Jack Johnson (of Ketchel fight) vs. Jack Dempsey (of Willard fight)

Noted for future reference next time you insist on primary sources.

 

I'm not going to pretend to be overly confident on a pick between two ATG's from successive generations. That is just folly. But I will pick Dempsey because Johnson never faced such a dynamic foe of heavyweight proportions who followed one punch after another and would quickly make Johnson, in his flat footed, 45 stance uncomfortable and readjusting. This ain't Tommy Burns in and out 1-2 here. I think Jack busts him up badly early but that it goes the distance with Johnson becoming increasingly the negative fighter and protecting himself for the limit.

 

Max I have no doubt you will pore over all my content diligently ,looking for mistakes you can use to trip me up with.
I also have no doubt that now and again you will be successful,I can only hope the gratification it affords you is worth the time and effort you put in!

 

Good comments but who did Johnson ever face at that 209 pounds? A wasted Jeffries, an inept 170 pound Ketchel, Kaufman?, an embarrassing effort against O'Brien? The best names on his resume occurred when he was younger and lighter, either by fate or by choice.

 

Primary research gives you direct access to the subject of your research. Secondary sources provide second-hand information and commentary from other researchers.

A super easy way to judge is does or should the source itself be sourced.

For example if I claim I sat down with Jack Johnson and he said "Your kicks is fly" that's a primary. You know its bull because I'm alive and he's not, so, not a good source but a primary. There is nothing for me to source, I am claiming I spoke with Jack, I am the sourcest source for the issue.

If I say you can read Jack Johnson being quoted in publication X, that's a secondary. I am not claiming direct connection or information but rather learned from a source info. If it can be sourced it is secondary.


Just the nature of br and cbz ... they are by definition and design secondary sources.


Anyone who says differently is at best a boxing book historian not a serious historical researcher.



In the case of records, the primaries are the papers and publications that informed researchers of the bouts. Each fight has its own set of primary sources. These sites don't cite sources consistently but when they do, often, you call pull the source they claim they read and find nothing they claim is mentioned. It is no wonder a boxrec source is rare. Best we got, but don't be fooled, it is trash.

 

I am a boxing fan and an average one nothing more.As far as I am aware Matt Donnellon and Adam Pollack are the only posters on here I would classify as historians on this forum.

 

I suppose you could say the same about Dempsey.

This content is protected