Re: Jack Johnson vs Gene Tunney
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trainer Monkey
Quote:
Originally Posted by Preme
never really rated jack johnson really, ok i havnt see a massive amount of the guy fight...
tbh tho i think hes only really a 'legend' coz he was the first black champion... as a boxer i didn't think he was anythign special, sure boxing was in its early form then, and has developed alot... but i dunno, just don't see anyhting about johnson...
Now tunney, he was a great and would of out out thought and out boxed JJ... tunney was one of boxings first inteligent boxers.. a thinker, i don't think he gets the credit he deserves sometimes coz of his style...
Actually alot of guys really studied what they were up to before Tunney,including Johnson,every one of those guys advanced the sport at their time
Johnsons footwork was light years ahead of what was happening at the time
I disagree Gene had a lot better footwork around the same time as prime Jack.
Re: Jack Johnson vs Gene Tunney
Its actually kind of hard to say when was prime Jack Johnson because he fought for so long.
Re: Jack Johnson vs Gene Tunney
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taeth
Its actually kind of hard to say when was prime Jack Johnson because he fought for so long.
Tunney's prime was after Johnson got back in the ring after his legal issues,long after his prime,his prime was more 1910-1920
Re: Jack Johnson vs Gene Tunney
Quote:
Originally Posted by ICE COLD BOXING
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bilbo
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris N.
Poor Bilbo. It can be a pain in the a** to get your point across when there going on besides the point. By the way I bet that you could keep dishing out more analogies as long as you want to. :)
And Ice, no offense bro, but it's just the principle that he's explaining through the analogy. ;) A great man in his own time would most likely be a great man if not a greater man in our own time.
Given the means that today's fighter have, coupled with his athletisism, and good use of technical boxing knowledge he would have brought a lot too the ring. I think given the means he could do well in any era, as well as today.
Like other great fighters before him he built upon the foundations of expertise that preceded him. If he was to make full use of today's resources I believe with all my understanding that he'd excell in today's day and age, even if he was the other era's of Dempsey, Marciano, Liston, Ali, and so forth he would be able draw from all the knowledge of that day.
It's just common sense really. ;)
Thanks bro have a :coolclick:.
Sometimes I feel like I'm banging my head against a brick wall trying to explain things to these young'uns but at least one person understood what I was saying.
It's interesting that Nat Fleischer the founder of Ring magazine and who had a chance to see not only Jack Johnson fight live but also all the greats upto and including Ali rated Jack Johnson as the greatest of them all ;)
Agreed its so hard to explain things to you oldies ;D
Nat would have been like 10-15 in Jack Johnson's physical prime which of course would make JAck look more impressive, and he missed Ali-Frazier 2, Ali-Foreman, Ali-Fraizer III which really raises his stock all time.
Re: Jack Johnson vs Gene Tunney
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trainer Monkey
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taeth
Its actually kind of hard to say when was prime Jack Johnson because he fought for so long.
Tunney's prime was after Johnson got back in the ring after his legal issues,long after his prime,his prime was more 1910-1920
He did start a little later maybe 1920-1930 was Gene, but he still was around the same era, and had a lot better defense than Jack. The video's of Jack were with such bad camera's that everything appeared quicker than it was on camera.
Re: Jack Johnson vs Gene Tunney
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taeth
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trainer Monkey
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taeth
Its actually kind of hard to say when was prime Jack Johnson because he fought for so long.
Tunney's prime was after Johnson got back in the ring after his legal issues,long after his prime,his prime was more 1910-1920
He did start a little later maybe 1920-1930 was Gene, but he still was around the same era, and had a lot better defense than Jack. The video's of Jack were with such bad camera's that everything appeared quicker than it was on camera.
That was a wasted and done Johnson
Look at the pics from the Jeffries fight,in 1910 for the title,everybody was still fighting dead flat footed,Jonson was one of the first guys to actually get up on his toes and slip
Re: Jack Johnson vs Gene Tunney
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taeth
Quote:
Originally Posted by ICE COLD BOXING
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bilbo
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris N.
Poor Bilbo. It can be a pain in the a** to get your point across when there going on besides the point. By the way I bet that you could keep dishing out more analogies as long as you want to. :)
And Ice, no offense bro, but it's just the principle that he's explaining through the analogy. ;) A great man in his own time would most likely be a great man if not a greater man in our own time.
Given the means that today's fighter have, coupled with his athletisism, and good use of technical boxing knowledge he would have brought a lot too the ring. I think given the means he could do well in any era, as well as today.
Like other great fighters before him he built upon the foundations of expertise that preceded him. If he was to make full use of today's resources I believe with all my understanding that he'd excell in today's day and age, even if he was the other era's of Dempsey, Marciano, Liston, Ali, and so forth he would be able draw from all the knowledge of that day.
It's just common sense really. ;)
Thanks bro have a :coolclick:.
Sometimes I feel like I'm banging my head against a brick wall trying to explain things to these young'uns but at least one person understood what I was saying.
It's interesting that Nat Fleischer the founder of Ring magazine and who had a chance to see not only Jack Johnson fight live but also all the greats upto and including Ali rated Jack Johnson as the greatest of them all ;)
Agreed its so hard to explain things to you oldies ;D
Nat would have been like 10-15 in Jack Johnson's physical prime which of course would make JAck look more impressive, and he missed Ali-Frazier 2, Ali-Foreman, Ali-Fraizer III which really raises his stock all time.
Yes Taeth, you are correct. The great ring analysist and boxing hall of fame legend Nat Fleischer was unable to correctly evaluate a fighter's worth, despite living contemporary with many of the greatest heavyweights in history.
It takes a young causal fan like yourself to point out Fleischer's lack of knowledge and ignorance of boxing.
Thanks for sharing your wisdom with us humble folk on the boards.
Re: Jack Johnson vs Gene Tunney
Re: Jack Johnson vs Gene Tunney
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trainer Monkey
Great clip :coolclick:
I love his beaming smile when he's fighting Tommy Burns and Jim Jeffries at the start, and when he holds Fireman Jim Flyn at arms length and punches him repeatedly in the face!
Nice little combo at the end too.
Re: Jack Johnson vs Gene Tunney
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bilbo
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trainer Monkey
Great clip :coolclick:
I love his beaming smile when he's fighting Tommy Burns and Jim Jeffries at the start, and when he holds Fireman Jim Flyn at arms length and punches him repeatedly in the face!
Nice little combo at the end too.
Fireman earned that whuppin
There are certain times you think your getting under your opponents skin,when all your really doing is pissing him off,like Patterson refusing to call Ali anything but Cassius
Fireman was calling Johnson all kinds of racial crap all through the fight
Re: Jack Johnson vs Gene Tunney
Re: Jack Johnson vs Gene Tunney
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trainer Monkey
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bilbo
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trainer Monkey
Great clip :coolclick:
I love his beaming smile when he's fighting Tommy Burns and Jim Jeffries at the start, and when he holds Fireman Jim Flyn at arms length and punches him repeatedly in the face!
Nice little combo at the end too.
Fireman earned that whuppin
There are certain times you think your getting under your opponents skin,when all your really doing is pissing him off,like Patterson refusing to call Ali anything but Cassius
Fireman was calling Johnson all kinds of racial crap all through the fight
Not to mention all those leaping headbutts. Amazing how restrained Johnson was to not retaliate.
Fly makes Sakio Bika and Edison Miranda look like amatuers.
Re: Jack Johnson vs Gene Tunney
Thanks Trainer Monkey. ;D :coolclick: That guy was tough and had a good sense of humor. The clip was great too, you can't tell me you can't even smile when you see Johnson's big grin with that music in the background. ;D
Johnson showed that he was tough and had class.
Re: Jack Johnson vs Gene Tunney
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bilbo
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taeth
Quote:
Originally Posted by ICE COLD BOXING
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bilbo
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris N.
Poor Bilbo. It can be a pain in the a** to get your point across when there going on besides the point. By the way I bet that you could keep dishing out more analogies as long as you want to. :)
And Ice, no offense bro, but it's just the principle that he's explaining through the analogy. ;) A great man in his own time would most likely be a great man if not a greater man in our own time.
Given the means that today's fighter have, coupled with his athletisism, and good use of technical boxing knowledge he would have brought a lot too the ring. I think given the means he could do well in any era, as well as today.
Like other great fighters before him he built upon the foundations of expertise that preceded him. If he was to make full use of today's resources I believe with all my understanding that he'd excell in today's day and age, even if he was the other era's of Dempsey, Marciano, Liston, Ali, and so forth he would be able draw from all the knowledge of that day.
It's just common sense really. ;)
Thanks bro have a :coolclick:.
Sometimes I feel like I'm banging my head against a brick wall trying to explain things to these young'uns but at least one person understood what I was saying.
It's interesting that Nat Fleischer the founder of Ring magazine and who had a chance to see not only Jack Johnson fight live but also all the greats upto and including Ali rated Jack Johnson as the greatest of them all ;)
Agreed its so hard to explain things to you oldies ;D
Nat would have been like 10-15 in Jack Johnson's physical prime which of course would make JAck look more impressive, and he missed Ali-Frazier 2, Ali-Foreman, Ali-Fraizer III which really raises his stock all time.
Yes Taeth, you are correct. The great ring analysist and boxing hall of fame legend Nat Fleischer was unable to correctly evaluate a fighter's worth, despite living contemporary with many of the greatest heavyweights in history.
It takes a young causal fan like yourself to point out Fleischer's lack of knowledge and ignorance of boxing.
Thanks for sharing your wisdom with us humble folk on the boards.
Casual? I spend more time than almost anyone on here studying film, and actually fighting. I've been fighting since iwas little. I am not saying that he didn't know about the sport I am saying that when someone is young they over exaggerate fighters. I thought Jerry Rice was fast when I was young because he could break tackles, and always was open, but he wasn't fast at all by NFL standards. First of All he started the magazine in 1922 so who knows how into the sport he was 12 years before that, and second of all It's hard to compare fighters in the early years because nobody was on their skill level. Ali was in the deepest heavyweight division we have ever seen which would make him look worse in comparsion to his opposition than Jack. Also people think Jim Brown is the best football player ever even though he isn't even close to as good as Barry Sanders or LT at running back he is slower, not as powerful as LT at weight lifting, and played against lineman his own weight pretty much. Being before your time doesn't make you better than people who came around with a great crop surrounding them.
Re: Jack Johnson vs Gene Tunney
well not to deviate, but Jim Brown with current weight lifting and training practices would still be one of the greatest RB's of all time.....5.2 yds per carry for a career and a 104.3 yds per game is pretty damn impressive against any competition....I'll tell you who is underated though is Gale Sayers...w/o the knee injuries he might have rewritten all of the records
