This content is protected This content is protected This content is protected This content is protected This content is protected Mendoza says: EXCUSES and omission of data! Johnson had 24+ known fights and had been boxing for roughly 7 years when he lost via early Ko to Choynski! Griffin was past his best; Johnson still could not beat him in three tries, he only lost and drew Kaufman? Hahah. A below-average white hope who was Ko'd by light punching Jack O'brien before. Johnson could not stop him at all. Six other men did. Can you say Johnson lacked power, or will you need to pull some obscure quote. Ko's on paper vs. losing records, mediocre, green or smaller men Johnson often does not have in many cases! Draw your own conclusions Ross was a BUM losing 4 of his last 6, then suddenly gets a title shot???. DISGRACE. This content is protected Wow, a guy with a 24-14-6 ( Ko'd 10 times ) hurt Jack Johnson, in what was called a 6 round world title fight. That does't make Johnson looks good, quite the opposite! A guy like Ross stung Johnson. We already know the deal on the Hart fight, Johnson lost it! He did little in the 2nd half. Don't you get tired with a losing argument against history? Copying what you like from Box Rec again? Before the bout, Referee Eddie Smith announced that he would give no decision if both men were on their feet at the end of the 10 rounds. So it's a ND, or if you must a " news " win, short title fight over Kaufman.
Name the24+ fights Johnson had before he faced Choynski? I included Kaufman to show Johnson did not fight all small guys. You said Johnson did not hurt Hart, actually he gave him a pretty good beating as the fight report, and descriptions of Harts face after the fight show. Ross beat Ferguson Harris Palzer Flynn Gardner And drew with Jeannette & Shreck Kaufman lost to O Brien in his 6th fight 4 months after being outclassed by Johnson ,Kaufman beat O Brien.TWICE Kaufman also beat Ross Lang Flynn Shreck Gardner Their records show they were both better fighters that John Finnegan and Jack Munroe, both of whom received title shots against Jim Jeffries!
I think Johnson has too much skill, speed, defense, footwork and strength in the clinches for Dempsey. Johnson's uppercut inside is the perfect antidote to Dempsey's infighting. I think it probably looks a little like this, minus the headbutts This content is protected
I'm objective, I look at which fighter makes the least mistakes and who has the physical advantages. I've gone back and forth on Jack Johnson. I've considered him pre-historic in the past because he's boring and he's a spoiler who fights with low hands, but technically he's solid, except for going back in straight lines, which his footspeed let him get away with. Dempsey's chance is that he catches Johnson going back in a straight line but he was usually hard to catch and got away with this textbook error. His use of distance with his footwork, he has fast parrying, clinches for defense and to tire opponents, jab and timing is masterful. On film his opponents could rarely lay a glove on him. Dempsey isn't a modern fighter, he doesn't use a jab hardly ever and he leads with power shots. He makes mistakes, which sees him gets countered. Stylistically he struggled against opponents with elite speed, jab, movement and defense. Johnson had all of these in spades I don't think Johnson could beat a modern SHW like Lewis, Wlad, Vitali or Fury, he's too small. But in his own era he was nicknamed a giant and a big man of his day.
In terms of the combination of height and muscle mass he was one of the bigger men of his day. Outside of Willard, Kauffman and Denver Ed Martin, he was taller than all his opponents. Jeffries was the bigger man in all of his fights too wasn't he? Average height has increased by 11cms in Britain since the 1870s: [url]https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-23896855[/url]
Jim McCormick Hank Griffin Joe Kennedy Fred Russell Jim Jeffords Peter Felix Frank Moran Arthur Cravan Pat Lester Bearcat Wright were all taller than Johnson too