Had a few vbeers which cleared up my thinking! Recently a few of the most knowledgeable posters, notably Mc Vey and Mendoza, but also several others persued each other throughout different threads regarding the relative merits of Jack johnson and Jim Jeffries. I personally think Johnson would beat Jeff on their best day but I rate both highly and have no axe to grind either way. The thread that Jeff beat better opponents as champ than Jack was no-contest to me-he did. Mendoza IMO opinion sullied his argument by dissing all of JJ accomplishments(considerable) pre-championshipment in order to demean Johnson. However I have to re-kick-start this thread in the following manner. JOHNSON'S SIX BEST POTENTIAL OPPONENTS(IMO) DURING HIS REIGN WERE LANGFORD, JEANNETTE, MCVEY, CLARKE, MCCARTHY AND SMITH, without anY reasonable argument. He fought NONE of them. He might have beaten the lot-he didn't! I think he was a massive great fighter from say(without boxrec!) 03 to 09 but after that(and he was getting old) he wasn't really proving the best man on the planet. Flynn(when Jack beat him) and Moran were not even close to the best of the white hopes. Dont get me wrong, i think Johnson was -or close- a top 10 all-time guy but as serious "historians" (taking ourselves too seriously?) we cannot ignore his title reign. GLOVE UP!
