What If...Burns had drawn the color line

I've read those books,you haven't ,so who would be best placed to comment on their content?
I'm not obsessed about Johnson ,I don't care for his style at all ,but I will always expose liars.
Johnson named Fitzsimmons as the best heavyweight before himself.
Burns announced he was in the best condition of his life when he faced Johnson,shedding some surplus he trained diligently and gave public workouts.
Burns weight fluctuated , inclined to chubbiness he was only170lbs when he fought Flynn.

Kevin Smith did not say Burns had jaundice and I remember him coming on this forum and telling you not to put words into his mouth he hadn't spoken.
Jeffries was not fat when he faced Johnson, and at 36 was hardly old,no older than Corbett was when he fought Jeffries and younger than Jackson,Goddard, and Fitz were when they fought Jeffries.
The obsession is all with you ,you are a sad,deluded, and pitiful man drawn to Johnson threads like a moth to a flame. .

 

Because who were ranked opponents when it happened. Nope. Ring Magazine did not start official rankings until the 1920, and no historians or fighter of the times from 1899-1905 felt Langford or Jeanette was a top ten guy. Not one of them.

Langford was a newbie a heavyweight, Jeanette would not be ranked with his record. McVey would be ranked in the top ten, but the man quit boxing for over a year in 1905.

The mature versions of Langford who beat better competition than Johnson did when Johnson was champion by far IMO beat Johnson. I already explained in 1909, Johnson absolute prime he was out boxed by 160 pound Jack OBrien, TKO'd in a 4 round exhibition match by GunBoat Smith, who was a novice at the time and floored and by his own admission hurt by a 155-160 pound Stanley Ketchel.

Yes-- This happened to the heavyweight champion of the world. Langford would cap him, plain and simple. Just watch his films, Sam's far more impressive. Mature versions of Jeannette and Mcvey were also far better than anyone Johnson beat as champion. Johnsons title run was a sham. He beat the shell of Jeffries, edged Moran, and got stoped by Willard.

The Jeanette Johnson beat shows Jeanette has a losing or .500 record fo his fight with Johnson. How on earth was this a good win?

Who says the Hart fight was a bad decision? I do not recall Johnson ever saying it. He gave Hart praise and was out worked.

This thread is about what happens if the colour line is drawn. Yes, Johnson would then have o face prime version's or of Langford, Jeanette and Mcvey. He's losing his share. As champion Johnson didn't even fight the best white fighters.

Example: Asside from GunBoat Smith knocking Johnson silly, Smith beat many of the best around including Langford, and many who received title shots from Johnson in Flynn, Moran, Willard, and Ross! Where is his Smith's title shot? He beat the same title opponents better than Johnson did.

McCarty was viewed as the best white hope, I don't think Johnson wanted him.

My view is Burns would lose the title even with the color line in play, possibly to Smith or McCarthy. Possibly to Ketchel in 1909. I don't think Burns matches up with a bigger durable man at all but he could have held on to the title until 1910.

Johnson would have more losses on his resume for sure, and might be historically viewed behind Sam Langford. If they fought 5 times, I see Langford winning three of the,. I do think Johnson had the limited McVey's number. 4-1 in a 5 fight series. If not in shape Johnson is losing to Jeanette. I'll give the edge to jack 3-2. Remember these two ( Johnson and Jeannette ) were close at the end of their sires. Johnson probably would have lost to Wills in 1914 and beyond. And we saw the trouble that Jim Battling Johnson gave him, so if they fought three times I could see 1-1-1.

Any win over a prime Langford, Jeannette or Mcvey would be his best. It never happened.

 

Smith. " Yes it appears Burns had something of a jaundice. " There is evidence Burns had a Jaundice. " - Kevin Smith. I showed you an additional source in the Tommy Burns book ,complete with the page number and link to read it. " Burns appeared yellow and sick according to those at ringside "

Go fish again McVey. Yes you are an obsessed fan and yes you have detailed antipathy for any accomplished white champions at heavyweight. Rocky Marciano lacked one punch power you said. Whatever.

Your a sad old man with a fading memory. Its' like your hearing this for the first time as I sure correct you often enough. You got Jeffries age wrong, DUH, and Corbett was 33 when Jeffries first beat him which is far away from the 36 you claim. How pathetic you are. " All in " every time facts come out you don't like only to be whacked into oblivion. Having fun? You can't count or remember jack. That much has been proven 10X over. I hope for your sake you don't play poker On second thought I take that back!

Why was Burns at a low weight for Johnson? 168 pounds in a fight where he needed weight. Hmmmm.

I read my share of books, its obvious you pick and choose what you like from them and don't even watch the films.

 

@mattdonnellon has them all top 10 opponents when Johnson beat them so ask him.

Ill ignore all nonsense about Johnson as champ because in this thread those fights don't happen any more.

Trying to decipher what youve said into something vaguely on topic, what you're saying is you think he wins his series of fights anyways against McVey and Jeannette, but loses to Langford via ko 3 out of 5?

My only issue with that is, if Johnson beat Langford by being too big for him, surely later on in their respective careers he's still too big for him right?

 

Those aren't not official rankings. Who did Sam even beat at heavyweight in 1906? You tell me. He could not be ranked at heavy. And Joe J had a losing record or maybe was .500 at times, he could not be ranked either.

Yes I think Langford in his prime was better 1909-1915, and also beat WAY better competition during this time frame,and did better vs the common " white hopes that Johnson fought " if want to drill down. Facts

185 vs 156 is too much weight. Age 20 ( Langford ) vs age 28. ( Johnson ) And Sam was new to heavyweight! You won't find many 156 beating 185 in boxing history, and when it happens the winner was't 20 year old. A mature heavyweight Langford was a very strong man who could in-fight or out fight with power, fight all night was was near impossible to stop. Good ring generalship and smarts too.

185 vs 200 isn't that much to give up. You find lost of examples of 185 beating 200. Johnson could be heavier and if he was he'd be an easier target for Langford skilled bombs. Johnson best wins came under 200 pounds. Yes-- I think from 1909-1915 Langford bests Johnson in a series.

Jeannete wasn't the most constant fighter, however he had a top chin, outstanding stamina and good activity. Johnson wasn't very active or at times in shape, so an upset here can happen. I think Jeanette with win 2 of 5, and maybe they draw once. I tend to think Johnson was the better from 1909-1915, however I'd pick Jeanette post 1913. Jeanette once said " When Jack won the championship he forgot his old friends and drew the color line against this own people "

Mcvey was a crude slugger left hook lead type of guy who moved forward in a straight line with little defense. Langford said he had no jab. I think Johnson out boxes him, but also might lose one via TKO/KO.

 

I told you they weren't my rankings, take it up with him. He did a thread when he made the rankings at the time, feel free to bump it.

All you've done here is repeat yourself to me.

I just said, you see Johnson winning a series of fights against McVey and Jeannette and losing a series of fights to Langford.

I don't envision Langford ever beating Johnson unless Johnson turns up out of shape, which if he was trying to force a title shot, I doubt he would do.

 

Ever hear of Jack Johnson? Jeannete got a win and a draw with him in 1906, I think that gets him comfortably into the top 10 at years end. He also had a win over Langford on his resume. Langford is more debatable but he bested Jeannette and went 15 rounds with Johnson. McVea has to be rated with a win over Denver ed Martin. Feel free to give your 1906 year-end ratings.

 

Langford was 23 when Johnson beat him ,Corbett was 36 for the second Jeffries fight,Goddard was 40 Fitz was near 40,Jackson was 37. If anyone wants to learn about Tommy Burns, Adam's book is the one to read. Not that pile of cack by Dan MacCaffrey you read,in which the author states Burns defended against a South African Jew, and a native American, both untrue,and that Johnson had his ribs broken by Burns, also untrue.immediately after the Burns fight Johnson went for a swim.
Burns was 2lbs lower than he was for the Flynn fight ,and the same weight he was for the Jem Roche defence.
You're a pitiful specimen of a man,you need psychiatric help to get you over this phobic hatred.
I hate accomplished white heavyweights? My avatar shows me with my Son and Grandson at my grandson's1st fight, we are White! My favourite heavyweight is Jack Dempsey what colour was he ?
You're not rational fella!

 

Clay Moyle an excellent source , whom I'd guess most objective posters would consider the expert on Langford states that both prime ,Johnson beats Langford.

 

It's as though he was conditioned like Pavlov's dogs, ring a bell and shout," Johnson," and he is up and barking!
A sad and sorry creature.

 

1906

The win was because Johnson went low. A DQ. Does a draw really put anyone in the top ten? Jeanette's record when he last fought Johnson according to Box rec is 10-10-1 losing four of his last six. Jeanette only beat one fighter in 1906, thats it. Come on Matt, a person with that record isn't comfortably in the top ten.

Which heavyweight did Langford beat prior to facing Johnson? Names please. If the answer is zero or one, the he should not be ranked at heavyweight. At lower weight yes.

I agree Mcvey should make the top ten somewhere by 1903 after beat Denver Ed Martin. We have common ground here, however he lost his next 3 fights in a row from 1903-1904, then quit boxing ( 1.5 years out of the game ). So his ranking was brief. Out of the ranking by 1904 out in all of 1905. Johnson was done fighting McVey by 1904, but yes I do think he was in the top ten nearly a year. By 1906 McVey had improved. No longer teenager Jack wasn't messing with him then. Yeah, I'd put McVea ( I might switch to calling him by that name ( In the top ten in 1906. 1906 was a pretty slim year at heavyweight.

I'll stand firmly on the facts made and think you should revise your 1906 rankings. Post them here, and I can probably find two more deserving fighters. Deal?

 

Mcvey says " Langford was 23 when Johnson beat him! "

" Clay Moyle an excellent source , whom I'd guess most objective posters would consider the expert on Langford . " - McVey

Clay Moyle says Langford was 20 years old when he fought Johnson! Now adjust your "thinking" if that is possible. LOL, you remain a joke, a living double standard and a broken clock. Nothing you say means much, your only regurgitating what others say and pick and choose when you say it, often contradicting yourself!

I don't care what you look like, you were banned for staring a racial thread. Like I said before, If I were to buy Adam's book, you'd be on the defensive if I quoted any part that isn't positive. What would you say then? I leave you with that. Now correct yourself.

 

Wait did you just give Johnson credit for the DQ against Jeannette!

 

No. I was talking about Jeanette not being unofficially worthy of being ranked in the top 10 in 1906. Johnson went low in round two and Jeanette could not continue. How is that justification of a good win?

I think given Johnson vast edge in experience and sometimes weight he should have pounded Jeanette, but at times drew with him. Jeanette had no amateur experience and was a novice with a sometimes long record for many fights with Johnson. By their last fight, Jeanette was 10-10-1.

 

I'm not used to you giving Johnson this much credit tbh. Don't know what to say.