Which fight was the most historical significant?

We can argue all day that one fight was a big fight for one reason, or another fight was big for another reason ... but no single heavyweight title fight was more historic globally, and included as many contributing factors to make it historic, as Louis-Schmeling II.

I mean, if we're just talking race, John Tate beating Kallie Knoetze (a South African cop who shot and maimed a black teen protesting after Steven Biko was killed by police) and Gerrie Coetzee in South Africa to win the WBA Heavyweight title, at the height of Apartheid in front of a free global television audience, and a combined live audience of more than 130,000 people, RANKS RIGHT UP THERE when it came to race.

There were as many or more black people living under Apartheid in South Africa in 1979 as there were black people living under similar conditions in the U.S. in 1908. Standing up against continued racism and Apartheid was a much bigger deal globally in 1979 than it was in 1908 when Johnson fought Burns.

And Tommy Burns was a white Canadian. White Canadians weren't exactly considered the devil by most Southern blacks in 1908. (Black slaves escaped to Canada during the Civil War.)

Burns' day job certainly wasn't as a southern cop shooting blacks in Atlanta to keep them in line, like Knoetze's day job was in his country when Tate knocked him out.

But all that's largely forgotten now because South Africa is no longer under Apartheid rule and John Tate lost a couple months after that to Weaver and all but disappeared from the sport as Larry Holmes eclipsed him.

Whereas Johnson, unlike Tate, had a long reign.

But, if we're just talking about RACE fights, Tate beating those two guys rates right up there.

Again, none of them were bigger than Louis-Schmeling II. That's all I'm saying. In terms of global, historic events, I don't know if one boxing match will ever surpass it.

It's fine if people disagree. I just don't see it.

 

Yes, a group of any people, black, white, whatever, are not uniform in their beliefs or responses. I did not mean to insinuate that.

 

"how many people in India, China, Japan, Russia, Mexico, etc."

The same question could be asked of the Burns and Jeffries fights with Johnson. How many Chinese cared, or even knew about, a boxing match in Australia? Or Russians? Or Indians? In 1910 what percentage of the world was even literate? What local media covered sports that were unknown in their countries? I doubt very many Africans were even aware of Jack Johnson. Just doesn't seem likely to me. Johnson's fights mattered in the US and certain parts of the British Empire, and possibly France. Hard to see them mattering any where else.

I think it a fair point that much and probably most of the world didn't care or even know about Louis-Schmeling II but I do think it was a significantly larger portion than the Johnson fights.

 

Very interesting thread. My take is Johnson ended up being an historical aberration, while Louis was the revolutionary who changed things. There had been black champions in lighter divisions before Johnson, and there were in the years between Johnson and Louis. When Johnson left it went back to the status quo ante. Louis not only opened the door but the flood gates. When he became champion, African-Americans could only compete in boxing & track, that I know of. When he left, baseball and pro football were desegregated, and there was no going back.

*just an aside outside of boxing. The story in America is that Hitler refused to shake Jesse Owens' hand at the 1936 Olympics. I heard an interview with Owens and he had a different take. Hitler was not present for his races, but later did meet Owens to congratulate him and shake his hand. It was Roosevelt who spurned him. The American gold medal winners were invited to the White House to meet Roosevelt, but Owens was not included in the invitation.

 

To me it's comical to even insinuate a fight about the equality of the races is on a lesser scale globally than a fight for "Democracy vs Fascism". I hope some of you realize the world globally was segregated into these two forms of government. While race equality in a topic that applies to every single person in the world. Yet somehow I'm supposed to believe the majority of the world cared more about a fight of "Democracy vs. Fascism"? I simply can't get behind such a theory. It doesn't matter how much changed after Johnson, because change isn't the only measurement of historic or impactful. As somebody put it well, a closed door is just as significant as an open one. Further, should we talk about all that "changed" after Louis beat Max, please elaborate on all these global changes that took place after that fight. I mean surely Fascism ended and there was no war... Oh wait...

 

Anyone who completely dismisses one side of the argument to bolster the other should be swiftly ignored.

 

Apparently they did care. As I'm assuming Klompton mentioned those countries for a reason.
I would ask him. But I wouldn't be surprised if he doesn't bear the fruits of his research when people (not you) are using interrogative argumentation against him.

 

I think Johnsons accomplishments were way ahead of its time.
The conditions of society weren't set to receive the benefits of his accomplishments the way it was for Joe Louis.

Joe Louis' win over Schmeling was an immediate and dire need.
Like putting out a fire. There was a significant geopolitcal problem (Nazi propganda) and Joe Louis beating Schmeling was immediate and effective in helping solve it. It was also a major victory for Black Americans, because it was one of their people who represented America in that important moment.

Johnsons situation was something else entirely. Johnsons victory was far more provocative and cutting edge.
His victory dispelled delusion of racial superiority. It was a cultural, psychological and most importantly individualistic victory. For one, Johnson showed people that the individual is most important, and can transcend political/cultural/oppressive elements of any time period. And two, it disproved the fallacy that black people weren't as capable as white people, which was scientific "proof" at the time. I believe it was the first time a black person was internationally known to be the best at something of true significance. It must've had a huge effect on peoples identities. His life caused a lot of pain to a lot of people, but overall had a profoundly positive effect.


I think my favorite quote from any boxer is:

"I'm black....
They never let me forget it.
I'm black alright...
I'll never let them forget it."

 

"Apparently they did care."

Well, did they even know what boxing was? I'm open to evidence from China in 1908 on how important they viewed the Burns-Johnson fight. Also evidence from Russia. Until I see it, I'll remain skeptical.

As for the 1938 Louis-Schmeling fight, China was fighting a war with Japan. How much attention was being paid to what happened in a boxing match at Yankee Stadium? Russia was going through the purges and realistically concerned about the growing threat from Germany. How much attention were they paying to a boxing match at Yankee Stadium?

My bottom line is if we are going to drag in the world and these vast countries as caring one way or another about a sporting event whose "global" implications are purely based on western hang-ups not only about race per se but about a sporting event proving racial superiority or inferiority, I would like to see something like evidence.