jack johnson ~vs~ vitali klitscho!!

Why is he obvioulsy shaken then?

 

That's because the knockdown...was...purportedly.. staged...

I'm talking about Johnson personally. He hadnt done **** in a year and came in at a fat 225. That was clearly not an even serviceable johnson. If you think Vitali finishes a prime Johnson inside the distance then fine. I didn't say Vitali would lose to Johnson either. I said that Johnson would have a W over WILLARD if it HAD been a 12 rounder. Thought that was clear...


EDIT: how is Johnson shaken? He catches himself with a hand and doesn't even hit the ground with his body and literally runs ketchel over less than ten seconds later. And let me tell you, taking a punch to the chin like that from stanley even if you are a heavyweight will still hurt like balls.

 

It really is hilarious reading certain posters here making out that a caveman like Johnson would stand a chance with a fighter of Vitali's caliber. Johnson's technique is abysmal. :rofl

A more honest and fair question would be 'Could Jack Johnson hold his own against Ustinov?'

 

You always say this but you know Vitali is a proven steroids cheat, he failed an Olympic test, he uses fast clearing steroids now to get away with it

 

Vitali's technique is nothing superb either. He has good straight punches but he doesn't turn them over and put his bodyweight into them like his brother. His infighting is second rate, objectively worse than Johnson's. Lots of clinching, and when he was younger some inaccurate uppers and hooks.

I'd say as far as technicans go both guys are pretty underwhelming.

 

Shoot, Johnson was tough and durable! My only conflict is that the science of boxing did not evolve for some time after his reign. Tell you what if they both came up in the same time, even though Vitali has the height/reach I see Johnson with the W by KO, with his heart and determination he would have walked through the lanky power punches and been inside on Klitschko all night. That would have been great at the Garden circa 1940!

 

Well if it was, then it was... But no one would believe that **** today, back then they obviously would and it says something about what was/wasn't happening in world class fights too. When you watch these really old tapes, don't you have an overwhelming impression that today's technique is pretty much on a different level?

Ah, I missunderstood, sorry :good

He doesn't just take a knee but kinda stumbles, rolls on his back, seems shaken.
Also, if it was staged, is the KO blow a few seconds after staged too? Cause it would be a strange kind of staging if that also wasn't planned, no?

EDIT:

Vitali bases on his reflexes and finding awkward openings. It may look pretty crude but it doesn't mean his technique is not 1st class (not the same class as Johnsons imo), it just mean it's not "textbook". About Hamed they were saying "He doesn't do anything right... Except winning".

 

I can't see that he was shaken, he got up and immediately kod Ketchel ,does that suggest he was in a dazed state?:huh
Have you watched the knockdown in slow motion?
If you have what is your verdict?
Does Johnson seem to be falling before the punch lands or not?

 

I mean, that fight was supposed to be an exhibition. Johnson was a crooked ****er though, make no mistake. As for a technique progression thing? Not really man. I think technique is different. Smaller and different gloves and infighting rules and longer rounds make the game completely different. Wlad would probably own Johnson if you warped him out of 1909 into a ring in germany. but put wlad out in the hot sun with smaller gloves where a guy will be allowed to get inside of him and wail away at his body and head for 15+ and i don't think he does so well. My opinion is that boxing's technical and competitive peak was from 1900-1980, with the best years being from round 1930-1950. After that, I think TV killing local fight venues and careful career guidance and overpayment has kinda hurt the game a lot, along with title splitting and multiple weight classes. I think it's a bit absurd to match dudes up from 100 years ago when the sport was completely different.

Back then boxers were more like martial artists. and now they're more like athletes. How the hell can you compare the two?

I'll let mcvey handle the legitimacy of the knockdown bit.

 

Hm... Pretty fair point. To be honest, I've never thought the rules differences are that significant. But I still don't think it's totally out of question to compare boxers even from these two eras though. Like, let's settle the rules somewhere in between and imagine them fighting. Or even not - give boxers of today some time to adjust and let them fight in 1900's circumstances. There was no one like Roy Jones back then. IMO his technique would be enough to make pretty much all of old timers silly, whatever the rules. Pretty much the same goes for Vitali.

I don't question Ketchel's power actually.

I didn't watch it in slow motion. Maybe he wasn't. But still there was plenty of silly looking, chopping, telegraphed, lumbering KO's back then. My point is the ability of boxers of those times isn't on pair with ability of the stars of 90's/2000's, even with the differences in rules.

 

Actually, i've said multiple times on here that the style of guys like Jones, Vitali, Ali, Hamed etc is a throwback to turn of the century counterpunchers. Watch film of Fitzsimmons, Burley, Corbett, Tunney, Gans, Johnson and you'll eventually start to realize that they are pretty similar. Maintaining range with low hands and then drawing and feinting hard jolted straight punches or swings. The only real difference is that the modern versions are moving in circles a lot and the old guys are feinting and drawing more and planting their feet for punching leverage but the styles are pretty similar. Here's an example of a fighter who i think is a bridge between the modern 'ali/jones' type and the old school johnson langford type.

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rhduRmOjwOg[/ame]

I'll be damned if he doesn't look like a pocket roy jones. Anyway the rules completely matter. The way you throw punches, the kind of defense you employ, the tactics you can employ matters HUGELY. With looser infighting rules smaller dudes could successfully take on bigger guys(much like Hart was able to battle johnson). And since they could employ those tactics over many rounds you'd see bigger bulked up guys with less stamina lose more often too. Of course the ruleset and regulations matter. I mean, watch Andre Ward against Abraham when he wasnt allowed to infight and then see what he does against Bika at home...

 

Thanks, I see your point.

Ok. The average overall abilty though is still on today's fighters part, and big time imo. Especially if it's about HW's. I just can't see guys like Dempsey, Marciano or Willard doing anything significantly dangerous to Lewis, Tyson or Vitali.

 

If Hasim Rahman, an old old Lewis, Buster Douglas, Oliver McCall, Evander Holyfield and a few others were able to frustrate and defeat good versions of those guys, dudes like Dempsey and Marciano who were legitimate owners to the lineage wouldn't do damage? I think that's a little silly, personally. I'd favor those new guys in a matchups against those three but i can see Dempsey and Marciano beating Lewis and Vitali given Lewis' vulnerability to great punchers and Vitali's lack of infighting.

Willard i don't think beats anybody out of that list of 6 fighters.

 

Dempsey and Marciano would hardly be cruisers today.
Willard is level(s) below skillwise compared to all the 3 I mentioned.
And Lewis wasn't that old and won on cuts.

Maybe Lewis, because of chin issues, could be caught and KO'd 1 out of 10 times, if he'd got cocky and careless. Other than that I stand by my opinion.

 

Where in my post did I say he was too old against Willard?

Where in my post did I say he was still worthy of contender status?

C'mon Seamus you can do better than that. As a boxing enthusiast do you not know the difference between a contender and a prospect?

I said he was still whipping some of the best prospects at Stillmans. Heck, I've trained and sparred with some guys that I would call pretty good prospects, but they were far off from contender status. Prospects don't turn into contenders overnight and get immediate recognition by the alphabet governing bodies.

If you knew the scene when Stillmans was THE boxing trainer center aside from the Kronk, the Catskills or Big Bear, you would know that many greats came to Stillmans just to watch the sparring. Jack Johnson was still sparring past his retirement and after serving his jail term.

So, before you boo freakin' hoo anyone and disrespect, learn to read first SIR.