Sam Langford Gives His Thoughts On Jack Johnson

Kr apper I said we should take this on another thread and stop hi jacking someone else's thread. I have already posted on that thread, so please stop posting here this thread has nothing to do with Greb and Firpo. I will answer all your posts including this one in turn.

 

You assume i care enough to follow you around your trolling threads. i dont. ive answered your questions in detail. my book does it for me and my sources are cited. when you put together a rebuttal 1/1000th as well researched as that then we can have a dialogue. until then you can keep creating new threads about me that i ignore and try to hijack threads that im occasionally active on like a child trying to get attention. notice its always you looking for me. i dont give you enough thought to look for you or create threads about you.

 

Ah professor kr apper, so the answer to everything is buy your book, and spewing more one-sided manure. Common sense is all I need. That you felt you had the need to address my posts tell me alot, shows how insecure you are. Your explanation of stalling is hilarious. You want to set your rules, there is a saying in boxing, who even you might have heard, "Never fight the other guys fight". If your book is anything like you post then it's full of your spins on those articles, why would I buy that. I dont follow you around, I read the posts everybody makes and comment on yours especially when you exaggerate and apply your magical cherry picking, as in Firpo ran, Dempsey ducked, the Shelby and the Archer cartels and oh yes the stalling lol. Really what I respond to is your arrogance, your bullying, and name calling. Sorry I dont like bullies, never did never will. One more thing this happens to be a forum and commenting on somebodies posts is what is supposed to happen, only you seem to be bothered by my 1/1000th common sense comments on your posts.

 

Blah blah blah. the fact of the matter is its all in my book, all cited, all in public with my name on it and until you can actually give real examples as to why im supposedly wrong or cherry picking and put your name on them you are nothing but a sad dempsey fanboy hiding behind your heros name on an internet forum. lol. if you or perry care to take up the challenge then by all means do so, my work stands on its own two feet and i stand behind it. until you can actually add anything beyond the same tired bleating like a broken record you two and your comical trolling threads arent worth responding to. the only purpose it serves is to distract from the fact that once again mendoza is being made to look like a fool.

 

Ok, here we go again, ya couldnt resist could you, so insecure. Are you so desperate to sell your book, that the only response is buy my book. You must have boxes and boxes of your book taking up space in your townhouse that you are trying to get rid of. Yeah I am gonna run not walk and order your book after seeing your hilarious "stalling" response. I dont play your game, like in the "stalling" common sense and a knowledge of the business of boxing is more then enough to answer your "challenge". Dont look in the mirror cos the reflection in the mirror is the fool. In the world of boxing you dont know 1/10,000th of what I know. I guess that's why you live on citations, cos you cant think for yourself. I can and from what little I know I can read something and know what the truth of the matter is. Like Dempsey being afraid and ducking a fight with Greb. Commonsense will tell you if Greb had fought Dempsey, Dempsey would've killed Greb. Greb, never ever fought a guy like Dempsey. If the fight was made the beating he took when he fought Tunney the last time would have been much worse. Dempsey and company would have seen from the Tunney fight where Greb was vulnerable to the body. Unlike the famous Greb - Dempsey sparring session, Dempsey would have trained specifically for Greb. He would have beat Greb's body to a pulp, and getting punched by Dempsey with 6 oz gloves would have been no picnic especially for a MW.
Why do you ignore the feeling at the time that Greb was just too small? Why do ignore the fact that Dempsey and company were under no obligation to fight or to accept offers from anybody, they could afford to wait for the right money and fight. Dempsey not fighting Greb or Wills has not hurt his popularity then or now except for the "few", who claim that he should've, and coulda fought them, yes but he didnt and again you refuse to accept the feelings at the time and poo poo those feelings cos it dont fit your agenda. The average fan today see's Dempsey as an icon, and that same fan today would say Greb who?
I know you say well, he beat the guys that Dempsey fought for the title and deserved a shot, maybe morally cos he beat LHW's and beat the John Ruiz of his time, Brennan, oh I forgot "KO'' Brennan, the guy who gave Dempsey problems in one fight. Oh and of course Firpo running from Greb. Fact is that Dempsey came out and stated the conditions for a fight with him, for Greb and Wills for the title. Neither could up with anything to satisfy team Dempsey. Dempsey was quite clear in his conditions for a fight. Dempsey had every right to consider or not any offer. Carp is a good example of this, by his refusing to even consider Greb and fighting Bat Levinsky instead. He made the right decision and thus the first million gate was born. You seem to ignore the fact that any champion had freedom of choice, why? Ya see commonsense not dueling articles, I dont need no stinkin' citations, and I dont hide behind different alts like you do. Do yourself a favor and do as Clay, stonehands and Pollack they dont make foolish statements as you do.

 

Blah blah blah. the fact of the matter is its all in my book, all cited, all in public with my name on it and until you can actually give real examples as to why im supposedly wrong or cherry picking and put your name on them you are nothing but a sad dempsey fanboy hiding behind your heros name on an internet forum. lol. if you or perry care to take up the challenge then by all means do so, my work stands on its own two feet and i stand behind it. until you can actually add anything beyond the same tired bleating like a broken record you two and your comical trolling threads arent worth responding to. the only purpose it serves is to distract from the fact that once again mendoza is being made to look like a fool.

 

OMG the professor repeated his previous post, ok, if that's the best you can do. FYI, in the examples I gave, you actually dont need citations, it's just commonsense application of basic boxing knowledge. Do you have citations for your every thought you've had? You dont need citations to make a point, duh!
Like I said before your "challenge" is silly, if you cant see these are basic answers to your own posted comments. The stalling, the Firpo running, Dempsey ducking and the contract, they are not complicated, these were your opinions and my answers are mine, the only criteria should be, does either argument make sense, that's all but you are so insecure you cant handle or accept somebodies else POV.
That's what a forum is for an exchange of ideas, opinions and arguments, that the nature of the beast. I happen to enjoy the exchanges between Mc and Mendoza, yours on the other hand are bullying rants demanding citations and if the poster challenges you on anything they get manure spewed at them. And yes I will keep "bleating" at your one sided posts if they dont make sense.

 

Blah blah blah. the fact of the matter is its all in my book, all cited, all in public with my name on it and until you can actually give real examples as to why im supposedly wrong or cherry picking and put your name on them you are nothing but a sad dempsey fanboy hiding behind your heros name on an internet forum. lol. if you or perry care to take up the challenge then by all means do so, my work stands on its own two feet and i stand behind it. until you can actually add anything beyond the same tired bleating like a broken record you two and your comical trolling threads arent worth responding to. the only purpose it serves is to distract from the fact that once again mendoza is being made to look like a fool.

 

LOL professor kr apper is showing everybody he is now shootin' blanks, the best he can do now is doing what he is doing posting the same thing over and over cos I keep after him on things he cant answer cos they are true. So the saying is true, STANDING UP TO A BULLY WORKS, HE IS NOW DOWN TO PETTY THEATRICS, YESSIR AND RUNNING LOL2X

 

Blah blah blah. the fact of the matter is its all in my book, all cited, all in public with my name on it and until you can actually give real examples as to why im supposedly wrong or cherry picking and put your name on them you are nothing but a sad dempsey fanboy hiding behind your heros name on an internet forum. lol. if you or perry care to take up the challenge then by all means do so, my work stands on its own two feet and i stand behind it. until you can actually add anything beyond the same tired bleating like a broken record you two and your comical trolling threads arent worth responding to. the only purpose it serves is to distract from the fact that once again mendoza is being made to look like a fool.

 

I guess you have given up, you have no answer and you want people to buy your book when you cant even respond to your own comments. The person who is now looking like a fool is you who offer nothing but manure like your comical response to Kearns "stalling". This and other spins and agendas favoring da kr appers POV await your reading pleasure, please buy his book he has cases and cases cluttering his townhouse. Post the same thing over and over dont matter to me, it leaves the door to more comical responses such as your post on the Dempsey contract.

 

Blah blah blah. the fact of the matter is its all in my book, all cited, all in public with my name on it and until you can actually give real examples as to why im supposedly wrong or cherry picking and put your name on them you are nothing but a sad dempsey fanboy hiding behind your heros name on an internet forum. lol. if you or perry care to take up the challenge then by all means do so, my work stands on its own two feet and i stand behind it. until you can actually add anything beyond the same tired bleating like a broken record you two and your comical trolling threads arent worth responding to. the only purpose it serves is to distract from the fact that once again mendoza is being made to look like a fool.

 

Thank you for leaving the door so that I can further expose your rants, that have no substance other than your ravings the You do remember the famous "muscular bald black men", and the Archer conspiracy? You cant make this stuff up these are your own words and the Archer conspiracy, priceless gems of a famed historian such as yourself. Really when you say something you should back it up.

Again thank you for leaving the door open so that I can respond, I was wanting to answer each and every point you made. Now that you respond I can respond to your comments. Thank you

 

Blah blah blah. the fact of the matter is its all in my book, all cited, all in public with my name on it and until you can actually give real examples as to why im supposedly wrong or cherry picking and put your name on them you are nothing but a sad dempsey fanboy hiding behind your heros name on an internet forum. lol. if you or perry care to take up the challenge then by all means do so, my work stands on its own two feet and i stand behind it. until you can actually add anything beyond the same tired bleating like a broken record you two and your comical trolling threads arent worth responding to. the only purpose it serves is to distract from the fact that once again mendoza is being made to look like a fool.

 

Oh thank you so much as I said you opened the door.

You said:The problem here is that Mendoza puts so much stock in the minority reports such as the Burns, Flynn, Jeffries, and Ketchel whereby overzealous newspapermen, even ehile admitting these contests were ond sided, wrote them in a way to make them more exciting to readers giving the impression that they were more competetive than they were.

Here you are right cos that was their job, remember it was their job to make things interesting for the readers much like todays newspaper and media writers job is to sell their stories


You said:It is not uncommon to read an article by someone who was not present at these fights, who read these exciting accounts and then later saw the films, to wonder allowed what the original writer was watching as its clear that in each instance Johnson was not only in control but that his opponent was a mere plaything to him.

And this is news to you, a MW fighting an ATG HW, did you actually expect it to be different

You said:In both the Burns and Ketchel fights he literally catches the fighter after a KD and hoists him up, so dominant is he that he can literally carry them.

You left out the part that in both cases he was the bigger guy, and he was a boxer and they were punchers. A good boxer has an edge to start off cos the puncher has to come in and in doing so the boxer can counter him and jab him to death, plus Johnson was the much bigger guy, so what is the big deal. Johnson had everything to win, and the smaller guys had only had a slim punchers chance.

You said:Against Flynn and Jeffries he won as he pleased, never having to open up even 50%. Anyone claiming otherwise has an agenda of their head up their ass.

In both cases Johnson had a gimme in front of him, in fact the Burns, Ketchel, Flynn and Jeffries were all gimme's which one of any of those had even a slight chance? None that's who.


You said: I dont give two ****s what Ketchel's weight was. You arent going to distract me from the point. The point was that Ketchel got his ass royally kicked by Johnson, didnt have a look-in in the fight, and was hurt so bad that he admitted that he never fully recovered by the time he died. Those are his words. HIS WORDS, not some ****ing clown posting lies on the internet 100 years later.

Here again, you forgot to post your source. Did you actually think this was a fight that Ketchel had a chance to win. Even a slap happy intellectual as yourself should know that, after all ketchel was a MW and Johnson an atg HW. What happened in that fight was supposed to happen.

You said:I couldnt care less whether Sam Langford had some of his facts right or wrong, his main point is what was central to his comment: That Langford felt Johnson was the greatest.

He also said Dempsey was the greatest, so what.


You said: Barring the fact that Greb is not "my hero" you are correct, you havent researched him or this era 1/1000 as much as I have so you and clowns like perry and mendoza would be wise to sit down, shut the **** up, and listen when you see me post on the rare occasion rather than joust at windmills by arguing with me on a subject you know nothing about.

Exactly my point when you add your biased remarks, the fantasy is your read on things. I challenge you to point out where I am wrong, in what I post especially about the stalling, the contract, what you have replied reinforces my thought that you dont really know what you're talking about

You said: The fact is that Ive answered your post in regards to Firpo more than once before you even posted it. You were present and active on those threads and if you had the necessary intelligence you could search them out and find them for future reference. If you werent busy popping off like a jackass you might have noted the answers to your questions. My time is too valuable to repeat myself ad nauseum just to entertain some lonely shut-in.

Was this your answer? “No but I dont give a guy any credit for running from a fight either. Greb was game and wanted it. Firpo, in his own words wanted someone less threatening. That says enough for me.” It sounds to me that you are making a mountain out of a molehill. Firpo wanted somebody less threatening then a punchless, 5’8 MW, c’mon be serious. Anyway where is the “citation”, oh yeah it’s in your book, and if it’s in your book it has to be true. Sorry but I think you are free and loose with facts and then to make it worse you add your own interpretation of those “facts”, to fit your storyline.

You said: And anytime you care to give me actual examples where I did that we can have that debate.

I have, you choose to ignore them your excuse is I don’t have the sources well, neither do you and you are asking us to blindly accept your version of things, yeah right.

You said: The fact remains, its preserved on these forums for posterity, that every time youve accused me of that its been ME who has posted a comprehensive collection of sources to back up my point, something NOBODY else on this forum takes the time to do, and you who has come with the minority of reports that "support" (if using one or two out 40 can be called support) his argument.

Remember when you posted an avalanche of posts, that was when you posted and commented on the “Kearns stalling killed the Greb match in Pitts then you further embarrassed yourself by your beyond dumb explanation. Why not say it, you don’t know what you are talking about when it comes to just boxing, if it isn’t in an article, in other words you lack commonsense.


I have more just leave the door open, thank you