How good was Jack Johnson?

He was great for his time but no match for later fighters.

 

I think more highly of him than most people here do and I think his defensive prowess would translate to the modern sport but I think his style would not be exciting to watch. Plus all the stuff that got him in trouble 100 years ago is routine behavior today so he’d lose that aura.

 

Great defensively but otherwise he wasn't that great. He is largely put on a pedestal because he was the first black World Champion, otherwise there's not much to talk about.

 

Very boring style, but a very formidable man under his own rules.

 

Had the smallest opponents of any HW champion and only stopped Ketchel and Jeffries as champ. The best boxers he was fighting really couldn't hurt him. He ducked Langford and the best competition during the 1910s. His best title win is probably over "nearly HW champ" Al Kaufman.


On the flip side Johnson would have beaten 6 ft 6 Willard if the fight was 12 or 15 rounds and at like 40 he easily outpointed Tom Cowler in a 15 rounder. Johnson had a Holmesian run when he was 13-0 after losing his title going into his 40s. However this does the same thing for me it does with Holmes, reinforces the struggles he had late in his reign while adding nothing to his legacy.

Johnsons a 6 ft point fighter who lacked the dominance of a Gene Tunney. If he wasn't that when he was fighting thats what he would be in later eras against bigger fighters. And I struggle to think of a HW champ that came after him I'd pick him to beat. Even before him you can reasonably say Jeffries and Fitzsimmons would beat him in their prime. Hart beat him. I'm not sure Johnson would beat Peter Jackson or prime Goddard either. That leaves us with Burns, Corbett, Sullivan, Peter Maher, Tom Sharkey, Slavin guys like that.

Another issue is the whole "he fought 45 rounds in his day and had great stamina" thing . This applies more to the period than just Johnson but before fighting Moran Johnsons hadn't fought a full 20 rounds in a decade and the man had 2 6 round decisions as champ. And 20 rounds was a real distance unlike 45 rounds. All these early champs get credit for things they never actually did because the commissions didn't want the fight going to decision. Its a pet peeve. Johnson didn't fight 45 rounds he lost his belt specifically because he couldn't go 25.

There has also been a push to make Jack Johnson the Jackie Robinson of boxing and push the sports more complicated and international history to the side. Johnson was the first black man to hold the lineal HW title but Peter Jackson was the first to be considered the "real champ" and even during Johnsons reign Langford won multiple "alphabet belts" that Johnson refused to unify and which modern fans refuse to acknowledge existed. Instead of fighting Langford Johnson defended his belt against Jim Johnson the 5th or 6th best black HW which was way worse than it sounds for a variety of reasons. Namely that Langford and Jeanette were fighting for the IBU world belt in the same city the very next day.

 

His title reign wasn't the strongest, but he was a month shy of his 31st birthday when he won the title from Burns, which was probably the final fight of his absolute prime.

It's mostly his pre title career that leads me to rank him #6 all time at HW (my rankings are solely based on what each fighter achieved in their own era and entirely exclude predicted outcomes in cross era fantasy fights).

Johnson was 52-5-11 prior to the Willard loss age 37, which was ancient for that time, including a run of just 2 losses in 55 fights between the ages of 24 and 37.

Jack beat a green Sam McVea 3 out of 3, went 5-1-1 (the loss a DQ) vs Joe Jeannette, Sam Langford, Tommy Burns, Sandy Ferguson x 4, past prime Bob Fitzsimmons, Denver Ed Martin x 2, Al Kaufman, Stanley Ketchel, Fireman Jim Flynn x 2 and the ghost of Jim Jeffries.

Most of those wins were before he won the title and imo, they combine for a damn fine resume. Allied with his relative dominance during his prime, he's clearly one of the 10 best HWs in history relative to the evolution of the era in which he competed, imo.

 

His best or most notable wins were against smaller fighters who were closer to middleweights, novices, or washed up. Ketchel and Langford were middleweights when they fought him, McVey had < 10 fights all the times they fought and Jeannette had < 20. Fitzsimmons washed up. Jeffries coming off a six year retirement having to lose nearly 100 pounds. Burns was a far smaller and not considered a great HW then or ever.

Johnson is recognized for being the first black HW champion, but he drew the color line against his own race while champion. Refused to give title shots to Jeannette, McVey and Langford. His fight with Battling Jim ended as a draw and he accepted a small fraction to fight him than what he was offered by Jeannette.

 

If Johnson beat the version of Jeannette, Langford and McVea out there during his reign then I would comfortably place him in the top 5 at HW all time. Add Wills and I'd say he's top 3, though I don't blame Johnson for not taking this fight as he was almost done with his title reign by the time Wills was a contender.

Without them, I find his resume underwhelming. I don't really rate Kaufman, Flynn or Ferguson highly nor would I rate Burns, Ketchel and Langford (when Johnson fought him) highly as heavyweights. The Martin and McVea (albeit green) wins are the standout best IMO, and are enough to squeeze him in the top 10.

 

I think most of that is fair, Mel.

No debating Jeanette and Langford got better at HW after Johnson fought them and, as you say, title defences against them would have meant more than his actual wins over them. They're still decent wins.

Pre title, he beat the best of his era and beat them consistently, mostly in dominant fashion, and that's all that can be asked. He didn't continue that into his title reign, though.

 

I know Johnson is an icon to some because he took no merde off the white establishment, but honestly I think if you look at the guy objectively, he was no crusader for any higher cause, until the day he died he was for himself first, last and always. I’m not criticizing him for that mind you, that attitude helped him persevere, just noting that people should be rational when assessing this guy and who and what he was.

 

Excellent post. For me personally everything that you mentioned makes him just outside the top 10, but I believe Johnson's resume is a bit stronger than most are suggesting here.

 

I didn’t say in my original response that I have him No. 4 on my ATG, just my .02 and YMMV.

 

Johnson fought only as hard as he was pushed. He was very strong and a great infighter. His hand speed and reflexes may have compared favorably with any fighter who ever lived, but because of the film quality, it's hard to judge him in this regard with fighters who came after him. To support this assertion, I look to the films of his fights with Burns and Ketchel when he put combinations together with speed and power that any heavyweight fighter would have been proud of. He was a very talented athlete who would have made his mark as a legitimate contender in any era. To go any further with this comparison would be pure speculation, however.

 

Really