Jack Johsnon news reads. Battling Jim, MCvey, Jeanette, and Langford!

Johnson could make more money for sure on Langford, Jeanette, and McVey than the Flynn's, Ross' and Kaufman's of boxing. I assure you the purse offering for Johnson were at least double, and in all likely hood at least 4x or more the amount he was making for the easy title defenses vs the Jim Johnson's and Jim Flynn's of boxing.

They were offers. They same as others. If the offers were not genuine, Johnson would have used that as an excuse and the press would have said, Johnson signs $100,000 to meet Langford and McVey, but the deal falls through!!! I see no such articles. I never read that any big fight vs Langford, Jeanette, or McVey vs Johnson feel through due to lack of funds. Johnson simply gave the best competition the cold shoulder and fought lesser fighters for less money.

Once again, Johnson could fight anyone he wanted to in France, England, and Australia. As I pointed out, Flynn fight was in late 1912, and that one took place in the USA. Johnson had plenty of time to fight the best.

The news papers showed the money involved. As for stipulations, Johnson was steering ht championship ship. He would have commanded a higher percentage of the purses.

This is unadulterated BS. You don’t have a point here. How much do you think Johnson made vs Flynn, Ross, or Kauffman? Though I don't have the financial amounts that Johnson made in these fights, I would tend to beleive one $50,000 fight with Langford, McVey or Jeanette would net him more than the three fights of the lesser " white hopes " that Johnson fought. Read the clippings I posted here. The amounts of money Johnson had on the table here were huge. The 100K deal from H.D. McIntoish would trump Johnson’s earning vs Jeffries.

 

Your opinion is your opinion. I just see it as an all heart opinion that lacks objectivity.

Let's suppose for a moment if Ali, Foreman, Marciano, Holmes or anyone else you mentioned was Ko'd by a light heavy, quit twice in the ring, lost to mere contenders, was knocked down by a middle weight, got DQ'd by goin low when the going got rough, drew or went the distance with many journeyman and as champion ducked the best five contenders out there! This man is #2? If so, I say OVER RATED.

When do you think Johnson prime years were, and why would the #2 all time heavy have that much trouble in his prime years? Let's assume that Johnson's prime years were from 1908-1912. Why did he have trouble with O'Briens', Ketchel's, and Jim Johnson’s of boxing? The best heavyweight champions would romp these guys. You're #2 all time guy in his prime had his hands full, and in truth should have lost at least one of these fights.



Could you imagie if Ali, or Holmes had the exact same results from fighters the size, skill, and caliber of a past his best O'Brien, a middle weight in Ketchel who knocked him down, and a career journeyamn heavyweight in Jim Johnson? I 'd drop them down several nothces, but that's just me being objective.

 

The gift of logic, reason, and objectivity on Jack Johnson eludes you my friend. If you want to engage in a debate on what I said about any all time top 5 heavyweight's ranking tumbling if they lost to, had trouble beating, or drew with the guys Johnson fought, go for it!

Guys like Ali, Foreman, Louis, Dempsey, Holmes, Tyson, and Lewis in their peak years would destroy the same competition Johnson fought with shocking ease. But if they had the same results, critics would correctly question them.

If you want this debate, go for it. I suspect you will avoid it as if it were the reincarnation of the bubonic plague. I think know my points are to strong, but you just can’t say it / admit it.

There may come a time when I need to borrow your

This content is protected

glasses. Can I borrow them if I need them?