Jack Johnson vs. David Tua

Johnson cops a lot of flack for not fighting his top 3 contenders (who he already dominated) but let us not forget who Tua didnt fight. He came first as a contender around 95, although this was after a couple of years as a contender.

From 95 to the present day, the best fighters in the world were probably:

1. Lennox Lewis
2. Evander Holyfield
3. Mike Tyson
4. Wladimir Klitchsko
5. Vitali Klitchsko
6. Riddick Bowe
and those guys were a clear class above the rest at one stage!
7. Chris Byrd (Tua Lost)
8. Andrew Golota (when he lost to Golota)
9. Oliver McCall
10. Ike Ibeauchi (Tua lost to)

Tua never competed at the top level as harsh as that sounds. He had a few miixed results agains that lower level 2nd tier (usually when they werent primed or at their very best). This is the reality of where he is as a fighter. And their is a massive difference (even thoughit isnt often recognised today) between tier 1 and tier 2. Johnson was proven to be tier 1. And Tier 1 in any era is going to beat tier 2 most times, regardless of size, skil, class or styles. Johnson was clearly tier 1, probably tier 1 PLUS. Tua was nothing more than a world class fighter with a dangerous punch.

He wasnt even physically the better man than Johnson. At 511 225 pounds, he is just a short and fat man with a reach disadvantage compared to Johnson. how in the world does he plan to get past the 4 inch reach disadvantage. And how is it that some on here are calling Tua (of all people) the Superheavyweight.

 

The bottom line.

 

Again, people are comparing the competition of these two era's as though they are equal, as though the King in Hell can compete with the Stooge in Heaven. The heavyweight division Tua competed in was drastically different than that of 100 years before composed of an entirely superior level of large and more power athlete as the norm and not the exception. That is why Tua's accomplishments in his era, on a head to head basis, eclipse Johnson's. He operated on a completely different level. That is the crux of my argument that seems out of the reach of so many Classicists. And I am fine with that. The world needs Civil War re-enactors, Dungeons and Dragons enthusiasts and all sorts of champions of anachronism and fantasy.

 

And my forgetful jackass, you were wrong many times, which is why I corrected you.

I showed you point blank that in the Burns book, those up close to the ring said he looked yellow and sick. And he did ask to postpone the fight. Loser.

I have posted this here before. What's in it for me if I do?

Or how about reading Siler's Inside Facts of Pugilism where he does not think much of Johnson, and said he fouled Jeanette!

Not even sure Siler was at this fight. Can you prove he was? Again, you waste my time, and refuse to read and accept the stuff I posted. Your infatuation and militant like defense of Jack Johnson has become a long standing joke around here, which suits you fine because your a no heart clown.

 

A note on size and weight. There were plenty of very big dudes back then. But they usually lost to smaller but better skilled, superior conditioned, and faster men. Also, many fighters back then who weighed around 200-210 were that size for fights of 20 rounds. The amount of training they had to do to be in top shape to go that long, plus the desire for physical efficiency, caused them to train down in weight, not up. If those same fighters were boxing today and only had to box 12 rounds, believe me, they could easily be 20 pounds bigger. A lot of heavies today could not last 15 rounds, let alone 20, unless they trained down in weight. And those rounds 13-15 are like hell, just like the marathon. They say most good runners can do 20 miles, but it is the last 6.2 that really breaks down your body. Well, same thing in boxing - many top guys can do 12, but 13-15 is where you saw lots of guys finally hit the wall. Even rounds 9-12 can be very tough on a lot of heavies today. Well just imagine if even the old school 15 round guys had to go yet another 5 rounds. These huge inefficient guys today would collapse without even being hit. They would have to train down in weight to be able to survive, and be in much better shape physically.

 

I'm aware of your points here, though I think the marathon/15 round analogy is a little off, as at 1 hour 45 minutes or so of aerobic activity there is a very real physiological deficit the body undergoes. A 15 round fight is more like 15 3-minute intervals. And protean to this dicussion, Tua at his fittest against Ibeabuchi, had an incredible work rate for 12 rounds and certainly would have been able to go 15 or 20 with sightly less but till impresive output.

However, to the first point of fighters training down, are we suggesting that Tom Sharkey, Tommy Burns, Jack O'Brien, Bob Fitzsimmons and Marvin Hart would be hulking 220 pound fighters today? They were small-framed fellers. And in contrast to training down, Sam Langford, love him as I do, fought most of his heavyweight career as a lardo and did quite well.

 

If they lifted weights as much as they ran back then, they would be this size now. How big would 200 plus fighter like Chris Byrd be if he ran instead of lifting weights?

 

I don't think we can reliably judge how big they would be today, but I will try.

Burns would have been a small fighter in any era, but he could have used weights to fill out into the 190s to effectivley compete at cruiserweight.

Hart and Sharkey could probably have filled out to 205 lb tanks, to fight at heavyweight.

O'Brien and Fitzsimmons would have had the frames to carry over 200lbs had they wished.

All these guys would have been small for the heavyweight division, but not out of line with some of the people in it today.

Johnson could have been a solid 225lbs.

Jeffries could have been a 235lb monster.

 

I posted Siler's extracts on this forum, you ****** atsch

This content is protected

Published in 1907.


He claims the credit for discovering Johnson, are you ****ing dyslexic?

You posted a piece from a stupid paperback , about 4 sentences , I highlighted 12 blatant errors in it, it was a complete joke.

I requested PRIMARY SOURCES that state Burns had jaundice, and asked for a postponement, you have produced NONE and never will, because they do not exist.

We go round and around, McGrain and many others ask you for primary sources to back up your wild statements you either ignore or obfuscate on the subject .
For example you just posted on the Jones/Jeffries thread that Jeffries was even/ahead against Corbett, I've posted a link from the New York Tribune from July 3rd 1910 the day before the Jeffries/Johnson fight ,this report states that Corbett beat the **** out of Jeffries for 20rds.

That his own corner told him he was facing certain defeat unless he kod Corbett.

That Jeffries was made to look foolish and, was totally unable to reach Corbett with his punches, whereas Corbett hit him at will, inflicting terrible punishment.

I can only assume that you make up these alternative scenarios in your head and then, because you repeat them so many times, believe them . You've never had credibilty on this subject ,we only read you for entertainment purposes, now its time for you to invent some new fairy tales.

 

I sincerely Tua could have fought another round let alone three or eight at that pace. He was exhausted.

 

"with slightly less output"

 

Tua by KO

 

OK, this is just bad conjecture.

Sharkey was already yoked at 185. He was all muscle. His lilliputian frame was not going to handle 20 pounds more. Face it, he was a midget in dimensions and not a real heavyweight by any modern standards. Which is fine, let's not judge him against real heavyweights who came 70 years later.

Did Hart have any muscle tone whatsoever? What was there to build on? You can not simply add pounds out of conjecture. You can not make imaginary fighters out of the scant materials of yesteryear by applying some sort of athletic inflationary index.

Regarding Fitz, he reminds me a lot more of Bob Foster than of any heavyweight of the past 40 years. I know, comparing someone to Bob Foster is damning praise.

Johnson was very well-proportioned and in shape at 208. Given his style, I don't see the benefit of extra poundage, especially given how short limbed he was.