Were we lied to about Johnson vs Ketchel?

STFU up already, I showed you, Johnson, saying he was hurt and the press at hand saying he was dazed at the end of the fight. Deal with it. You were shown up. Or say you're correct if you have the integrity to do so.

As for the purse of Johnson vs. Johnson, you said you knew it. Pollack said the purse remains unknown. I'll take his word over yours List the number, liar liar. I have only mocked you for lying 10 times on this topic and will continue to do so.

I have zero upside wagering with a person who welches on bets. I never said Fitz vs Ruhlin can be seen, only that it was filmed. And it was. I never said where or how. I showed the IMDB database proven it was. You lose. Read below:


[url]Life Motion Photographs of the Fitzsimmons and Ruhlin Fight[/url](1900)

Summaries

• Complete in six rounds, including training pictures. Needless to say, this is the finest film ever taken. Even though the pictures were taken at enormous expense, the price of the films is within reach of all exhibitors. The greatest money maker.

Release Dates
[url]USA[/url] August 1900
Also Known As (AKA)
(original title) Life Motion Photographs of the Fitzsimmons and Ruhlin Fight
USA (alternative title) Fitzsimmons-Ruhlin, 6 Rounds, and Training Pictures
USA (alternative title) The Only Original Fitzsimmons-Ruhlin Fight

Link proving it was filmed, by IMDB:
[url]https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0302719/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1[/url]

Some day you'll be banned again, hopefully for good.

And once again, you may find one paper that said Johnson vs Ketchel was fixed, I can find double that do not mention a fix.

 

Read what Johnson said after the fight.

[url]https://timesmachine.nytimes.com/timesmachine/1909/10/17/101040198.pdf[/url]

 

Anyone who thinks that knockdown of Johnson was legit falls into one of three categories: 1. Never watched a boxing match in their life. 2. Stupid as hell. 3. Wants to believe so bad in the idea that Ketchel could punch that hard, or Johnson was that vulnerable, that theyve convinced themselves that punch was legit. Otherwise anyone with any amount of sense can see the punch goes around the back of Johnson's head and that Johnson was already falling forward BEFORE the punch landed. And no, we are not missing frames from that film, if your lame reply is "Well we dont get to see the whole sequence because frames are missing." I guess your next retort is that the times (yes plural) that Johnson knocks Ketchel down only to either hold him up, or scoop him up like a child and set him back on his feet, were just accidents and that happens all of the time in boxing when a much larger fighter is really trying to stop his smaller, overmatched opponent... Get real. Nevermind that Johnson bruised and bloodied Ketchel throughout the fight without even trying. Ketchel was like a babe in his hands, but yeah, go on believing he just surprised or double crossed Johnson prompting Johnson to finally get serious. LOL.

 

Oh please. You of all people should know this is an old film, and your only looking at it from one angle, which is hardly conclusive.

What other angle have you seen of the knockdown? Might the film here be missing a frame or two? It is common for older films to be missing frames or be blurred at best moments the people of the times wanted to see replays, which lead to extra wear and tear on the film itself at the moment of interest. The Fitz vs. Corbett film is an example as a KO if missing frames. What happens here, we see a body shot then Corbett loos to be falling out of nowhere But we all know what happened

Sports photographs often are poorly used of proof , as they are often taken slightly before or after the moment of contact. If this were NFL football, I could show you 100’s of photos that look like the player was out or in bounds deepening on the moment when the photo was taken. If this were boxing, I could show you a photo of a punch that landed, but look like it missed on a photograph taken split seconds after contact. You should know better.

Johnson looks like he was getting ready to duck the punch and gets caught in the back of the head, which for anyone who knows boxing can screw up the equilibrium. He got up hurt and angry and flattened Ketchell, which I doubt was something Ketchell himself would agree to.

If this was a fixed fight, Ketchell sure took a beating, and Johnson holding Ketchell up, if you look closely, was because his arm was underneath Ketchell’s armpit. ( going on memory here ) It’s simply Johnson being himself playing with a much shorter and lighter overmatched opponent. Johnson did the same thing to Burns on film as well, do you think that one was fixed too?

Johnson testimonial after the fight is crystal clear. Ketchell hurt him and gave him the sorest jaw he could remember. And those at ringside said Johnson was dazed by the punch that floored him. I posted the new link.

PS: What is your estimate of Ketchell’s weight? 170 looks like total BS to me. Under 160 looks more accurate.

 

In regards to Johnson's comments, he may still have been trying to sell a rematch... As was often done in the days. Fix the first, fight the second.

In regards to the KD, I have seen plenty as strange. Ketchel connected, Johnson went down. Nuff said.

 

The fight advertised as the Ruhlin v Fitzsimmons one is a re-enactment.made by Lublin this has been confirmed by Odd,Pollack,Ward and Klompton
So once again you run away from a challenge.Ive told you I will post the amount Johnson received for the fight
on the condition that you leave the forum for good.If I can' t do so I will leave.
You say I am lying,that I don't know the amount. I''m prepared to prove I do.
You on the other hand,are not willing to put your accusation to the test by accepting the bet.
In short you are a COWARD!