Time to lay to rest the nonsense that Jack Johnson feasted on smaller opponents.

Keep it up Ben, unbelievable work!

I think Jeffries still could have beaten many of those 180lb top 10 ring magazine fighters. Not a guy like Jeanette, but certainly a Al Kaufman type.

 

Excellent case.

Johnson fought top opponents for a very long time. His only decisive defeat between 1901 and 1926 or so was to Willard in a finish fight which he dominated for over 20 rounds. There was a reason observers such as Nat Fleischer considered him the best.

 

I suppose I've underrated Johnson's opposition in the past, but after further study, I do think that it was better than many have credited him for.. There are few champions who can genuinely claim that they fought anyone and everyone in their respective eras, but I think Jack probably holds the strongest claim for doing so. Even though I've never thought much of Jess Willard, I can't imagine the hell that it must have been for Johnson to be wrestling with him on the clinches for 40 rounds and in his late 30's...

 

Good stuff Janitor.

I believe Johnson has taken a bit much of a knock lately because his title reign not being much and him not taking on Langord's challenge. But just as Louis and Ali he beat everyone of his era, and took on just about every style and size there was. You have served some good reminders of that lately, you stalwart against reviosionism, you.

 

Those big men don't impress me. Willard had very little skill. Martin had big durability problems. Jeffries hadn't had a fight for a full damn 5 years. Ferguson wasn't any good to begin with. Mcvey looks **** on film and Johnson avoided him once he reached his prime.

Having said that, similar criticism can be made of basically every champion before Ali. Different times, different athletic composition. My main problem with Johnson's resume is his pathetic title reign and the blatant duck job of the main challengers. I don't care if he already beat them when they were 6 fight novices or superwelterweights; when they reached their primes he didn't fight them, over a broad time window. His longetivity is excellent, though.

 

It's not an argument of extremes. No one in their right mind is claiming Johnson was crap or fought only featherweights. Personally, I just feel he is over-rated by certain enthusiasts, which is fine... we all have our favorites where we are not objective.

That said, Denver Ed Martin was huge, just not that good. He was getting KO'd, fought to a draw or losing to guys with less than a dozen fights. Granted, Johnson and McVea were on the list, but it was a very green McVea, who himself is lionized a bit beyond what he deserves.

Ferguson was damn near a career .500 fighter. His best win is over a welterweight and a one-off vs. Jeanette. He lost to plenty of barely recognizable or unrecognizable fighters. He just wasn't that good.

Many of the very best fighters Johnson faced were smaller than he. Langford, Ketchell, O'Brien, Flynn, Burns and Choysnki. And he had his trouble with a few of these.

Again, the argument is not black or white, not extremes of difference in opinion, but rather it is shades of grey. Johnson was a very, very good fighter and a great in the sport of boxing.

 

This is a reasonable and well balanced assessment.

 

Personally, I feel the pre-1920's era was weaker than after it. Obviously there were some outstanding fighters in the period who could hold their own with any fighter from any other period but in terms of depth and 'second-rate' fighters I think the era of 1890s-1920 is very poor.

My main reason is men were not receiving any great boxing training from trainers, obviously there were some trainers for the top fighters and young fighters would learn from older fighters. But many fighters learnt to fight themselves, and no fighter can be that good from training themselves. Most of the second tier sort of guys would have trained themselves so in turn wouldnt have been as good as they had the potential to be. And since only the top guys had trainers there was hardly any depth in the division.

So because of this I find it hard to rate Johnson that highly as his era was weak compared to other era's, however, I am open to changing my mind and I would be extremly interested in what Janitor has to say on this.

 

Denver Ed Martin WAS a good fighter. He beat some top fighters like Frank Childs, Sam McVea, Bob Armstrong, and Hank Griffin. Martin was the coloured heavyweight champion and considered a major opponent for jeffries in late 1902. I have film of him sparring with gus ruhlin, he tooled on ruhlin.

 

Great post, Janitor! Jack was certainly one of the all-time greats in the heavyweight division!

 

This is a feeling I get as well. When did boxing gyms become frequent and an absolute in every fighter's development?