Johnson vs the following in 1911 and 1912

Odd you'd list 2 fights Johnson didn't even lose. Not only did he not lose them... one was a 6 round fight and the other he had a broken arm early on... Yet still got the better of the action. Choynski is not relevant because this is a prime Johnson, not middleweight Johnson. To me it's a good thing when all people can cite against Johnson are these kind of fights, pretty indicative if you ask me.

 

Choynski was early on, yes. Still not a good night.

O'Brien was a decrepit old lightheavy, who would only fight (and mostly lose) a few times more, and was able to land on Johnson over 6 rounds.

Many ringside at the Johnson fracas claimed Johnson broke the arm at the end of the fight during a fall.

We can also include the Hart performance.

My claim is not that a prime Johnson was not the absolute class of his era at heavyweight (he was) but that he was inconsistent and not above stinking out the joint despite his own high estimation of his abilities.

 

The OP asks us to match them when Johnson was prime.

"Take the prime version of Johnson (the one that dismantled Jeffries in his comeback fight" .

Not when he weighed ,according to Pollack about 168lbs.
Not when he fought Hart and badly marked him up ,emerged unmarked himself and the referee gave it to Hart for his "making the fight".A decision the best referee in the US called "very strange".
Not when he entered the ring untrained ,having been out on the tiles the night before, and knowing he was in a 6 round no dec fight against a non puncher.

And not when he was 35 ,out of shape, having not had a fight for a year and a half ,and fighting with a broken arm.

We are matching him when he was;

PRIME !PRIME ! PRIME ! PRIME !


ps. That means at his best.

 

Certainly Rocky was superior to Flynn. Rocky was an ATG. However he gets torn apart by prime Johnson. By round 10 Marcianos face would be unrecognizable.

Johnson would do his real damage in close. I can't see a scenario where Rocky would be able to get anything going. He would be smothered and bombarded with uppercuts at close range.

 

Was Jeffries his prime performance? Really? Dismantling an alfalfa farmer who didn't even take a warm-up fight, who was so bad in training that Ketchel wanted to KO him during ring introductions to save the White Race the embarrassment, the guy who, according to some, assumed the fight was rigged for him to win up until the final days before the bout?

We can certainly say that Johnson looked impressive physically but what proof beyond the eye test do we have that that was "prime" Johnson? It certainly wasn't a "prime" result when you take an objective look at the opponent.

 

Johnson was an elite hwt champion with unmatched skills in the ring. Add to this he was a black hwt champion beating white fighters in an era where lacks were lunched for fun.

Any intimation that he was anything less than an elite ATG is amateur level boxing knowledge.

Greatest defense.
Wonderful jab.
Excellent both at distance and inside.

 

The day you take an objective look at either Jack Johnson or Jack Dempsey will be a first.:good

 

Who is truly objective? Most of us have read tons of books on these fighters. I have. I know you have.

My questions regarding Johnson is, and has been in past threads, when was his prime? What were his prime performances? The best opponents he beat were named Langford, McVey, Jeanette... and perhaps Burns. Yet, many contend he was at his prime versus Jeffries, at a weight over 200 pounds. But what is the measure of this? A recently fat Alfalfa farmer who either thought everything was fixed or knew he had no chance as he hadn't entered a ring in years? That seems like a faulty measure to me.

 

I'm persuaded by Johnson's own assessment of his condition

 

We've seen boxers make ridiculous statements about their condition before. Without a top rate opponent to test it, we really don't know.

 

That is a fair comment we aren't dealing in certainties after all.


I still think you are biased against both Jack's though.:hey


You probably feel I'm too biased in their favour.

 

Yes, probably more so than people allow for.

 

I'm a huge fan of both Jacks. I don't think I would have read so many books and articles about and by both if I weren't. My next reading project after my current study of the Crimean War will be both Pollack books on Johnson... and I certainly hope Pollack makes it to Dempsey in his project.

 

Johnson wins every match.

He toyed with Burns, Ketchel, and Jeffries. Not just beat them with ease. He toyed with them.