- Joined
- Jan 11, 2010
- Messages
- 1,935
- Reaction score
- 0
there was no such thing as the cruiserweight division back then
Last edited:
Prime Jack Johnson vs Jack Dempsey
- Thread starter KORUPT xLOxx
- Start date
there was no such thing as the cruiserweight division back then
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2003
- Messages
- 7,763
- Reaction score
- 0
Got a source for that? Thanks in advance.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2003
- Messages
- 7,763
- Reaction score
- 0
So Sam McVey, Joe Jeanette and Sam Langford don't count as quality wins (and it should be noted that Boxrec does have incomplete records if you're going to start posting their records at fight time, btw)?
[/QUOTE]
In the first round, Ketchel leaps to throw a left hook, trying to reach the taller man. Johnson used the technique of leaning back on his right leg and pulling away from a punch, something Ali would later employ, making it even harder for Ketchel to reach him. Johnson hits Stanley a solid right cross which has none of the look of "exhibition" about it.
In round 2, Johnson becomes very aggressive, throwing blows that give no indication of being less than full force. He hits Ketchel with a solid left, then Stanley retaliates with a body shot that doubles Jack over. With his full 209 pounds behind it, Johnson hits Ketchel a perfect right cross with such momentum that Jack must leap over the falling middleweight to keep from going down atop him. He stands over the fallen Ketchel for a moment, as if daring him to rise, then moves to the corner as the referee begins counting. Stanley rises to one knee, shakes his head, and takes the full 8 count before rising. He survives to the bell, despite Johnson's attempts to land a finisher.
In subsequent rounds Johnson bloodies Ketchel's face, while the latter continues to come after his tormentor. Rounds 3-7 are mostly Johnson, taking advantage of his size and reach to punish the game middleweight champion. The blows are landed with force, the blood is real, and the only exhibition is how well Ketchel can take a punch from a bigger man. In round 8 Ketchel swarms all over Johnson, leaping to land his fist to the heavyweight champion's face, driving hooks to his ribs when he tries to tie him up. Johnson goes into his famous defensive posture and turns the initiative over to Stanley. In rounds 9-11 it's mostly Ketchel, as Jack seems content to defend and land the occasional shot when a wild Ketchel swing leaves him open. The crowd is getting into it, as they begin to see the possibility of Johnson being defeated by a middleweight.
And now we come to the 12th round. Both men have been marked, Ketchel's face is bloody, and they circle each other like stalking beasts. After a sharp exchange, the fighters separate. Ketchel cocks his right hand back all the way to his hip, an action so obvious one can't imagine how Johnson would call it a "sneak" punch. Throwing from his right hip, Ketchel comes in with an overhand right that hits Johnson so hard, it actually spins him around. Jack lands hard on his butt. The crowd jumps to its feet.
Jack Johnson tries to rise, but sinks down again. He seems surprised and dazed and looks at Ketchel as if to say, "How the hell did you do that?" The referee starts to count.
Johnson rolls over to his hands and knees, using the palm of his right glove and the surface of his left to try to push himself off the floor. The count continues as he straightens his arms and walks his legs up under him, obviously hurt. He does not "bounce right up" as his and other accounts claim. Somewhere around the count of 8 or 9 he's on his feet. It was that close.
Johnson may still be dazed, but now Stanley unwitting plays into his hands. The smaller man, eager for the knockout, rushes in wide open and Johnson catches him with a tremendous right cross, its impact magnified by the forward motion of Ketchel. Stanley is rocked back on his heels by the punch, then collapses to the mat as the momentum of Johnson's punch carries him over the fallen man. Jack himself falls to the mat on the opposite side of Ketchel, having put all 209 pounds into the punch. He rises as the referee starts to count over the middleweight champ.
Jack moves to the ropes and while the ref counts Ketchel out, he wipes off the surface of the left glove with the palm of the right. (The surface that he used to push off the floor, not the glove that knocked out Ketchel) It is probably true that Johnson found Ketchel's teeth embedded in the glove, but that was after the fight. The old timers tales of him picking the teeth out as Stanley was counted out were simply wrong. Johnson wiped the left glove only, then placed his arms on the ropes. "I thought I killed him," Johnson would later say of the knockout; Ketchek was out for 10 minutes.
A year later, Ketchel is dead, murdered by the jealous boyfriend of a woman he may have made a lewd remark to as she fixed his breakfast. Johnson will go on to claim the fight was only an exhibition and he was dropped by a "sucker" or "sneak" punch. However, the film of the fight clearly shows it was no exhibition and from round one both men were hitting with serious intent.
In 1985, seventy-six years later, Michael Spinks would do what no other light heavyweight ever could when he took the heavyweight title from an aging Larry Holmes. But in 1909, middleweight champion Stanley Ketchel came within a count of 2 of taking the heavyweight crown from one of the best of the heavyweight champions still in his prime.[/QUOTE]
The full article:
What Really Happened in the Jack Johnson-Stanley Ketchel Fight?
No one said they weren't...but his greatest and most sounding win was against
the former champion Jeffries...you can't debate that.
That 15 round KO came like a shock in he whole USA.
God knows how the Langford bout went...there are so many different testimonies, some ppl. say Langford got robbed, some say(Johnson included) that Jack totally dominated that fight, but you can't really take him serious, he was a notorious lying POS.
Besides that, he ducked those 3 fighters for the rest of his career....
And ppl. give Jack Dempsey allot of shit for not fighting Harry Wills, who it wasn't even that good to being with..
- Joined
- Sep 4, 2004
- Messages
- 15,882
- Reaction score
- 1,173
Use this source, Taz. Getting day after reports is just a teenie bit better than quoting something written 100 years after the fact;
Search Newspaper Pages - Chronicling America - The Library of Congress
The San Francisco Call (from the fight's location) has some great stuff on there that cover the buildup, the actual fight, and the immediate aftermath. You should find some interesting stuff. And some suspicious stuff, as well, covering reasons why people even back then questioned the validity of the fight.
Search Newspaper Pages - Chronicling America - The Library of Congress
The San Francisco Call (from the fight's location) has some great stuff on there that cover the buildup, the actual fight, and the immediate aftermath. You should find some interesting stuff. And some suspicious stuff, as well, covering reasons why people even back then questioned the validity of the fight.
- Joined
- Sep 4, 2004
- Messages
- 15,882
- Reaction score
- 1,173
Check out the dispute over the side bet. Read about the secret meeting Coffroth and Johnson had just a couple of nights before the fight. Read about the peculiar betting patterns. Read about the gate receipts and when facturing in the "side bet" that was said to still be on, read about and wonder how Ketchel could afford to buy a $6,000 automobile when his take was only $1,700. You can also read about what those sitting at ringside thought about this "knockdown" of Johnson too.
Probably some other stuff too, but those are a few things I remember reading in the past that questioned the legitimacy of the fight. And all written by people who were on the scene at that very time and sitting ringside to watch the fight. Unlike us 100 years later, who have to resort to grainy footage that was shot from a distance quite far back.
Probably some other stuff too, but those are a few things I remember reading in the past that questioned the legitimacy of the fight. And all written by people who were on the scene at that very time and sitting ringside to watch the fight. Unlike us 100 years later, who have to resort to grainy footage that was shot from a distance quite far back.
- Joined
- Jan 11, 2010
- Messages
- 1,935
- Reaction score
- 0
heres the problem with both jack johnsons and jack dempseys legacy's
jack johnson avoided all the top 10 black boxers once he was champion
jack dempsey may have plastered wrapped his hands for a few fights
both those things leave a cloud over their legacy's
jack johnson avoided all the top 10 black boxers once he was champion
jack dempsey may have plastered wrapped his hands for a few fights
both those things leave a cloud over their legacy's
Ketchel was a freakish puncher, there is no shame in getting caught by him. Both Johnson and dempsey are obviously atg's, interesting style matchup. At his best i would go with Dempsey, movement, power, ferocity, but he would have to be at his best. Johnson was a very intelligent fighter and was very methodical, not someone you can sleep on.
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2003
- Messages
- 7,763
- Reaction score
- 0
It was the most historically significant win and was shocking to the white people in the US in 1910 given the hype job done on Jeffries, but it wasn't the best quality win vs. a top fighter (which is what I'd consider being a key part of the greatest win).
I've never read a legitimate source that said Langford was robbed in the fight - all the sources I've read said he was pretty soundly beaten, but that he was dogged enough that Johnson didn't want anymore to do with with him.
He still got the W over them, which is my point - he beat them and whether or not he refused to fight them afterwards is immaterial since his resume was already boosted by the wins over them.
Why do you say that? He had wars with the other 3 top black contenders of the era and was regarded as the top man (or #2 guy) for about 6 years there.
Edit: Thanks for the fight report posting, btw - forgot about the 2nd & 3rd round KDs.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Oct 22, 2006
- Messages
- 11,309
- Reaction score
- 757
What are the stats on these guys? Doesn't Johnson outweigh Dempsey by 50 pounds and about a foot in height?
They'd be 2 or 3 divisions apart if it were today.
Johnson, not even close, he'd embarrass Dempsey.
A fair fight, (the 2 men were actually the same size) then it'd be a lot more interesting - but styles make fights - and Johnson would still embarrass him as most boxer/movers do to just punchers/brawlers.
History has shown us that. I love Dempsey, but reality is reality.
They'd be 2 or 3 divisions apart if it were today.
Johnson, not even close, he'd embarrass Dempsey.
A fair fight, (the 2 men were actually the same size) then it'd be a lot more interesting - but styles make fights - and Johnson would still embarrass him as most boxer/movers do to just punchers/brawlers.
History has shown us that. I love Dempsey, but reality is reality.
- Joined
- Sep 14, 2009
- Messages
- 949
- Reaction score
- 0
Johnson was 6'1.5" with a 74" wingspan and weighed in at around 210 in his prime. Dempsey was 6'1" with a 77" wingspan and weighed close to 190 for his championship fights.
I know there's a list of their full tale of the tape somewhere, but I couldn't find it.
C
chaingun
Guest
Great topic. I love the golden age of boxing the the years leading up to it. The fact we can see a lot of clips of it on youtube is pretty cool. Seeing John L. Sullivan in an old grainy film throwing some punches blows me away - just because his image is engrained in our heads mostly in black and white photos and drawings. I just wonder how much un-released film is still out there. You think the entire Bill Cayton collection is probably out on youtube by now?
Dempsey was a swarmer, and probably the greatest one at it.
Generally swarmers beat boxers, but lose to sluggers.
I'm just wondering what makes you think Johnson has even the slightest chance to get out of the first 5 rounds, let alone beat Dempsey.
Dempsey was better all around.
quicker, faster, stronger, more powerful puncher, more elusive, better chin, quicker hands...
His initial onslaught would put the soft chinned and slow starter Johnson, to sleep.
- Joined
- Mar 25, 2003
- Messages
- 21,631
- Reaction score
- 7,377
Just foung the Ketchel fight, doesn't look anything like a 10 count. Anyway, Johnson did what champs do, get up and take care of business:YouTube - ‪Stanley Ketchel vs Jack Johnson‬‎
- Joined
- Sep 14, 2009
- Messages
- 949
- Reaction score
- 0
Have you seen Unforgivable Blackness? According to Johnson, they agreed to take it easy on each other making sure the fight would go 20 rounds and they'd get more people to see the fight in theaters. Ketchel felt like he could beat Johnson and a fight broke out in the middle of a boxing match. The film doesn't show this as being particularly accurate. Ketchel went down in the 2nd round taking an 8 count and Johnson tried to finish the middleweight early. It isn't until the 8th round that Johnson starts to sit back and coast.
In the 12th round, Ketchel manages to land that snapping lead right that spun Johnson around. That punch Jack Johnson delivered after getting off the canvas is still one of the hardest in the history of the sport. Ketchel was unconscious for a few minutes after with half of his teeth in his mouth, a fourth on the canvas, and a fourth stuck in Johnson's right glove.
spiralingintro
White Belt
- Joined
- Jan 29, 2008
- Messages
- 112
- Reaction score
- 0
I was thinking he beat Langford. I do believe Dempsey refused to fight him as well. Papa Jack would have beat Dempsey. Tunney proved that a sound boxer could beat The Mauler (brawler, which stylistically usually looses to the boxer,hello!)
spiralingintro
White Belt
- Joined
- Jan 29, 2008
- Messages
- 112
- Reaction score
- 0
For a fantastic fictional account of Johnson and Ketchel raising hell, check out the book, The Killings of Stanley Ketchel. It's a good read.
spiralingintro
White Belt
- Joined
- Jan 29, 2008
- Messages
- 112
- Reaction score
- 0
You have got to be kidding man! Swarmers beat boxers but lose to sluggers!!! Fantastic job, Sir Troll. Why didn't the "swarmer" beat Tunney?
- Joined
- Mar 17, 2007
- Messages
- 17,675
- Reaction score
- 6,444
Yeah, and Dempsey was prime against Tunney. Like McCallum against Jones Jr.
