Jack Johnson vs Gene Tunney

[Taeth]

I'm a big Jack Johnson fan and reckon he could win this. He did struggle to get motivated for fights though.

A motivated Johnson would have been trouble for any fighter in history imo.

Even Larry Holmes said that he felt the only fighter in history who he would have struggled to beat was Jack Johnson.

Well Holmes must of been being nice to Johnson because no way Holmes would of struggled with Johnson he has very old boxing style that wouldn't work in newer eras Tunney by decision.

Have you ever even watched Johnson fight? Most fighters couldn't even lay a glove on him.

He was at least 50 years ahead of his time. If he would have lived and fought in another era he would have mastered the current level of boxing knowledge and built upon it again.

Do you think if Gallileo or Newton lived today they would be crap scientists and have less understanding of physics than the average high school student?

Of course not, they would absorb all of today's knowledge and build upon it. They would have been brilliant visonaries in any era, and so would have Jack Johnson.

Nice point but im not sure if Intelligence and Athleticism go hand in hand?

Athleticism wasn't what made Johnson great, it was a masterful understanding of the sweet science of the defensive arts. No matter what era he would have fought in his intuitive understanding of boxing would have made him a nightmare for anybody to face.

How anyone could possibly think his style wouldn't be any good today is completely beyond me to honest

Can anyone seriously imagine Sam Peter, Oleg Maskaev, Shannon Briggs and the like having a F****** cool about how to unlock his defense? He'd make most of today's heavies look silly.

I'd fancy his chances against any fighter who ever lived.

When did i say in todays era ?? i clearly stated i was on about 90s 80s 70s ect.

And he would lose to the following

Larry Holmes
Mike Tyson
Muhammad Ali
Riddick Bowe
Lennox Lewis
Sonny Liston
George Foreman
Joe Louis

I'd fancy him to beat Tyson, Liston, Luis, Bowe and Foreman. Lennox Lewis and Ali would have been his hardest fights and Holmes. But I can't seriously see how you can think he wouldn't have lived in any of those eras

Johnson was the Ray Robinson of the heavyweight division. It's fighters like Johnson, Willie Pep, Ray Robinson etc who were the innovators and inspirations for all the fighters that came after them.

Johnson was light years ahead of his contemporaries.

WTF are you talking about. Foreman,k Tyson, Liston, and probably Louis would have killed Johnson. He was way too small, and fought in primitive times.

[VictorCharlie]

Johnson carried many a fighter for rounds just to earn more money on selling the film otherwise he'd have alot more KO's....He was a complete fighter and a defensive master. I put JJ in my all time HW top 3...10th round KO for Jack

[Taeth]

Johnson carried many a fighter for rounds just to earn more money on selling the film otherwise he'd have alot more KO's....He was a complete fighter and a defensive master. I put JJ in my all time HW top 3...10th round KO for Jack

Oh yeah who did he fight? How was he a defensive master? THe fights I've seen of him show him getting hit plenty of times. He is definitely not top 10 heavyweight material. His style was too archaic, and he was too small to fight half the guys from the 50's and on.

[VictorCharlie]

you could make similar arguments for Marciano, Louis, Fitzsimmons...you have to judge a fighter on his era

[Kev]

I don't know Bilbo, he was also a product of his time. No doubt he was ahead of his time, but I don't think he would have turned out the same if he didn't have a good pro to show him the the finer points of the ring. No doubt he was talented, he could hit and take a hit but he needed someone to help him develop right. I'm not discounting Johnson at all. Just ask any experienced trainer how many talented and skilled prospects that they've been known get mishandled and I'm sure they tell you of a few.

Hopkins is a good fighter himself but he's also a product of what he learned, you can't really make a good comparison between Johnson and Hopkins, they're two different people from one another.

Mate that is absurd. He 'learnt' if you can call it that from a veteran heavyweight who taught him moves whilst they were in prison for a month.

If you think he learnt and mastered the style that would make him one of the all time greats in under 30 days than you my friend are a buffoon.
When Johnson was around there were no masterful defensive fighters, he invented the style.

Any fighters who have fought in the last 40 years or so have the accumulated wisdom of a hundred years of professional boxing to draw from.

And if you think Johnson's 4 weeks inside was the preperation he needed to become a great it's worth reminding yourself that B Hop was inside for 6 YEARS and was a prison boxing state champion. He was coached inside for 6 years and fought other prisoners from all over the US.

Sorry but that was the most retarted post I've ever read.








No offense

Easy Bilbo, put the safety back on before you shoot someone's eye out with your with your opinions.

When Johnson was around there were no masterful defensive fighters, he invented the style.

Are you saying that he came up with the feint, parrying and catching punches and moving all on his own. I guess that guy's like Corbett had nothing on Johnson when it came to defense, and maybe you're thinking that Joe Gans (who was from Johnson's own era) was not on Jack Johnson's level of defense either. Here's a thought wasn't Corbett supposedly bring the age in boxing, particularly defense and new moves?

Here's a serious question, how much have you had to drink Bilbo? No seriously here... I didn't mean to buy you another drink when I just made a simple point that maybe Johnson had to learn his boxing from somewhere? Is that really too hard for you to believe? Do you think that his moves were on account of some kind of immaculate conception? If that's the case then you're the buffoon and I'll I need 6 more beers before I can see what you're looking at.

Shall I continue??

If you think he learnt and mastered the style that would make him one of the all time greats in under 30 days than you my friend are a buffoon.

Where did you come up with this part? I didn't say that Jack Johnson learned all his ring craft out of a 30-day crash course in the pen, every man needs his beginning. Aristotle had his Plato, and Jack Johnson just so happened to have Joe Choynski for a while.

Now was Joe Choynski just some 'veteran heavyweight' as you make to seem so nonchalant and not out of the ordinary? He was one of Corbett's nemesi, he was as skilled as they come. And a more pleasing note, we can all thank Choyski's skull for forcing Corbett's hand in inventing the much celebrated 'left-hook.'

Since you've probably watched the Jack Johnson documentary in-numerous times then you know that the aged Choynski stopped Johnson in the 3rd round. Not bad for a old small Jewish heavyweight, I guess Johnson wasn't always as great as the pedestal that you place him on. Anyways after his '23' day stint behind bars Johnson was able to able to learn a thing or two from a guy that went head to head with the defensive master Corbett that you have made no mention of in your 'retarted' post.

Am I getting though to you yet? Anyways have another beer to soften your ego and I'll finish this before somebody might start pissing and moaning and inventing more hilarious analogies to promote their overstated opinions.

Simply put, Jack Johnson was not the Jack Johnson that you've come to love before he met Joe Choynski. Now who knows what happened after that, but before that incident you and I know that Jack Johnson was a rough fighter that didn't have the moves that many have accredited to him. And we know all that bag of tricks, and those polished moves just didn't happen out of nothing.

Now are we seeing eye to eye on any of this? :P

Anyways with comparing Jack Johnson to Bernard Hopkins when I said they're too different people, I meant their respective styles although they also have simularties both in the ring and out. Your reminder accepted, but I should also remind you that Hopkins didn't have some immaculate conception when it came to boxing the way he does. Obviously there's over 40 years of boxing to draw upon which I should have brought up earlier, but Hopkins didn't invent boxing or the way that he boxes for that matter.

I'll say this though, they both had a spark, things clicked and they've shown that they both have a real knack for boxing. Jack Johnson really improved the moves such as feinting, blocking, moving in a way that best suited him, he didn't "invent" defensive boxing. But through his dedication and his best abilities he really made defensive boxing look good. He wasn't alone though, there were great men before him and there were great men after him. As for another fighter that seems ahead of his time take a good look at Joe Gans.

Now I can't buy a drunk a drink, but maybe I can give you a CC and a taxi ride home, all of course after you've moved your big head from your a**.

You're right by the way, what a 'retarted post'

Should I rest my case? I'd still have Johnson to win over Tunney, so maybe, just maybe we can agree on something here.



No offense taken

hehe the pen is mightier than the sword indeed! returned.

I just don't understant your original statememt at all thought. You discredit Johnson saying he needed to be taught the fundamentals of boxing as if that means he's nothing special but every fighter in history had to learn their craft from somewhere. Nobody ever got good at anything without learning from others and putting in years of practise and hard work.

As for some people saying Johnson was too small he was no such such thing. People have continued to increase in size over the past generations in response to improvements in diet and health.

If Johnson would have been born in 1950 he would likey have been a couple inches taller than he was, just as if Lennox Lewis was born in 1870 he would be quite bit a smaller than his current form.

I've never understood how when comparing great fighters people try and transplant them from their past era and stick them in a ring with a modern fighter without giving them any of the modern advantages.

If Johnson lived today he'd fight at around 230-235 lbs, certainly not too small. They called him the Galvestan Giant because he was big for his day. If he was born in the 1950's or 1970's he would have been bigger.

Anyways I guess it's no point trying to convince each other, part of the fun of mythological match ups is that we have no way of knowing who is right.

[bronco]

I go for Johnson to beat Tunney , Johnson was a genius defensive boxer on the retreat,and its reported he could stop opponents punches with his gloves in mid-air, he was that quick, so Tunney would find it difficult to land a punch, allthough he was small and very quick for a heavy,Johnson could only beat the man in the opposite corner,and if Tunney was that man TKO 13 round to JJ.

[Chris Nagel]

hehe the pen is mightier than the sword indeed! returned.

I just don't understant your original statememt at all thought. You discredit Johnson saying he needed to be taught the fundamentals of boxing as if that means he's nothing special but every fighter in history had to learn their craft from somewhere. Nobody ever got good at anything without learning from others and putting in years of practise and hard work.

As for some people saying Johnson was too small he was no such such thing. People have continued to increase in size over the past generations in response to improvements in diet and health.

If Johnson would have been born in 1950 he would likey have been a couple inches taller than he was, just as if Lennox Lewis was born in 1870 he would be quite bit a smaller than his current form.

I've never understood how when comparing great fighters people try and transplant them from their past era and stick them in a ring with a modern fighter without giving them any of the modern advantages.

If Johnson lived today he'd fight at around 230-235 lbs, certainly not too small. They called him the Galvestan Giant because he was big for his day. If he was born in the 1950's or 1970's he would have been bigger.

Anyways I guess it's no point trying to convince each other, part of the fun of mythological match ups is that we have no way of knowing who is right.

Indeed it is, but in our case it's a keyboard.

I guess I can see how it came out like that. I didn't mean that he needed to be be taught boxing from square 1, but I guess he just needed to schooled on some of the finer points at the time. Now did Choynski have all the answers? I don't think he did, but I think that he was able to pass some of his bag of tricks to Johnson, maybe even perhaps planting some of the ideas that inspired Johnson to emphasise so much on defense. Besides I can tell you that no fighter learns all there is to know about boxing from one person, and obviously they can't learn everything they need to know in one night. All I'm saying is that he had to start somewhere, the same goes for any great boxer.

Anyways Jack Johnson was a big guy, usually the bigger against his opponents maybe with the exception of Willard. Except in his bout against Willard this wasn't the same Jack Johnson that fought Jim Jefferies; however he did give Willard a such schooling that if it was fought 35 years later in a 15 rounder, Jack would have won the fight unanimously by a large margin.

Personally I like Gene Tunney more than I do Jack Johnson, but common sense tells me that the bigger man with his skill and big bag of tricks would have won hands down.

'Won hands down' maybe this phase came from Jack Johnson himself.

"They just knock themselves out."

[ICB]

I'm a big Jack Johnson fan and reckon he could win this. He did struggle to get motivated for fights though.

A motivated Johnson would have been trouble for any fighter in history imo.

Even Larry Holmes said that he felt the only fighter in history who he would have struggled to beat was Jack Johnson.

Well Holmes must of been being nice to Johnson because no way Holmes would of struggled with Johnson he has very old boxing style that wouldn't work in newer eras Tunney by decision.

Have you ever even watched Johnson fight? Most fighters couldn't even lay a glove on him.

He was at least 50 years ahead of his time. If he would have lived and fought in another era he would have mastered the current level of boxing knowledge and built upon it again.

Do you think if Gallileo or Newton lived today they would be crap scientists and have less understanding of physics than the average high school student?

Of course not, they would absorb all of today's knowledge and build upon it. They would have been brilliant visonaries in any era, and so would have Jack Johnson.

Nice point but im not sure if Intelligence and Athleticism go hand in hand?

Athleticism wasn't what made Johnson great, it was a masterful understanding of the sweet science of the defensive arts. No matter what era he would have fought in his intuitive understanding of boxing would have made him a nightmare for anybody to face.

How anyone could possibly think his style wouldn't be any good today is completely beyond me to honest

Can anyone seriously imagine Sam Peter, Oleg Maskaev, Shannon Briggs and the like having a F****** cool about how to unlock his defense? He'd make most of today's heavies look silly.

I'd fancy his chances against any fighter who ever lived.

When did i say in todays era ?? i clearly stated i was on about 90s 80s 70s ect.

And he would lose to the following

Larry Holmes
Mike Tyson
Muhammad Ali
Riddick Bowe
Lennox Lewis
Sonny Liston
George Foreman
Joe Louis

I'd fancy him to beat Tyson, Liston, Luis, Bowe and Foreman. Lennox Lewis and Ali would have been his hardest fights and Holmes. But I can't seriously see how you can think he wouldn't have lived in any of those eras

Johnson was the Ray Robinson of the heavyweight division. It's fighters like Johnson, Willie Pep, Ray Robinson etc who were the innovators and inspirations for all the fighters that came after them.

Johnson was light years ahead of his contemporaries.

WTF are you talking about. Foreman,k Tyson, Liston, and probably Louis would have killed Johnson. He was way too small, and fought in primitive times.

Exactly i think this is a joke Johnson had the old boxing style he would of been killed by all the modern greats too big too athletic too everything and people keep saying he could of changed his style actually its not that easy to change someones style who knows if that would of been good for him ?? but we are on about prime for prime Johnson would get killed.

[Kev]

I'm a big Jack Johnson fan and reckon he could win this. He did struggle to get motivated for fights though.

A motivated Johnson would have been trouble for any fighter in history imo.

Even Larry Holmes said that he felt the only fighter in history who he would have struggled to beat was Jack Johnson.

Well Holmes must of been being nice to Johnson because no way Holmes would of struggled with Johnson he has very old boxing style that wouldn't work in newer eras Tunney by decision.

Have you ever even watched Johnson fight? Most fighters couldn't even lay a glove on him.

He was at least 50 years ahead of his time. If he would have lived and fought in another era he would have mastered the current level of boxing knowledge and built upon it again.

Do you think if Gallileo or Newton lived today they would be crap scientists and have less understanding of physics than the average high school student?

Of course not, they would absorb all of today's knowledge and build upon it. They would have been brilliant visonaries in any era, and so would have Jack Johnson.

Nice point but im not sure if Intelligence and Athleticism go hand in hand?

Athleticism wasn't what made Johnson great, it was a masterful understanding of the sweet science of the defensive arts. No matter what era he would have fought in his intuitive understanding of boxing would have made him a nightmare for anybody to face.

How anyone could possibly think his style wouldn't be any good today is completely beyond me to honest

Can anyone seriously imagine Sam Peter, Oleg Maskaev, Shannon Briggs and the like having a F****** cool about how to unlock his defense? He'd make most of today's heavies look silly.

I'd fancy his chances against any fighter who ever lived.

When did i say in todays era ?? i clearly stated i was on about 90s 80s 70s ect.

And he would lose to the following

Larry Holmes
Mike Tyson
Muhammad Ali
Riddick Bowe
Lennox Lewis
Sonny Liston
George Foreman
Joe Louis

I'd fancy him to beat Tyson, Liston, Luis, Bowe and Foreman. Lennox Lewis and Ali would have been his hardest fights and Holmes. But I can't seriously see how you can think he wouldn't have lived in any of those eras

Johnson was the Ray Robinson of the heavyweight division. It's fighters like Johnson, Willie Pep, Ray Robinson etc who were the innovators and inspirations for all the fighters that came after them.

Johnson was light years ahead of his contemporaries.

WTF are you talking about. Foreman,k Tyson, Liston, and probably Louis would have killed Johnson. He was way too small, and fought in primitive times.

Exactly i think this is a joke Johnson had the old boxing style he would of been killed by all the modern greats too big too athletic too everything and people keep saying he could of changed his style actually its not that easy to change someones style who knows if that would of been good for him ?? but we are on about prime for prime Johnson would get killed.

Aww come on Ice man how many times do I need to explain this? If Johnson was born in another era he wouldn't need to change his style he would be fighting according to the advancements of the time.

How can you not understand this. Roy Jones speed and athletic ability are what made him great.

What made Jack Johnson great was his innate understanding of the art of pugilism and defense in particular.

That ability can be transferred to any era just the same as natural athleticism.

I'll say it again, if Gallieleo had been born in 1940 he wouldn't need to put away his 16 th century telescope he would never have had a 16 th century telescope! He would have spent his entire career dealing with modern telescopes!

Why do you keep getting hung up on how Jack Johnson's style was dated? It's dated becuase he was one of the original innovaters and future generations of fighters have built upon the knowledge laid down by Johnson and other great fighters like him.

If he was born in 1950 it's safe to assume that he could just as easily grasp the modern fundamentals of pugilsm and add to that knowledge, the same way Floyd could if he boxed 50 years from now.

And as for him being too small he wasn't. People were smaller back then because of diet and health factors. If was boxing today he would be probably 3 inches taller and 15 lbs heavier than in his prime in the 1900's.

And what do you mean by modern fighters are too athletic

Johnson was used to fighting 30 rounds or more how many modern fighters in any weight class could manage that let alone amongst the heavyweights?

[ICB]

What ?? he would have to completey change his style because i've seen his fights and style he had you actually think he would get away with that in modern boxing ?? he would get beaten to a pulp and now your saying he would be 3 inches taller ?? no lets say he was born with same parents in same era as modern greats with his old style which is dated yes very dated just say he was taught different way how can you know for sure that he would be more affective im not saying im completey right either but what im saying how can you know for sure ??



I'll say it again, if Gallieleo had been born in 1940 he wouldn't need to put away his 16 th century telescope he would never have had a 16 th century telescope! He would have spent his entire career dealing with modern telescopes!


Your comparing this to boxing ?? thats completey different and you know it.

[Kev]

What ?? he would have to completey change his style because i've seen his fights and style he had you actually think he would get away with that in modern boxing ?? he would get beaten to a pulp and now your saying he would be 3 inches taller ?? no lets say he was born with same parents in same era as modern greats with his old style which is dated yes very dated just say he was taught different way how can you know for sure that he would be more affective im not saying im completey right either but what im saying how can you know for sure ??



I'll say it again, if Gallieleo had been born in 1940 he wouldn't need to put away his 16 th century telescope he would never have had a 16 th century telescope! He would have spent his entire career dealing with modern telescopes!


Your comparing this to boxing ?? thats completey different and you know it.

Aww man you are so exasperating! I know his style is old that's because he fought in 1900!!!

If he was born in 1950 he wouldn't fight like that would he?

How can you not understand the analogy? It's not different it's exactly the same principal.


When it comes to Gallileo you know full well that the telescopes they had back then were just the best tools that he had available to him at that point in history. If he lived in the present he would have a different set of tools.

It's the same in boxing. In 1900 Jack Johnson was drawing on (and inspiring) all of the accumulated boxing knowledge of his time and putting it to better use than any other heavyweight.

This is because he had an innate understanding of pugilism and that ability can be translated to any era.

If he was born in 1950 he would have used his innate understanding of pugilism to master the accumluated boxing knowledge of that current era and built upon that. He wouldn't be fighting like he did in 1900, because he wouldn't have been from the 1900's! How is that so hard to understand?

Leonardo Da Vinci is famous for many things but one of his most curious achievements were his drawings and designs of helicopters several hundred years before they were invented.

Now modern scientists have attempted to build some of Da Vinci's designs and they don't work. His helicopter wouldn't have flown.

Does that mean that if he would have lived today he would have been incapable of bulding a helicopter that flew? Of course not, he was several hundred years ahead of his time and it's fair to assume that if he lived today he would be designing things way beyond our current understanding of technology.

How can you not see how this relates to Johnson? Or for that matter any sporting athlete?

[Trainer Monkey]

Johnson carried many a fighter for rounds just to earn more money on selling the film otherwise he'd have alot more KO's....He was a complete fighter and a defensive master. I put JJ in my all time HW top 3...10th round KO for Jack

Oh yeah who did he fight? How was he a defensive master? THe fights I've seen of him show him getting hit plenty of times. He is definitely not top 10 heavyweight material. His style was too archaic, and he was too small to fight half the guys from the 50's and on.

He was between 6'1" and 6'3"
Tyson was 5'11"
Too small how exactly

[Chris Nagel]

Poor Bilbo. It can be a pain in the ass 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.

[Kev]

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 .

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

[Gandalf]

What ?? he would have to completey change his style because i've seen his fights and style he had you actually think he would get away with that in modern boxing ?? he would get beaten to a pulp and now your saying he would be 3 inches taller ?? no lets say he was born with same parents in same era as modern greats with his old style which is dated yes very dated just say he was taught different way how can you know for sure that he would be more affective im not saying im completey right either but what im saying how can you know for sure ??



I'll say it again, if Gallieleo had been born in 1940 he wouldn't need to put away his 16 th century telescope he would never have had a 16 th century telescope! He would have spent his entire career dealing with modern telescopes!


Your comparing this to boxing ?? thats completey different and you know it.

Aww man you are so exasperating! I know his style is old that's because he fought in 1900!!!

If he was born in 1950 he wouldn't fight like that would he?

How can you not understand the analogy? It's not different it's exactly the same principal.


When it comes to Gallileo you know full well that the telescopes they had back then were just the best tools that he had available to him at that point in history. If he lived in the present he would have a different set of tools.

It's the same in boxing. In 1900 Jack Johnson was drawing on (and inspiring) all of the accumulated boxing knowledge of his time and putting it to better use than any other heavyweight.

This is because he had an innate understanding of pugilism and that ability can be translated to any era.

If he was born in 1950 he would have used his innate understanding of pugilism to master the accumluated boxing knowledge of that current era and built upon that. He wouldn't be fighting like he did in 1900, because he wouldn't have been from the 1900's! How is that so hard to understand?

Leonardo Da Vinci is famous for many things but one of his most curious achievements were his drawings and designs of helicopters several hundred years before they were invented.

Now modern scientists have attempted to build some of Da Vinci's designs and they don't work. His helicopter wouldn't have flown.

Does that mean that if he would have lived today he would have been incapable of bulding a helicopter that flew? Of course not, he was several hundred years ahead of his time and it's fair to assume that if he lived today he would be designing things way beyond our current understanding of technology.

How can you not see how this relates to Johnson? Or for that matter any sporting athlete?

I have just read through this thread with a lot of interest.

Nice arguments, Bilbo