other with the winner earning a shot at Johnson. Again, Johnson would be up for this fight, and there are no guarantees that the winner beats Johnson. They couldnt do it before, so why now?

And once again, you are basing this on what you think would happen, and not what actually happened. Johnson declined in relation to his Jeffries form, but he also lost one match in about 20 years. How many matches did each of the other fighters lose in the same period?

One punch finisher, true, but Langford wasnt the defensive master and ring controller that Johnson was.

It would have been a great fight. It certainly sounds like Johnson, even then was confident he could beat Wills. My money (smart or not) is on the old Johnson.

True, but he is always going to be an ace up sleeve situation. A big strong man is always a chance at a title shot, it is easy to sell. If Johnson had beaten (in title runs) - Jim Johnson, the winner of the Langford, McVey, Jeanette box off, Maybe a Jim flynn or someone similar and a raw Harry Wills, there is every chance that Willard would get a shot against Johnson. Because, he was as you say, the ace up Jack Curleys sleeve.

You are probably right, but he still wouldnt have garnered the same popularity as he had now. Most people, willard included, thought willard was going to beat Dempsey.

I agree. I do get the feeling that he was a lot better than most people realised. It is just that i dont know whether his problems had more to do with corruption than the colour line.

That ripple effect is interesting, but i disagree, i think it all comes back to lineage eventually. I have a thread around here which traces the lineage of every dodgy title in existence when Lennox Lewis retired. 90 per cent of them have found their way back to Wlad and Vitali. This is what would have happened if little ripples had occurred. It Happened with pretty much every ripple in history.

And one more point, the colour line technically started with John L and finished with Tommy Burns. Jackson has a brief chance to break it, and so does a couple of others in Jeffries reign but none would be any better than 50/50 chances. For the record, i would cheer for and think Jackson would be good enough, but it is a pick em fight against either John L or Corbett and he doesnt get both chances.

 

I actually prefer the inactive Champion. The biggest difference was that the challengers were not inactive and they fought off to earn their right at the title (at least far more than today). With an active champion, challengers dont take risky fights because they know they will get their shot if they bide their time and dont lose (against mediocre opponents). If they only get one shot a year, they need to take risks and fight good opponents to make themselves clearly the best option for the champion to take from a money perspective.