Johnson- Jeffries: What am I missing?

No I don't think that one has been done J. I liked Bowe I thought that with more dedication he might have gone onto have the career Lewis had.He was the best inside fighter I've seen among the super heavies.

 

Excellent post.

 

Then watch Joe Jeanette vs Sam Langford and tell neither had a jab

 

Johnson would look at Lyle and ask why is he wasting energy running around as he was? Classic boxing such as exhibited by Johnson involved subtle footwork rather than dancing about unnecessarily. Subtle footwork combined with feints, parries, blocking, slipping. Johnson as per Fleischer was a master of both feinting and blocking. Most of the fighters who faced Johnson were punchers. Johnson would at times allow the puncher to get in close but then control their attack and counter inside with huge uppercuts. His opponents punching in close would bring their attack to Johnsons head only to find their efforts blocked. At distance Johnson would snap off a beautiful jab. When he wanted Johnson could open up with both hand in combination. Look at the ko sequence vs Burns to see a fusillade of combinations that one has great difficulty counting their number.

 

??? Who said this ??? Names, please. I often ask for them and you fail to come up with them. Burns was considered a step down from his predecessors and successors by most historians of the time. Not as great as Sullivan, Corbett, Fitz, Jeffries, Johnson, Langford, and Dempsey.

Yes, he could fight for his size but at 5'7" and 168 pounds, he was too light, short and weak to overcome a grappling like Johnson.

 

Actually, Jeanette has a spear-like jab. He just could not keep a prime Langford off. Watch the film, you'll see Langford feint and his ability to cut off the ring. The Langford vs Jeanette fight shows both men in their primes.

You can see why Jack Johnson avoided getting in the ring with them from 1909-1914 as they are significantly better than the title opponents he fought ( and sometimes struggled with ) , save perhaps Willard.

 

Bohun Lynch & William Naughton. Either get back to topic or take your hate and f*ck off .

 

??? Who said this ??? Names, please. I often ask for them and you fail to come up with them. Burns was considered a step down from his predecessors and successors by most historians of the time. Not as great as Sullivan, Corbett, Fitz, Jeffries, Johnson, Langford, and Dempsey.

Yes, he could fight for his size but at 5'7" and 168 pounds, he was too light, short and weak to overcome a grappling like Johnson.

Any context of what they said? Your memory has been pretty bad in past threads. Not buying it until I see it.

As for the fight, it's Johnson in his prime vs. an old man who had not fought in 6+ years, and had no warm up fights either. When this happens in heavyweight history, it should be a blow out.

Dempsey over Willard
Marciano over Louis
Holmes over Ali

This one dragged on for 15 rounds.

 

Why don't you try and show some respect and courtesy to the OP and address the topic instead of spreading your hate driven lies on every thread?

 

Exactly, which is why I don't get people assuming Johnson wouldn't be able to handle more than one punch at a time.

I know Johnson never demonstrated his defence against quick combo punchers but that is because he never had to, there's no way a man of his reflexes would fail to succeed in the modern era.

At worst he'd be able to jab and grab like Ruiz did. I've no doubting his abilities after all I've seen.

 

Well, because he was simply the better fighter, learner, adapter, innovator, ring general etc etc. The point I was making is, if somebody distinguishes themselves as the best of the best, when everybody else has been exposed to the same training and techniques of the day... well then, you're something very special. If you're able to do that then, you would be able to transcend whatever changes you'd encounter in varying times. Tua on the other hand, didn't distinguishes himself the way Johnson did. He wasn't ahead of his time, he wasn't dominate, he wasn't a ring general or genius, he wasn't good at adapting. Just like anything else, I generally prefer to go with the guy who has proven himself more and his more naturally gifted and talented. I'd usually expect that person to beat someone who isn't what the other is, and frankly isn't even close when it comes to distinguishing himself.

 

Johnson didn't lack skill, but today he wouldn't be considered the master technician he was considered in his day.

The upright position, the high chin, the squared stance, the lack of lateral movement, the lack of a proper guard, the lack of a consistent jab and consistent combination punching... Yes, you could say some of these things to a certain extent about more modern HWs that are considered extremely skillful, but not all of them.