Jack Johnson Agrees To defend Against Sam McVey For $30,000

That's fine, but why not fight in France, Australia or other nations Adam?

As champion, Johnson could fight anywhere. Besides Wells started boxing in 1910? How good could he be in 1911? He was so good, Gunner Moir 13 wins, 7 losses knocked him out in three rounds that year.

By 1915, Wells was KO'd six times ( early round KO losses in 3, 2,4 and 1 !) Wells was a regional talent at best with a glass jaw.

The fact that Johnson would take a fight vs a novice shows he was looking for easy marks. A champion is defined by who he defends his title against and in some cases who he avoids.

 

How about instead of attacking Johnson how about criticizing the Brits for not allowing him to defend his title there because he was black? You criticize him for not fighting in 1911, but utterly overlook the fact of the racial obstacles he faced. Wells was the British champion, and the English promoter was willing to pay Johnson a 30k guarantee, so he couldn't have been perceived as being all that bad. Johnson himself admitted he was about the money. He was a businessman.

 

HBO or Showtime?

 

Because he probably wasn't single track minded on fighting another black man. I mean to commit to a fight, travel to another country (by boat?) only for the deal to fall through is a devestating business hit.

I think Johnson not fighting another black man is due to a combination of him not trying super hard, plus a timid public who made the idea too risky. For a man interested in self preservation, like every other human being, it didn't make sense to pursue fighting another black guy. Too much risk, and for what reward?

Also, I didn't know he paid for McVeys funeral. Great guy.

 

Sorry, what value is there in facing an untested man who has only been boxing for a year who hasn't beat anyone? This is not a heavyweight title fight, it's a side show.

Geez, and I think the Alphabet champions these days are terrible for not fighting top ten opponents. Next to Johnson's title opponents picks, guys like Arreola and Szpilka look like world beaters. Johnson took the art of belt milking to a Picasso-like level, and no one has been better at it since.

Johnson had no intentions of fighting Mcvey, even though both were famous in France but he could meet him there with no racial restrictions. The same goes for Australia and Russia.

I agree Johnson was about mostly about money, but I also think he is guilty of not giving worthy opponents a title shot in big money fights.

But back to him being a business man. I agree Johnson was very bright. Why not take this glass jawed novice on in France, where the French who still really don't like the English people to this day wouldn't mind seeing the man across the channel get knocked out? Brits today travel well to back their man. Presumably, they would have done so in 1911.

As for Churchill design not to allow the fight, I'll speculate some. In 1909 Langford vs. Hauge was a significant fight. It was billed as the English Heavyweight title and it took place in the UK! No problem here in 1909! Langford, of course, was Black and won by brutal knockout. Perhaps because Churchill knew the hometown boy had no shot had something to do with the ban?

 

Reznick,

The only trouble with this reasoning is Jack Johnson did give a title shot to a black opponent. His name was Jim 'Battling Johnson, and they fought to a draw with Jack Johnson being in trouble at the end of the 10th round. There was no re-match.

 

I have days when I wonder whether Johnson wanted to fight Langford again, but I am certain that he would have fought McVea again for the right money.

 

This is all known to me.

 

Because by the time Louis came on the scene Johnson was 45 years old and was a different person, he didn't look at it the same way as he did when he was champion.
When champion he was ****y, arrogant, confident and wanted it all for himself.

 

I suppose neither was Joe Gans beating Sam Langford at 17 years old ... Oh wait.