What if Ring Magazine rankings had existed during Jack Johnsons career?

ONE WORD OF CAUTION, MY LISTS ARE YEAR-END(and fallable!)

 

I totally agree with your post ,and I think you phrased it very concisely.
If Jack were facing little Sam he would not have turned up in the condition he was in for fights against Kaufmann,Ross,OBrien.
That does not mean he would have been the winner ,[though I think he would prevail], but knowing the calibre of Langford,I beleive he would have been in the shape he was in for Jeffries/Burns,that Johnson beats ANY Langford imo.
Denzil Batchelor noted, in his biography of Johnson, that Jack always said that Sam McVey was his toughest opponent, maybe he was telling the truth ,but Batchelor ,and most others,[ including myself], thought Langford was the man he did not want to face again.
There would have been no chance of a gentlemanly fight to a decision,Langford hated Johnson.
It would have been a" pull out the stops war",and ,after his triumph over Burns ,Johnson was very seldom in condition for such a Frazier/Ali drag out.

 

I have taken Matts original rankings from 1899. This will be a long and length project, but i have updated the results using a solely results based update. ie. to get a top 10 ranking, you have to beat a top 10 ranking. A win over a higher rated fighter places you in their position, and everyone slides down one spot. This means that the only way to advance is to beat the best fighters. This is how the Rankings look after the end of 1900.
1 Jeffries -Beat Jack Finnegan and Jim Corbett
2 Fitzsimmons – Dunkhorst, Ruhlin, Sharkey and others
3 Ruhlin – W Finnegan, Sharkey, Kenny L Fitzsimmons – ND - Maher
4 Sharkey – W Goddard, Choynski & others L Ruhlin, Fitzsimmons
5 Corbett – W McCoy L Jeffries
6 McCoy – W Maher, Choynski, Ryan & others – L Corbett
7 O Brien – W West, Bonner and others L Young Peter Jackson(O Brien not Ranked)
8 West – W Walcott, Bonner and others L O brien Root (West not ranked at time)
9 Walcott – W Choynski, Bonner, Smith & others L West
10 Choynski – W Maher, Russel & Others. L McCoy Walcott Sharkey
11 Maher – W Klondike, oDonnell, Haynes, Jeffords, - ND Ruhlin, L McCoy, Choynski
12 Kennedy – No Fights
13 Childs – W Bonner, Russel, Everett and others D - Bonner
14 Martin – W Kenny, Galvin and Scully ND Klondike and Armstrong


I am not sure whether or not Klondike or Armstrong should be added as 15 or 16, but i have left them off, meaning NCs do not really count and Bonner does not earn a ranking on par with Childs either, even though he earned a draw. I am not sure what to do with Young Peter Jackson or Jack Root, who beat ranked fighters during the year, but not when they were ranked. I am thinking of going back and editing so that they are given a ranking, but it is hard to be consistent on this, particularly if wins over ranked fighter happen more than a year. This might be a bit of a discretionary rule.

 

And Langford at 156 was 25 lbs under his best weight. Another double standard here...

I did some re-search. Offers from 30-50k were out their for Johnson to fight Langford, McVey, and Jeanette....Johnson ducked them.

 

And there's me thinking he had allready beaten them.:huh
Was Langford's best weight 181lbs then?
I should think it might be around 175lbs myself ,which would mean he was 19lbs below his best weight whereas, Johnson, at 187lbs was 23lbs below his 208 lbs when he humiliated Jeffries.
Langford had also engaged in more fights than Johnson at that time.

When Johnson fought Burns ,Burns received the biggest purse a champion had gotten up to that time.$ 30,000.
I doubt there was a promoter willing to pay in excess of that for a title fight between two blacks.
Johnson went where the money was,when he fought JEFFRIES ,both men were guaranteed $101,000 the winner to receive 75% of it ,the loser 25%, in addition they got a $10,000 signing bonus, additionally %'s of the movie rights.Edward R Moss ,sports editor of the New York Evening Sun , estimated Jeffries would receive around $667,750,and Johnson,$358,250, if Jeffries won,if Johnson won the films would be worth less .
Johnson received $31,000 for toying with Jim Flynn, why would he take on one of the black trio ,work like a dog to get in shape, and all for considerably less than he would get bowling over pathetic challengers like Flynn and Jeffries?
Johnson was a lazy pragmatist , in constant need of ready cash ,and blowing away the white debris that challenged him was the easiest and most remunerative ,[not to mention less strenuous],way of acheiving it.
It was not glory he craved, it was gold.
Later Jack Dempsey made an absolute fortune appearing in mediocre pot boilers, instead of facing Wills and Godfrey.
The golden rule applied."Them thats got the gold,makes the rules"

 

Yes. we know. It was implied in my post.

"Johnson himself was" :-(


I wish you were still banned

 

My take on Johnson's career is simple and I think agreed by most boxing people; he had a great period pre title-maybe the best- and a horrible post title-winning career-maybe the worst of any long term champion. How good was he, is hard to guage because of the lack of film, his own attitude, he may have been great, he may have been average, therefore we get these great debates.

 

Just for that I might goad you in focusing on your inner hate

Relax a bit, put down your ax to grind, and stop with the double standards.

 

I'll man up. I was un-aware there was a rule about requesting a live link to a ppv fight. It was my mistake, and it cost a week. Fair enough. However, as far as I could tell the ban only applied to creating posts in the forum.