Jack Johnson's manager agrees to fight Hauge in 1909, but Jack himself refuses?

Much as Langford got the sh1t end of the stick, I don't think that a win over Hague constituts a title claim.

Johnson was striped by the major European sanctioning body later in his title reign. They then awarded the title to Langford based on a win over Joe Jeanette. Perhaps we should recognise Langfoird as an alphabet titlist.

 

The NSC was a private Club ,not an elected board of control.
It had no authority ,either to confer,or remove recognition of any title from anyone

.It was formed in 1891 as a private club ,in King St Covent Garden.
Subsequently moving to the Cafe Royal in the 50's ,then to The Grosvenor House Park Lane ,and back to the Cafe Royal, I've been there three times as a guest, once to the Cafe Royal ,and twice to the Grosvenor House ,the club closed in 2009.
Confusion about the status of the NSC originated because when the BBBOC was formed in 1929,[some ten years after the Hague /Langford fight,] several members of the NSC were offered seats on the board of the newly formed BBBOC, and they retained a permanent place until 1937.

The NSC was responsible for the custom of awarding Lonsdale belts to all British champions who successfully retained their titles.This was under the auspices of Hugh Lowther the 5th Earl of Lonsdale ,and President of the club.

William Iron Hague was a clumsy, pudgy, wild swinger ,who possessed great power and strength, but lacked conditioning, and science.
He had an average domestic record at the time of the Langford fight, his best win was over a 40 year old middle weight Frank Craig ,"The Coffee Cooler",a moderate Ben Taylor whom, a hungover Jack Johnson had belted out in 8 rds a year earlier,and a ko over one of our worst heavyweights Gunner Moir whose forbidding visage, belied the fact that he was not only unskilled but less than durable.In 25 fights Moir was stopped 8 times.And had not fought in 2 years, since being wrecked by Tommy Burns in 10rds in1907.
Hague had a brief moment of triumph over Langford, when a wild swing connected with Langford's head ,caterpaulting him backwards, but it was a very fleeting flash of lightning,alerted to Hague's power,Sam pulled the trigger in the 4th round on the 12-1-1 Hague leaving him absolutely senseless on the floor.
The idea ,that the 12-1-1 Hague would make a credible oppoent for the Champion Jack Johnson is totally laughable.
Hague lost his next contest, being kod by Petty Officer Curran 1-2-1 ,and outpointed byJewey Smith.

Hague was then kod by Billy Wells 7-1-0, the same Wells whom the British government refused to allow to fight Johnson, when Wells was older, and more experienced.


Hague was subsequently kod in 8 rds by 20 year old Tom Cowler being floored 8 times before the 8rds were abruptly stopped, when he was dropped for good . Cowler[ now a mature 27,] was carried by a 41 year old Jack Johnson whom the press said, could have ended it whenever he chose , instead of settling for a dec win.

It's worth noting that the Sam Langford who destroyed Hague was in the middle of some very spotty performances himself in 1909, he had only managed draws with Jim Barry ,and Sandy Ferguson that year,and a few months after beating up Hague ,he lost a decision to Jim Flynn.
Langford took the Hague fight, because it was far and away his biggest purse up to that time,and it remained the biggest purse he ever received.
Which rather sets the premise that a Johnson Langford fight would have drawn big money, on its head ,imo.

"In the 2nd round they thought it was all over when Iron’s sledgehammer fist caught the left side of Sam’s head and sent him cart wheeling across the ring. By the fourth round Langford had discovered how raw the English Champ was, he drew him close by pretending to punch with his right, but as soon as Hague took the bait his left fist shot out and Iron Hague was on the canvas let down by lack of ring experience."

This content is protected

Conclusion ? The 12-1-1 Hague might have been a suitable opponent for Jim Jeffries,,[he was as good or better than Finnegan and Munroe.], but he was never a credible opponent for Jack Johnson.
To suggest otherwise is laughable.
Since Jim Flynn beat Langford in 1910, should we recognise him as a Champion?:think

 

Have a look a the quality of the fighters Hague [it is HAGUE] stopped ,they were nobodies really.Many kos? Well he had only 14 fights at the time, so not too many.

Ross was a weak challenger,,but he had Kod ,and drawn with Mike Shreck who was considerably better than anyone Hague ever beat.
Stopped George Gardner ,and Ross had also drawn with Jim Barry ,and was on the verge of a ko win over Marvin Hart ,who had been dropped when Ross hit him whilst he was down and was dsq'd.His other recent defeat was to Al Kaufmann whom many at the time thought was a real threat to Johnson.

I venture to suggest that If Johnson had fought the 14 fight, crude Hague, you would be just as castigating of the fight as you are about the easy win he acheived over Ross.

Since Johnson was only offered a derisory £3000 by the NSC to defend his title against Langford ,and £800 earlier to challenge Burns [he agreed to the Burns fight ,,Burns refused] his passage and training expenses to be met by himself, I doubt the purse for Hague would have been very tempting.

The same year ,[1909], Johnson received $5,000 for turning up "as fat as a Jap wrestler",[his words]to waltz through 6 dreary rounds with O Brien, why would he travel across the Atlantic for less?

If you think my description of Hague,"clumsy, pudgy wild swinging " sounds a lot like Jim Flynn,how do you account for Flynn beating Langford, a few months after Langford kod Hague?
To my knowledge no one alive has seen footage of Tony Ross so it would be hard to categorize his style,all we do know is he beat two fighters ,who were of a much higher quality than any Hague ever defeated. A ko win ,and a draw with Mike Schreck easily tops anything Hague ever did.

Schreck had 2 ko wins, and a points dec over Marvin Hart ,and was the first man to beat Tommy Burns.

 

It is also worth pointing out (for anyone that doesnt put 2 and 2 together) that the win over Schrek and domination of Hart (i know it was really a DQ loss) are particularly relevant in the context of Johnson because as we know, Hart was the last person to defeat Johnson. If Hart had beaten Shrek and Ross comfortably there would have been huge demand for him to meet Johnson. he didnt and Johnson instead met the man who defeated Hart. Not only does this make it a defendable defence, but it also makes it a must defence for Johnson.

In hindsight a couple of guys ended up with better claims, obviously. But in reality, it seems that it was only Langford and Jeanette who really bettered him too badly, and in the case of Jeanette, his poor condition means it probably really wasnt much of a test of their abilities.

[url]http://news.google.com.au/newspapers?id=h1w1AAAAIBAJ&sjid=3RMLAAAAIBAJ&pg=6338,513235&dq=ross+jeanette+fight&hl=en[/url]
[url]http://news.google.com.au/newspapers?id=VidRAAAAIBAJ&sjid=hWYDAAAAIBAJ&pg=2274,6593971&dq=ross+jeanette+fight&hl=en[/url]

And his fight with Kaufman was really an elimination bout, it seems - although note also from this article that Johnson is reported to having retired by this time. I think it is often forgotten that by this time Johnson was winding things down. Realistically speaking, the fact that Johnson was retaining his title when he was virtually retired speaks volumes for his abilities. Look at what happened to the likes of Dempsey, Liston and even Ali when they lost their edge and started flaunting retirement.

[url]http://news.google.com.au/newspapers?id=L3YzAAAAIBAJ&sjid=BPQDAAAAIBAJ&pg=6791,2171488&dq=flynn+kaufman+fight&hl=en[/url]

 

Thanks for the input, and the news reads B :good

 

It's a bit inconsistant to disparage Flynn , when last week you were sure Jack Dillon would have been a good opponent for Jack Johnson. As late as 1914 , when Flynn was 35, Dillon could only draw with him.

 

Yes, it is HAGUE.

















































Not HAUGE.

 

Mendoza is often rather " vauge," about his spelling .:yep

 

Jack Johnson W 15 Sam Langford
Jack Johnson KO 15 James Jeffries
Jack Johnson KO 2 Bob Fitszimmons
Jack Johnson W 10 Joe Jeanette


FACT.....deal with it

 

You really need some tuition on writing the English language.
Joruneyman ? A best ?
I bet your school report said, "needs to try harder,"
You cannot be tko'd in a sparring match, despite what you say the New York times said of Smith's spar with Johnson, I prefer to believe Smith himself ,who happened to be there.
That super middle was the reigning light heavyweight champion, 30years old.
I see you dropped the "long in the tooth description "of him ,after I pointed out he was the same age as Johnson.
****ed up there ,didn't you.
I reply to your posts ,to expose your biased lies ,not with any hope of persuading you of the error of your ways.
I am content to let the rest of the forum make its own mind up on the subject of your lack of objectivity on Jack Johnson.

Something their derisory posts indicate they have allready done.
I don't see anyone offering support for your opinions ,do you?

As Schreck beat both Burns and Hart,does that give us a reason to suspect both of them?

Or, is it possible Schreck was a good bit better than you admit?

Certainly better than Hague.

Hague had a good ring record?

Did he ? He had two wins over name domestic opponents, Gunner Moir who had not fought in 2 years after being badly exposed, and kod by Tommy Burns. Moir was 12-4-0,and Ben Taylor 23-14-3 who had been comprehensively thrashed by a hungover Jack Johnson a year before.

Moir never beat a boxer who was above average domestic level , prior to the Langford fight he had been kod in 3rds by unknown, and unheralded Charlie Knox 8-14-3.
After the Langford fight he lost his next 2, one by ko to P O Curran 1-2-1.

In fact Hague had 14 fights after being kod by Langford, he lost 6 of them ,5 by ko ,and one to a 20 year old Tom Cowler, whom a 41 year old Johnson carried when Cowler was 27, with more experience under his belt.

Please explain why Hague would have been a credible opponent for Jack Johnson in 1909? Or indeed, when Johnson was 41 and outclassing the improved Tom Cowler who had beaten Hague 7 years earlier.

ps. Commas are tools of punctuation, to indicate phrases,and clauses of a sentence, in proper terms, their function is to signify an enharmonic interval.
When is your birth day? I willl send you a present.
An English dictionary.
ps Don't you get tired of having your arse kicked by me?:vonnecunt