Whose "left on table" hurts their legacy most?

I had it 4-2 for Klitschko. All three judges had it the same, meaning Lewis would need to win 4 of the next 6 rounds to earn a draw. I think Lewis was tiring, and had the fight gone on, would have lost.

Lewis said he would re-match in the post fight interview later to the press. Lewis tried to make other fights with Roy Jones and Kirk Johnson. So Philly, he was active, and obviously felt he had more to gain. He didn't say I'm 38 I need to think about it. Not once.

The Rahman re-match was one of Lewis finest outings, and that happened about a year and a half sooner the Klitschko fight. He was certainly committed for that fight so I disagree with your comment that he didn't looked committed in his last 3 fights. Lewis himself said the Rahman defeat light his fire.

The truth came out when the WBC ordered a re-match, and Vitali showed improvement.

 

Janitor,

You're correct. Jeannette despite having limited experience actually gave a much more experienced Johnson some tough fights. When they meet Jeannette often had a losing or .500 type of record.

Langford was an estimated 156 pounds and 20 years old for Johnson. Sam McVey, but a teenager.

History can be ironic, Johnson did fight one African American fighter in a title shot in Jim Battling Johnson, and drew. The three men above were much better from 1909-1913. Some posters here claim Johnson's purse demands could not be meet. Don't buy it. He made but $21,000 for the Flynn fight, which had about 4,500 spectators.

Had it been Johnson vs. Langford, McVey, or Jeanette in 1909-1913, you get 5 times the crowd and a larger purse. The purses back then were largely based on the gate.

 

I'm going to opt for Marciano on this subject and I'll explain why. Johnson did have some intense comp with Langford, Jeanette and McVey, however, as had been mentioned before, he did fight them prior to winning the title and beat them but I don't think any promoter in America wanted to stake money on an all-black world title fight. France, on the other hand was much more open-minded but I don't know the amount of money that would be involved. As it was, Johnson was in it for the money and if he could go on defending against the Ketchels and the Jeffries while packing the arena, he would. In the long run, since he had beaten them, I don't think his standing on legacy is hurt much.

Larry Holmes had some terrific matches there with Coetzee, Thomas, Page, Tubbs, Dokes and a rematch with Weaver or Witherspoon. These would have been great if they took place, however, I don't think anyone is out there that believes Larry wouldn't have beaten all these guys. Personally, I wanted to see Holmes against Tate, but Big John was damaged goods after Weaver. Again, Larry would have been the favorite in all these matches, although he has the most matches that never took place, but I don't think it hurt his historical standing because of the frequency he put his title on the line.

With Marciano, the question through the ages has been how would Rocky have done against the big heavyweights?
If Rocky had signed for Nino Valdes or better yet, Bob Baker, the question would have been answered. I believe Rocky would have won either of these matches and his standing would have solidified by removing that last question. And lets face it, had he opted to fight either Nino or Bob instead, no one down the decades would have been saying, "if only he wouldn't have avoided Cockell, his standing would have been set."

 

Again though, the argument that beating Sam early on didn't matter because he wasn't as experienced then doesn't hold much water for me. He had more fights than Johnson by that point in the time, and frankly, one could argue the best single win between the two when they met. Sam being inexperienced simply doesn't cut it for me. Him gaining more weight also doesn't cut it for me because so did Johnson. They both gained about the same amount of weight. Difference being, Johnson seem to be more proportionate to his body than Sam's was. Sam was often describe as hog fat as he got up in weight. I don't know about you, but I think Johnson's was better weight and more useful weight of the two. So if they both gained about the same weight, and Johnson was likely the better more efficient weight to gain, and Johnson absolutely abused Sam when they did meet (showing he had the style to easily neutralize Sam).... where is this notion that this fight SHOULD'VE happened?

Further, in what year and specifically which window do you think Sam should've gotten this shot. As I've seen you argue when it comes to Marciano... Dempsey and others... the timing of when these bouts realistically taking place is what matters... not simply that someone existed in a small window as a contender but the champion is already signed to fight another... then that contender losses. There is a realistic window there. So where would you say this window occurs with Johnson? As you know, Sam had a lot of mixed results when Johnson was champion. A few very solid runs, but also a mixed bag many other times.

 

How did Pacquaio fight left over of Pacquaio?

 

This is the important question.

There was interest in a Johnson Langford rematch before Johnson won the title in 1908, and by 1909 many were saying that Langford was the best available challenger, apart from Jeffries.

It must be noted, that the purses that Johnson was being offered for a fight with Langford at this point, were nothing like what he was realistically going to ask for.

I would say that any time between Johnson beating Jeffries in July of 1910, and Harry Wills coming on the scene in 1914, Langford was either the best available challenger, or as good as any available.

The only losses during this period are the 1912 loss to Sam McVea (avenged within four months) and the late 1913 loss to Gunboat Smith (avenged within a year during which Smith lost twice).

The time when the fight could realistically have been made, would have been early in 1913, when Johnson was offered a $30 000 purse to fight Langford in Australia.

In the end the fight fell through due to Johnson's arrest under the Mann Act and subsequent trial.

In October of 1913 the French Federation of Boxing Clubs stripped Johnson of the title for failing to fight Langford, but the IBU refused to do so.

The former organisation subsequently recognized Langford as champion, arguably making him the first alphabet titlist!

 

Johnson's first fight with Langford is not a barometer on how 1909-1913 fight would play out.

Langford would be not 20, 156 pounds, or green as a heavyweight as he was in 1906. The only thing the first fight proved is Johnson with every advantage could not stop Langford in 15 rounds.

The Boston terror grew into a man, very strong according to reports, and would be 175-190 pounds for this fight. He was smashingly effective vs Jeannette on film, and he was close to 200 pounds for that one. In addition Langford beat far better completion that Johnson did while Johnson was champion. A fact, and Johnson himself was rather inconsistent as champion.

Sam could have been given a shot from 1909-1914.

In fact he and Johnson signed a contract to fight in 1909 in the UK. What happened? Johnson pulled out of it!

The French who staged many fights with Johnson, Mcvey, Jeanette and Langford would likely be the most logical venue. They wanted to see the fight, and I think stripped Johnson of his title for not making it.

 

Holmes was held to that standard. People give Holmes alot of agita for not giving rematches to Witherspoon or Williams.
Keep in mind, even if you think that Lewis was right to retire at the time he did, I won't argue against it, he shouldn't have turned down the $20 million offer from Ray Mercer who wanted a rematch badly.

 

Again, this simply isn't true in actuality though. Sam's weight wasn't all good. There are multiple contemporary reports that Sam looked fat and out of shape when he rose to those weights. I believe he even comments that he was in his best shape below 175. A 175 Langford isn't going to beat a 210 pound Johnson. Not going to happen.

He had fights, he knows how to fight, he has more fights than Johnson when the met. This whole notion that he's inexperienced because he hasn't fought at HW much is BS. HE KNOWS HOW TO FIGHT for Christ's sake. He isn't learning on the job. He already has his technique down and style. Just because he's fighting HW's, doesn't mean he changed his whole style. His style was his style, and style that Johnson easily crushed. So how does him gaining more weight change anything? It doesn't. Johnson gained more weight and more experience as well, so when you couple that with his already stylistic and physical advantages... it's all over. No fight needed to happen. It could've, but let's stop pretending there was this great outcry for fighting Sam. He kicked the ever living crap out of him when they did meet.

 

Which is my point, you came up with a very isolated window when Jack could've fougth Sam, and guess what, he did sign to fight Sam. It fell through. So the one time it became realistic, it feel through. Yet this is seen as a big miss on his resume... a fighter he kicked the ever loving crap out of before with ease? I'm just not seeing it.

 

Even if you take the view that Johnson was blameless, the fact remains that the fight didn't happen.

He did not defend against the top contender of his era.

Reading between the lines, I think that Johnson's plan was to milk the white hopes for as long as he could, and then cash out in big money fights with Langford and McVea.

Ironically his arrest and trial, likely prolonged his title reign.

 

Johnson made $31,100 for the Flynn fight,verified in Pollacks book.That's twice I've corrected you on this.
Can you now stop repeating this ? Once could be an honest mistake twice is a deliberate lie and we both know it is ,and why you repeat it. Now let's have the $30,000 offers for Johnson to defend against Jeannette.McVey and Langford that he turned down?
I've been asking you for these for 9 years now!
If as you state , those fights would draw "5 times the crowd",why didn't promoters make those offers to Johnson ?
Wouldn't they want to make that money?
Isn't that what they are in business for?
If Jack Curley ,who promoted the Flynn fight could have gotten 5 times more people to watch Johnson fight any of that black trio,
and by implication, 5 times the gate.Why did he NEVER attempt to promote such a defence?
Why didn't Rickard or Coffroth EVER offer Johnson $30,000 to defend against them?
I couldn't care less about Jack Johnson, but I do enjoy exposing your constant stream of lies about him!

 

I concur ,Johnson agreed to defend against both Langford and McVey but his arrest and subsequent exile put the block on that.
If you need to blame some one,blame yourselves[ancestors] as to why these fights did not happen, the Great American Public!

Q. You can demand and get $30,000 for defending against a white challenger ,who you know you can beat without even being in halfway decent shape.
Q. You can defend against one of the black trio for the same money,[if, a very big IF you can get a promoter to put it on] and for such fight, given your life style and age, you will need to be in the best shape you have been in since 1910.

Which one would you gravitate towards?

 

Pollack's book is WRONG.

Johnson received $21,000 instead of the $31,000 he was promised. Two days before the fight, when things looked very bad for a big house, he agreed to take less. - Source BOX REC

As I told you attendance was low for this fight with approximately 4,500 spectators. The purses back then relied heavily on the gate. If you think Johnson vs Jeannette, Langford, or Mcvey would have down less than 4,500 spectators your even more foolish than I thought.

As we know Johnson pulled out of a signed contract to meet Langford for $30,000, which is more than he made in the Fireman Flynn fiasco DQ.

Your inability to learn is only rivaled by your reliance on books, some of which as I have pointed out to you over the years are wrong.

 

A few questions if I may KuRuPT

1 ) Don't you agree that Langford who wanted a fight with Johnson for years would be in good shape here and not hog fat if that fight was made?

2 ) Don't you agree that Langford look very impressive vs. Jeannette on film in 1913 in Parris. He's listed at 185 3/4 libs for that one, and is not hog fat. Please see the film, its a revelation.

3 ) What do you make of Johnson pulling out of a signed contract to fight Langford in the UK?

Other points: 156 ( at age 20 ) has little chance vs 185 with more years experience, but 185 has beaten 205 often in history. Besides guys 160-180 either Ko'd Johnson, or gave him a lot of trouble. We are talking about Sam Langford here. According to many Johnson was fat at 205 pounds. He can't afford to be too heavy vs Langford. Johnson's best wins came below 200 pounds.

I have Langford's work out clips. He's a very compact and strong man. 175-185 is fine for him.