Jack Johnson vs. Marvin Hart (Hart's win leads to Title shot)

"I have never fought a ****** ,but I will fight this one just to put him in is place."Hart

 

"I have notified Johnson that he must fight all the time or the fight will be called a no contest. I don't expect any difficulty on that score Zeke Abrams, [Johnson's second,] has also told him he must win in a hurry,"If you stay twenty rounds to a decision ,we will run you out of town."Alex Greggains referee,promoter,and match maker of the fight .
Marvin Hart had hitherto refused to fight black boxers,after beating Kid Cutler, Joe Walcott climbed into the ring and challenged him,Hart refused saying,"I am a Southerner and my folks would disown me if I fought you.
Johnson got the fight with Hart after koing Denver Ed Martin for the Coloured title ,putting him to sleep for nearly ten minutes.
He then dogged Hart turning up at his gym and calling him a coward to his face.
Hart relented saying,"I've never fought a ****** ,but I will fight this one just to put him in his place".
At the signing of the fight Hart said ,"I tell you right here that this **** will have to go some to beat me,before the twentieth round is reached,probably several rounds before,there will be a ****** prostrate on the canvas"

WW Naughton supported Greggains decision for Hart saying."Though Hart's face was prodded to puffiness by Johnson's straight left,he never faltered for an instant",The white man's indifference to punishment and the great pluck displayed by him seemed to discourage the negro.
Johnson shows beyond doubt that he lacks the essential fighting qualification_grit"

The L. A .Times headlined with "Fight Decision A ***** One"
George Siler the premier referee said in the Police Gazette.
"It was the opinion of all fair minded witnesses that Johnson beat Hart"

One wonders whom Greggains would have given his decision to when George Chuvalo fought Muhammad Ali and Randy Cobb fought Larry Holmes ?

 

It may be that Hart deserved the verdict but statements before the fight tend to indicate the odds were stacked against Johnson before the fight had even begun.

 

It was even announced beforehand that Johnson was going to have to knock Hart out to get the decision.

https://chroniclingamerica.loc.gov/lccn/sn85058130/1905-01-01/ed-1/seq-45/

 

Yes, hard to believe,further down that article there is a piece on Corbett beating the drum for a third fight with Jeffries,and Jeffries naming Choynski as the hardest hitter he had met ,something one poster always wants to dispute for some reason.
Pre fight predictions.
"Best fight the Pacific Coast has had for some time in the heavyweight line.The colored man is the cleverest of the two and should jab his man to pieces.I fancy Johnson's chances ,but he will have to take care that he doesn't run up against Hart's handy right.Don't look to see the colored fellow win on a knockout_ it will be points." Jim Corbett

"Well I don't know very much about this man Hart ,but I understand that he is a big strong fellow and I feel certain that his bout with the negro ,Johnson will be the best 'Frisco has seen for some time ,years in fact.I venture to say that Johnson will win.From what I know of the two,I believe he figures the best.
Yes Johnson should win after a hard fight".Bob Fitzsimmons.

"Well I should say that it's pretty hard meeting to pick the winner.But on form Johnson should gain the decision on points.I will say however that Hart can deliver a blow capable of laying Johnson to the mat.
Will I fight the winner?Well no,not if it comes out the way I anticipate.
My ideas are too well known." Jim Jeffries.

Given that Greggains was not only the referee and match maker but also the promoter for this and other fights.Given also that Jeffries had categorically stated that in the event of Johnson winning he would not defend his title against him, isn't it possible that the "cash cow" in this fight was seen as Hart? That with Hart victorious there was the prospect of a further money spinner in title defence against the Kentuckyan? But if Johnson won that fight was "dead in the water"?
Adam Pollack certainly thinks this was a possibility, and that the result of the fight might have been decided before the fighters stepped into the ring.

 

Corbett always talked a good fight. I know that after Johnson won the title he was claiming that if Jeffries didn't come back to face him he was going to do it himself.

 

Yes similar to some of todays fighters ,Broner,Wilder,Fury,he wasn't slow to blow his own trumpet.
As Joe Louis that man of class, who never did it ,or bad mouthed an opponent,"every dog got a right to wag his own tail."

 

Still trying to re-write history on this high stakes loss for Johnson?

Look--As I told you Johnson did very little in the second half of the fight. His corner urged him to pick up the pace. He dogged it, possibly because Hart was hurting him. Infact Hart did hurt him in the 11th.

As for brakes from the ref, Johnson got way with fouling, losing via DQ but still keeping his title and such.

 

This fight in important for a couple of reasons.

Firstly it goes a long way towards legitimizing the Hart Burns lineage.

Secondly it is for practical purposes, the only loss that Jack Johnson sustained during a fourteen year period, and the only loss that came anywhere close to his prime.

For these reasons it is important to understand what happened as well as we can.

To dismiss it as a robbery has far reaching implications, as does accepting its legitimacy.

My take on it is that the decision was probably within the bounds of reasonable interpretation for the era.

 

The article makes it sound to me Johnson deserved it. Saying Hart's face was a mess, but Johnson didn't *really* hurt him, and Hart attacked more sounds like classic straw clutching you give to justify a crappy decision

 

I am trying to rewrite nothing,having not seen the fight I have an open mind on it.
All I have done is post verified contemporary news paper posts.I have the utmost confidence in Pollack's research.
You, not having read his two volume bio on Johnson,are arguing from a position of ignorance.
What Johnson did/or didn't do in other fights is not relevant to this thread.
BTW the report that Hart hurt Johnson in the 11th rd is incorrect,it was the 20th and last round. Hart hurt Johnson with a right hand in the 11 th but J J was never in danger of being floored
20th rd "A sudden flash of light from a photographer in the balcony made them think the round had ended.The referee told them to continue,and Hart quickly rushed Johnson,who had stopped ,and landed a right to the jaw."

You need more than Box rec!

 

I keep an open mind on it ,it's a fight I haven't seen. If I were to have, I might have thought Hart's doggedness and willingness to make the fight meant he deserved the nod.Who at this late stage can say?

 

Indeed, so where would each outcome leave us?

If we uphold the decision, or at least say that it was justifiable, then Hart is a legitimate lineal champion.

We could probably give Johnson a pass, by arguing that Hart was a perfect stylistic foil for him, like say Norton was for Ali.

If we dismiss the decision as a robbery, then the foundations of the Hart/Burns lineage become very rotten.

In this scenario Johnson has basically been untouchable for 14 years, though that is partially offset by his failure to meet certain contenders.