Setting the record straight on Marvin Hart. Apollack's book on Hart

In the Ring With Marvin Hart should be released in a week or two at the most. It has more than enough on the Hart-Johnson pre-fight training and analysis, the fight itself, and post-fight analysis and discussion, offering several local San Francisco newspapers' discussion of the fight from the time it happened (where it happened), as well as some national papers' reports. Enjoy! It will be available via amazon.com and some various web book sellers.

 

True but not the order of the day and Ive posted some articles whein the author made his feelings clear Hart cought an ass whippng.

 

I think the point is that a persons personal bias is not dictated by whether he voted for or against Hart. The fact that someone voted for Hart should not be indicative of personal bias considering the reports and the conditions.

 

So if Jeffries at ringside considered Hart the winner Hart really beat Johnson????

 

And just because George Siler didnt like the decision Johnson won????

When did Jeffries opinion ever factor into this discussion?

In fact most reports state pretty clearly that regardless of who won neither man was even close to Jeffries class at this time.

 

After this fight Johnson lost by dsq to Jeanette 8months later, then went 10 years without defeat.
He was in Jeffries class allright , and some speculate that Jeffries retired because the mounting pressure to fight Johnson , had gone from a whisper to a shout.

 

Those who actually saw him fight on that day disagree with you apparently.

 

Couple of points. I think Johnson was a great fighter. I dont think the Hart loss detracts from that. Stylistically I think hes a nightmare for tons of great fighters of the past and future.

The full 20 rounds of Johnson-Moran do not exist.

My take on Johnson is that he was sort of like Hopkins during the latter stage of Hopkins career in that he was a master of minimizing the action to suit his pace and winning ugly. He did this in plenty of the films we have.

This has always been troubling to me because in the Willard film which he was well past his prime and overweight he actually shows that he could really fight his ass off when he chose to. However, he was a guy who marched to his drummer, I wont say he was a headcase per se but at the very least he was headstrong to the point of self destruction. I think this showed in the Hart fight. He was told how he should fight to catch the eye of the judge. He was told this primarily because he already had a bad reputation of a guy who would not give the fans their money's worth. Despite this he chose to fight at his own pace and win ugly. It was a head strong strategy and ultimately worked against him.

We also need to keep in mind something that we would do well to remember in our own day and age. Fighters who were not percieved as fighting to the best of their ability, as hard as possible, were OFTEN penalized for not giving the fans their money's worth. Promoters and referees were instructed to protect the customers who PAID HARD EARNED DOLLARS to see a fight. If your style was to lay back and wait, or clinch to minimize action: Tough ****. The guy who tore in and made a fight was going to be getting a lot of credit. A lot of times if you showed to advantage in skill but chose to lay back and counter the prevailing wisdom was "If hes that good why doesnt he just cut loose and kick this guys ass??" It was seen as stalling, dishonest, lazy, and possibly crooked in regards to betting and the possibility of stringing along fight films (which we know Johnson did on at least one occasion) and was not tolerated in many instances.

In an era of John Ruiz's etc where fighters often go out of their way to only do enough to win fans would do very well to remember that this was not always how the sport was and that its not wrong to demand your money's worth.

You can look down through records of the first 20 to 30 years of the 20th century in boxing and see a plethora of fights that were decided by who got out there and fought his heart out, not by who looked to be the more skilled, or pretty fighter. Color didnt have to have anything to do with it, it was more about protecting the consumer.

The sport has surely changed over the last 100 years but not always for the better and we ought to remember that lest we judge these things far out of context.

 

]
I'll comment.
The fact that Ross and Kaufman went the distance with Johnson means nothing, he carried them, read the accounts of the fights.
By all accounts shown here ,Johnson v Hart was a close fight,and does not resemble the description you posted of a supposed quote from Johnson ,"he beat me,he beat me good".
Geoffrey Ward the author of UB,pays fullsome tribute to Randy Roberts ,the author of" Papa Jack ,"which you declare has many inaccuracies in it.
Roberts spent 3 years researching his book and he is a meticulous fact finder ,and a professor of history.
Your comment about Johnson being a "much better in fighter than out fighter "is one you repeat often, it seems reasonable but fails to take in to account how Johnson actually fought.
Johnson boxed off the back foot, he did not often take the initiative, waiting for his opponent to lead ,he would then counter ,who outboxed him at long range?

Please do not say O Brien, he ran.

Johnson did not lead he drew his opponent in.

Flynn a journeyman?
Well he had beaten, Kaufmann,Morris,Squires, Ross,Gardner ,and Langford at that point and 6 years later, when aging ,he kod Dempsey in 1rd.

By the way he was 5' 10" .

Because Hart was a heavyweight he could be competitive with Johnson ?

This implies that Johnson could only dominate smaller men,and that men his own size were equal to him.
Who ever outmuscled , or out hit a prime Johnson during his 10 year unbeaten run ?

Who in his long unbeaten run , looked the better man
against him ?

Johnson was allready 30years old when he finally got his title shot, he was 34 when he defended against Flynn and 36 and 20lbs over weight when he beat Moran.

Most of the Moran fight is extant, including the clip of Johnson breaking Moran's nose with a single uppercut,and Moran landing a single heavy punch ,with Johnson standing back and clapping his hands in mock apreciation of him .
A 36 year old Champion out of shape clearly beat Moran, you of course think differently.

Ketchel at 170 1/4lbs was 2 1/4lbs heavier than Billy Conn was when he gave Louis a boxing lesson for 13 rds.
Johnson carried Ketchel ,when he floored him or dazed him ,he quickly grabbed him and stood him back upright.
Ketchel did not win a round.

We have been over the suspect chin before and posters agreed with me that Johnson's chin was not suspect.

From 1901 when Choynski stopped him, when Johnson was short of his prime, till 1924 when he was stopped on a corner retirement at age 48,Johnson was kod ONCE, by Willard, when Johnson was 37 years old and it took the giant Willard 26 rds to accomplish it.

So lets put this bull**** to bed.

Illegal hitting and holding ?
Johnson fought to the rules of the day, he was a clean fighter,even when fouled repeatedly by Flynn and Kaufmann he did not reply in kind,his superiority was such that he had no need to.

His opponents were perfectly entitled to adopt the same tactics.

You pick out the Moran ,and Willard fights ,to somehow show Johnson negatively,in the first he was 20lbs over weight and 36 years old .

In the second ,against a giant, he was 37, and well in front after 15 rds, he was still leading going into the 20th rd, but his lack of training , years of dissipation , and age, meant his stamina ran out, and he was kod in the 26th rd by a tremendous overhand right,after putting up a very courageous fight, in tropical heat,and don't say it wasn't hot.

"It was hotter than hell in there", a trained to the minute Willard.

Surpisingly your final analysis of the Hart Johnson fight, I agree with, except that "throwing punches" should not guarantee you the decision,they should have to actually land to score


One things for sure, Hart did not," beat him good" ,at all, did he?.

 

I think that you nailed a lot of soild , sound points here .. his style as a latter day Hopkins, his fighting enough to win , his fighting to his own drummer, the offense he showed as a fat 37 year old man v.s. Willard ...however for a close fight against a Marvin Hart, something was not right ,, even if he won 13 rounds ... the terrible output in such an important fight against a top white contender ... something else does not add up to me ...

As much as I have admired him as fascinating character I'm starting to think he might have been prettyt lucky to have never fought a prime Jeffries or Langford ... if he had trouble with Hart, these guys might have torn him a new as-hle ...

 

I think that you nailed a lot of soild , sound points here .. his style as a latter day Hopkins, his fighting enough to win , his fighting to his own drummer, the offense he showed as a fat 37 year old man v.s. Willard ...however for a close fight against a Marvin Hart, something was not right ,, even if he won 13 rounds ... the terrible output in such an important fight against a top white contender ... something else does not add up to me ...

As much as I have admired him as fascinating character I'm starting to think he might have been prettyt lucky to have never fought a prime Jeffries or Langford ... if he had trouble with Hart, these guys might have torn him a new as-hle ... Whenever I read about a Jeannette or other black fighters from that day having said Langford would have taken his title at any time or other old timers write that he was lucky he did not fight Jeffries in 1905 I've laughed it off but I'm not so quick to anymore ...like anyone else he was a stylistic match up ...

 

Or maybe Jack had stamina, conditioning issues?
From reports Hart had his main success by coming on strong in the later rounds(his strong suit) and maybe Johnson spoiled/fought in spurts to minimize energy usage.

 

Tony Ross,real name Antonio Rossilano.
.
"Again Johnson showed up tired and out of shape,and received a cool reception, in the first round he broke Ross's nose and split the white boxer's lip.Then, after knocking him down,Johnson slowed down and allowed Ross to finish the 6rd fight".

Al Kaufmann.
"Kaufmann was no O Brien ,or Ross,A former blacksmith ,he was a big strong experienced heavyweight".

" Kaufmann trained hard, and tried his best, but he was unable to hit the overweight and, only modestly serious Johnson."

"E.D Burrows,who covered the fight for the San Francisco Bulletin, estimated that Kaufmann landed no more than a half a dozen clean punches ,and those only stirred Johnson into action.For every punch he landed,he was forced to pay a dear price.Johnson won,he wrote, without even trying"

You have a crap ,cobbled together article written by, A N Onymous. and expect us to beleive he is writing Johnson's own words?

We have established that it was a close fight ,so why on earth would Johnson state Hart beat him good ?

Johnson would have no chance against Jeffries in 1905 ?
Plenty of people thought Jeffries retired , rather than take a chance of being whipped by the black man. Plenty of people clamoured for Jeffries to defend against Johnson.
No one clamoured for Jeffries to fight Hart did they?
I would guess just about every poster on here, except you ,would give Johnson a live chance against Jeffries in 1905.
The fight with Hart proved jack **** about Johnson's chances with Jeffries.

You have Geoffrey C Ward, and Randy Roberts mixed up ,I think.
Ward is the one who has written ONE book on boxing ,using much of the research collated by Roberts, and, collaborating with the documentarian Ken Burns.
Randy Roberts has written countless books on the period of American History that Johnson's career encompasses.
He has written detailed, and concise volumes on American History in general and, the history of American Blacks in particular.
Roberts has written acclaimed boxing books on .
Jack Johnson_"Papa Jack".The praise heaped on this biography is well known.
"Jack Dempsey"
The Trial Of MIke Tyson,
And a History of Sports in America.

Roberts teaches [or did, when he wrote Dempsey and Johnson],
history at the Sam Houston State University ,Huntsville Texas.
In short he knows, what he writes about.

I've read reports that O Brien ran like a thief while Johnson loafed , and they were booed for it.It was a no dec 6 rounder.O Brien could not win unless he kod Johnson, very unlikely and Johnson knowing it, took advantage of it to come into the ring hungover, and out of shape in short he pissed on the public ,but did not care, he was on a $5,000 guarantee .
Johnson was 36, and out of shape when he fought Moran, from the footage available, I think he wins clearly.
I see no evidence of Willard out boxing Johnson at long range ,Johnson 37, and fat, took the fight to Willard but, the giant Kansan,absorbed the punishment ,and outlasted him .
I beleive the ko to be legit.
Jim Johnson was NOT robbed, he was coming on strong while the Champion was fading and fighting with a broken left arm.A draw was probably the right result ,though the fight was not entertaining by all accounts.
Johnson had not fought in a year and a half and had been carousing and indulging his prodigious appetites ,for sometime before that.

The Ketchel fight was pre arranged ,Johnson ,would take it easy on Ketchel ,and let him go the route,that way the film footage would be worth more.
Ketchel did not live up to his part of the script, threw his best and paid the price, Johnson can clearly be seen picking him up and setting him back on his feet after he is dazed from a couple of Jack's shots.
The fix was in Ketchel's favour NOT Johnson's he could have taken Stanley out quick if he had wanted to.When stirred to action he emphatically proved it.
Flynn did have a win over Langford ,when he fought Johnson, along with wins over other contenders.
Johnson was not concerned about other black fighters he tolerated them but had no special rapport with them, apart from Sam Mcvey, he was friendly with Ferguson ,and very close to Ketchel.
Johnson did not give a **** about "his legacy" he was concerned about gold and how he could get it into the pocket of Jack Johnson ,and he found the easiest way to do it was by fighting white hopes.
The public wanted him to face them, and he obliged.

In over 80 fights Johnson was dsqd ONCE, he could have fouled out to Willard when he knew he was finished and spent, after the 20th round ,he was fading ,realised he couldnt ko the giant, that he would not last the 45rds scheduled, and would take a beating , but he continued to try and win.
.
Harry Wills fouled out to Sharkey in much less adverse conditions.

Johnson was a clean fighter.

I think I have answered your questions ,I write this without any expectation of you considering my points objectively, so there is no real point in extending this further, you just rehash the same old tired spin about Johnson losing to O Brien ,being kod by Smith, neither happened but it pleases you, so be my guest.