Pick one lightheavyweight to fight Jack Johnson

I think Tunney, Spinks, Langford, Foster, Roy Jones, Archie Moore, and Ezzard Chalres all have a chance.

I think Tunney is best equiped to defeat Johnson, as his reach, jab, footwork, stmaina, and chin were supeiror. Tunney would not let Johnson clinch or uppercut him. He was too smart for that.

Johnson fought a past his prime version of light heavyweight Jack O'Brein, and if truth is told, O'Brien who had a suspect chin and a weak punch had a shade better of the scoring.

 

Johnson was what? 195 lbs? He wouldn't be THAT much bigger than the light-heavy he'd be facing, especially if it's Spinks or Foster, men of roughly the same height as Jack.
I dunno if Foster has the toughness to go 25 rounds with small gloves though...
Roy Jones is a good pick. Strong, fast, awkward...but 25 rounds?

It's really difficult to say with the modern guys. 12 rounds is a hell of a way from 25...just under half distance. He may feel good for 9, 10, 13 rounds...but suddenly and dramatically tire in round 18. It's very tough to relate to something like this.

 

Roy Jones certainly had the speed and skill to out box Johnson, but the problem is, there would be a lot of holding and inside tactics that were only allowed under the London prize rules, which are long gone. If I were to pick a fighter at 175 to beat Johnson it would have to be some one who at least has an understanding of the ideology of the style.

Very different form of boxing.

 

I have little doubt all the fighters I mentioned could go 15, and Tunney could go 20+.

In some cases Johnson would not be the bigger man across the board. He's giving up some height and reach some many of the match ups I presposed.

 

Maybe not. The 1900's demanded toughness, allowed rough in-fighting, and had smaller gloves. In additon, there would be no ( Insert your own form of substance Roy Jones was caught using where his testestrone level was 5 x the normal level ) in the 1900's.

That said I do beleive he could still defeat Johnson on points. Not saying he would. I'm saying he could.

 

This point cannot be stressed enough.

 

Ah, sorry. Brain getting a bit rusty...:yep

 

ezzard Charles, I think he could give Jack fits.

 

These two are completely different fighters on film. Roy is a mover / out fighter. His jab and combinations were better, and I think his hand speed was better too. Jones threw more punches than Johnson did.

Johnson was more of a cautious in-fighter, who liked to clinch, body punch and sneak in the uppercut. Johnson hit harder, and likely took the better punch, but he did not open up unless he had the other guy tired or hurt, or unless the other guy was much smaller with limited skills. While Johnson’s defense was good in his day, his low guard, short height, and mostly stationary stance would be a problem vs a sharp shooter like Jones, unless Johnson gloved circle and block type of defense could thwart Jones hand speed and accuracy.

The fight boils down to this. Johnson would need to be in shape and motivated to fight to catch Jones. I’ll go with Jones in a 8 rounder or less, and Johnson in a 12 round or longer fight. I do not think this would be a fans fight at all. It would be very tactical.

 

Given Jack's shoddy record and primitive style, I could name a dozen who would take him out in fifteen rounds or less. Antique boxing is just no match for modern fistic science. Just off the top of my head, Billy Conn, Archie Moore, Bob Foster, Yaqui Lopez, Matthew Saad Muhammad, Mike Spinks, Dennis Andries, Thomas Hearns, Iran Barkley, Roy Jones, Jr., Dariuz Michaelsceski (sp)... It feels like going 25 rounds just trying to name them all.

 

I think Tunney ,Charles,Moore and Spinks would all give Jack problems ,would they beat him weighing 175? I dont think so.I think Foster is a great LH ,but his record against Heavies is very poor,he had the power ,but his skinny frame lacked the durability.