Was Fireman Flynn a good title choice for Johnson in 1912?

http://news.google.com/newspapers?i...AAIBAJ&pg=5174,4734993&dq=sharkey+burns&hl=en

This one shows, hints of Sharkey Fitzsimmons III! Johnson should have given Fitz a rematch!

Willard McCarthy is an interesting fight, it is hard to see how McCarthy could be at the top of the tree when he can only draw with Jess Willard. Jeanette, seemed from the tone of the article to have been higher thought of than Willard or McCarthy although it is only one article.

 

Well agendas can be nullified easily enough, if they are so blatantly

obvious that everyone is aware of them ,don't you think? :good

 

Burns certainly seems to have improved in the smack talking department:

http://news.google.com/newspapers?i...AAIBAJ&pg=3817,3544550&dq=sharkey+burns&hl=en

It is a shame that Burns didnt have a few bouts against top contenders. I get the feeling that if nothing else, he was still one of the better white contenders adn probably deserved a second shot at Johnson at least as much as Flynn in era where there really were no deserving white contenders it seems. Obviously Johnson shouldnt be criticised for not rematching him though.

 

Burns was a very good fighter, he just could not handle Johnson, and he really did not fight anyone to give him respectability as a challenger in 1912.
Flynn was no wonder man ,he had been unconscious for over 4 minutes when Johnson kod him the first time, but Barney Curley parlayed his wins over Morris, and Kaufman, into making him a rejuvenated title threat ,and the bout made money,which is the name of the game.

 

I thnk McCarty was a "what might have been, " rather than a, "what actually was".
Johnson, no shrinking violet ,stated that Fitz was well past it ,when he kod the grand old man.

 

http://news.google.com/newspapers?i...AAAIBAJ&pg=6142,185358&dq=sharkey+burns&hl=en

Here is another one with the Johnson Corbett feud getting pretty bitter. It is quite clear i think that Jeanette, Langford and McVey were seen as the three best challengers, although this is offset by the American authorities refusing to sanction the Jeanette fight.

It is also interesting that there is so much talk of the public supporting Jack, and the calls for the black trio to be given the chance. It really does seem taht among most of the public, at least, the racial card is a little overstated. Although obviously the few in power might be a different story.

 

What do we make of Johnson's claims of Corbetts alleged bribes? And the claim Mitchell took a dive

 

The money for Johnson to fight any of the leading black contenders, was poor in comparison with what he received against the White Hopes, this pertained especially to the States.
Barney Curley, a leading promoter stated Blacks against each other, for the heavyweight title did not draw.
Add to this ,some commissions would not sanction such bouts ,and the situation was pretty hopeless.
Corbett had some nerve attacking Johnson,Corbett dodged Peter Jackson for years, he was a nasty racist individual who was involved ,as Johnson said ,in several fixed fights , .it's not generally known, but Corbett was arraigned for beating up his wife on one occasion,and often travelled across state lines with prostitutes of course ,he was white so that made a difference. :hey
Thanks again for the info ,allways good to see :good

 

The grand old man probably was passed it, and probably couldnt compete with Johnson by then (never count out the great one) but unlike many stories of fixes, excuses etc, this version by Fitz of the Johnson Fitz is probably pretty accurate. Certainly, Fitz' excuses at least came before the fight.

http://trove.nla.gov.au/ndp/del/article/57556714?searchTerm=fitzsimmons spar&searchLimits=

 

My post adressed your points ,and conclusively refuted them.
Its McCarty and Dilllon by the way, not McCarthy, and Dillion. I asked you who either of these ,and Smith had beaten up to 4th July 1912,[the date of the Flynn fight], which would justify them getting a title shot?
You did not reply.

 

One other thing that should also be noted, is that Flynn's manager had friends in the press. They seized upon Flynns recent sucess to argue the case for Flynn to fight for the title.

That plus his managers ability to put up $30 000 sealed the deal.

 

This is the clincher Johnson stated in print he would fight ANYONE in defence of his title ,for what Burns received when he challenged him,namely $30,000.

 

As with McCarty, Dillon, and Smith ,please show whom Clark had beaten up to the 4th of July 1912 ,that would indicate he was a credible contender for Johnson's title . A month after this date, Clark could only draw with Kid Cotton, a Johnson sparring partner.
Why you mentioned Dillon is a mystery:huh
Dillon had not only ,never fought a heavyweight at that time ,he had never fought a light heavyweight ,and had recently been beaten in his challenge for the middleweight title.
Two years after this date, Dillon could only draw with Flynn, the man you think he should have replaced in 1912.:huh

In your desperation to smear Johnson ,rationality ,and objectivity ,have clearly flown swiftly out of the window.
Calm down, Old Pal , marshall your troops and regroup:good

 

http://cdnc.ucr.edu/cdnc/cgi-bin/cd...-20--1----greatest+fighter+of+all+time-all---

This is an interesting article, in that it shows that Fireman Jim Flynn and Sam Langford must have both been very good draws at around about this time. Obviously the article sounds like it is a abit of a PR piece, but it seems that the Fireman was probably a bit more popular than we give him credit for. Which does explain why he got so many chances and even why he (arguably) was thought good enough for some to waste money paying off Jack Dempsey for a dive.