What was the purse between Jack Johnson vs Jim Battling Johnson in 1913?

I never suggested that the NSC sprang anything on Johnson they just took advantage of his penurious state to offer him a low purse Johnson and Fitzpatrick were broke and accepted it .Once Champion ,Johnson was in the driving seat and wanted more money.
McIntosh doesn't mention Johnson demanding more money in his statement neither does Pollack, as you have the books you know this. Johnson agreed the two fight deal, why would he do so if he didn't intend to go through with it?Imade this post to show Johnson agreed to fight all his black challengers not just Langford. Langford is seen as the best of the three now but that was far from clear at the time,many thought Jeannette the bigger man had the better chance with the champion.I guess we will have to agree to disagree,but its been refreshing talking with a sensible poster on the subject.

 

Johnson signed to fight Langford in September 1908 you've been told this several times,I don't know why it never sinks in. The French stripped Johnson of their version of the title and gave it to the winner of the Langford v Jeannette fight which occurred the next day, in less than a month they reversed this decision and reverted to recognizing Johnson as the champion and his defence against Moran was duly recognized by the French boxing authorities as such. These are facts that you just can't get around no matter how hard you try to. For the last time produce these "numerous offerings "of $30,000 that Johnson refused.You should be able to show a few of them if there are so many verified offers of $30,000 for Johnson to defend against that three that he refused.

In 9 years you haven't produced a single one!Why is that?
Your problem, and it is a serious problem, is your paranoid and toxic hatred of Johnson has distorted your brain to the point which you cannot mount a rational argument.As McGrain our Moderator says ,you are our resident Johnson hater.

The purse Jack Johnson received for the Johnson fight can be found on page 394 of Unforgivable Blackness by Geoffrey C Ward.I won't tell you it because I wouldn't do you any favour ,I wouldn't **** on you if you were on fire. Buy Ward's book and then you will know.So long Chump!
ps its ad nauseum,not ad nausea,best not attempt complicated words,you have more than enough trouble with basic English.lol

 

You are now quoting a book you haven't read?Sounds sensible.
Pollack does NOT say Johnson turned down multiple offers to fight Langford lol

Why debate further with a chimp? I'll talk boxing any day with Berlenbach whom you are now using as your champion by proxy because you cannot formulate a sentence or an argument yourself.
The answer you require is ,as I've told you twice now, on page 394 of Unforgivable Blackness a book you once talked of as though having read!
If you have you know the answer,if you don't buy it! Simple as.

Mendoza you are a **** ,you have always been one and will remain so. You have lied and lied your time away on this forum,you have welched on bets and denied things you have stated in the past.
You haven't seen the Langford v Hague fight.
You reneged on honouring a bet with me that the Ruhlin v Fitzsimmons fight was filmed and when exposed you tried to bring Ted Spoon into the argument as support for you saying he told you he had seen it he didn't ,I know this because I pm'd him about it and he gave me permission to post his reply denying he had seen it which I did a couple of weeks ago.
Years ago you quoted Kevin Smith about the Johnson v Burns fight and he came on this forum and told you to stop telling lies about what he had said .That's twice you have been guilty of this , add to that, reneging on the bet concerning the Fitz vRuhlin which Klompton,Gilbert Odd and Adam Pollack state was NOT filmed .
You are a man without honour or shame , a despicable example of a human being,if one of my children or grandchildren carried themselves through life as you have done here during the 9 years I have been a member, I would be ashamed of them.
I have just got back home from A&E at my local hospital,Ive had 3 blood tests,an ECG, a canular fitted to allow dye to circulate thought my blood ,an Xray and a CT Scan.I've been informed I have a blood clot in my left calf and 3 in my lungs.I am now on Rivaroxaban for 3 months and Codeine for the pain.

The point I want to make is this, I would rather die tonight than carry myself through life as you do.
You are a piece of dog ****, a man without principles, standards or any conception of truth and rightness.
A complete waste of oxygen.

 

Pollack's book doesn't mention Johnson's extra demands made days after accepting McIntosh's offer, however Moyle's book does (page 243 if you have the same edition as me). Why would McIntosh go into specifics? As far as he was concerned they were still haggling and he was just announcing that he was calling off the negotiations.

 

The reason he gave was Australian public opinion ,which you know because you have the books.
The page in Moyle's book states, Johnson insisted that instead of a $15,000 forfeit being posted with a Sydney newspaper it be posted in the US..McIntosh's representative said he was confident the issue would be resolved within the next few days.Now, given that Johnson was travelling halfway around the world to twice defend his title I find it quite reasonable that he have some tangible evidence of intent and fairplay.He wasn't asking for more money,but that the money be deposited in the US instead of in Australia where, if things went pear shaped and the fights did not come offhe would have little chance of reimbursement.If that passage had said something along the lines of "after agreeing terms Johnson suddenly upped his price by $5000",I would say you had a case that Johnson may very well be stalling,but he didnt and,in my opinion, which of course is no more valid than yours,he wasn't.
I'm afraid you have attracted a remora fish who will swim beneath you trying to feed off your crumbs,you must make your own mind up concerning him,I made mine up years ago! A pleasure debating with you !

 

No I believe you are calling Ted Spoon a liar.Now **** off you ******.

 

Commenting on a book you haven't read ,that just about sums you up,do you give reviews of films you haven't seen too? I've given you my opinion of you, nothing more to be said.

 

Whether or not Johnson's demand was reasonable, it was nevertheless an additional demand that he and McIntosh had not yet agreed upon. So at best Johnson had accepted an initial offer (but hadn't actually committed to anything, btw) and they were still haggling over the details when McIntosh called it off. We obviously have different views on Johnson's intentions and will have to agree to differ. Good fun debating with you as always.

 

McIntosh said on a different occasion that he believed Johnson didn't want to face Langford. He didn't say that in his statement calling off the negotiations. The Mann Act charges were the main reason he called them off. From the New York Times:

Jack Johnson will not fight in Australia. Hugh McIntosh, who had offered Johnson $50,000 for fights with Sam Langford and Sam McVey or Joe Jeannette, cabled today to W.W. Kelly, his representative in Chicago, to cancel all negotiations.

Mr McIntosh explained that Johnson's part in the alleged abduction of Miss Cameron had so angered the sporting men and public of Australia that the matches were no longer desirable.

 

I look forward to others on different subjects.

 

Thank you for your objectivity and honesty.