jake lamotta vs charlie burley... why didnt it happen?

McGrain, I'd be interested in your views regarding Johnson issuing the statement only a couple of days after the Jeffries fight, when, while he was still in Reno and boarding the train to Chicago, he stated that he'd fight Langford as long as Sam put up a $20,000 side bet to gain the fight, which Langford agreed to not but a few days later when the papers stated he was on his way to New York to post the forfeit.

Or what about the in-ring meeting they had while both were in Boston in Sept of that year where a lengthy debate (said to be about 15 minutes) took place between the two fighters while they discussed the possibility of a fight, which carried over to the next day when the two met again at a Boston newspaper office and again squabbled over the particulars (basically Johnson refusing to post the funds until langford did first) of a meeting between the two?

I'm summarizing there, as well as leaving a lot of things out between the dates of July and Sept of that year (or even the statement issued by Johnson a couple of days after those meetings when he stated that he'd accept McIntosh's offer to get them in the ring together provided...), but wouldn't you classify those as being somewhat serious in nature as far as talks go?

 

The in-ring meeting was said to have happened on Sept 20th, 1910, and here's a couple of quick quotes on it, McGrain;


"Boston, Mass., Sept. 20--Jack Johnson, the heavyweight champion, and Sam Langford, his most persistent challenger, met in the ring of the Armory Athletic Association tonight, and after fifteen minutes of the fastest joint debate ever heard at the club, decided to post $20,000 each tomorrow morning to bind a match between the two." - Sept 21st, New York Times


"Boston, Mass., Sept 20--As the result of an impromptu meeting within the squared circle tonight at the Armory Athletic Association, Sam Langford and Champion Jack Johnson have shaken hands and come to a temporary understanding.

The challenge has been extended by Langford and the posting of the forfeit tomorrow is probable. At the weekly meeting before the Armory Athletic Association tonight Johnson was introduced to make a few remarks and had started to make a speech, when Langford entered the ring a demanded to be heard. Neither man was willing to give way and a keen debate occured.

While Langford yelled loudly about the amount of money he was willing to put to fight Johnson, 'in a cellar if necessary', Johnson waved a fat roll of bills and declared that Langford never had the coin to post.

The pair finally agreed to meet at a newspaper office tomorrow forenoon and talk business." - Sept 21st, 1910, San Francisco Call


That meeting was also described in numerous other sources from the day, as was their meeting the next day, and this was pretty much the jist of it as described in the New York Tribune, Sept 22nd, 1910;


"Boston, Sept 21--Jack Johnson, the champion pugilist and conqueror of Jim Jeffries, refused today to put up $20,000 for a fight for the title with Sam Langford, the Boston middleweight boxer, until the latter had made the first deposit. They may come to terms later.

The two fighters, who had a two-round oratorical contest in the ring at one of the local boxing clubs last night, had another fast debate in the sporting department of a Boston paper today, and while each displayed a roll of bills which it was claimed contained $1,000, Johnson absolutely refused to show additional cash until Langford had made the first move.

Johnson backed his stand by claiming that it was the challenger's duty to put up the stake and his, as defender, to cover it. He said he would hand the $1,000 over to a stakeholder on the spot, and would give Langford twenty-four hours to put up his $20,000, with the agreement that if he (Johnson) did not make up the remaining $19,000 the $1,000 would go to Langford.

The Boston fighter called Johnson's attention to the latter's statement last night, in which Johnson offered to put up the money today, but Johnson said he made a mistake in saying so."

 

Oft subject,

Are you aware of any other fight film of Burley other than the often mentioned Oakland Billy Smith fight?

I wasnt hugely impressed with what I saw...

 

did TV companies stop filming fights in the 40's or what? :twisted:

 

That's what I was sort of wondering myself, although soon after those meetings were going on, as well as soon after Johnson stated that he'd accept McIntosh's offer for a London bout provided McIntosh posted the purse in America (Johnson was worried about the earlier business regarding the scheduled Langford bout in that location the year before and thought some would catch up on some payments, sort to speak), some of the papers were saying that Johnson was "all talk" in regards to the Langford fight (some said they were both all talk), so it's tough to say with any certainty one way or the other if he was seriously considering the bout or not.

 

McGrain,

I can look up the information that is available to me if I really wanted to prove my point concerning the proposed Burley/LaMotta fight, but frankly I can`t be bothered to flip through the pages to find the quotes I am reffering as this debate is not that important to me really.

As for wether Jake didn`t fancy his chances against Burley, maybe he did and maybe he didn`t but that is all I can say as any other answer I would give would be mere speculation on my part. Neither you or me know why this fight did not take place, however what we do know is that there was no public outcry for the fight to happen and they were never mandated to fight each other either.

Jake was under no obligation to fight him, and there are any number of reasons as to why the fight did not take place as far as I`m concerned, so for you to so boldly claim that it is a legitimate duck on Jakes part just doesn`t fly with me. We will obviously not see eye to eye here, so lets just move on.

Now concerning the Williams fight, it sure sounded to me like you were claiming that Holman was robbed by the judges, at least that is the impression I got from reading your post. But if you say that wasnt the case than I believe you, it just came accross to me that way. As to why these two didn`t meet earlier again I couldn`t tell you as I do not know. But I do know that there were no talks of any kind between Holmans and Jakes people until a few weeks before they did meet and the contracts were signed.

As for your claim that Jake waited until the perfect moment to take on Williams to assure himself of victory, I disagree. SuzieQ49 already posted the names of some of Holman`s vitims leading up to his fight with Jake, and while I agree that he was on the slide by then he wasn`t completely shot and finished as a top echelon fighter just yet. And who says that Holman wouldn`t have been troubled by LaMotta`s style at any point in his career?

Because I think that Jake had the right style to give a guy like Holman fits each and every time and vice-versa. Both men were great fighters and neither would have had an easy time with the other, if you think otherwise thats your right but I disagree.

 

To my knowledge that is all that is available on Burley. If I ever find out otherwise I`ll let you and the forum know.

 

No, just you folks here and some friends of mine, the rest of the world can **** off.