Was Jack Johnson good for Boxing???

First topic message reminder :

Simple question but a hard one to answer........

Yes
-----

Broke the color line.........
Brought great skill and was like it or not a pioneer........
Huge character that brought Boxing into the mainstream
Gave black people especially in the States a certain pride and no doubt encouraged a new generation of Black boxers...If he can do it i can do it etc!!!
One of Boxing's biggest characters!!

No
-----

Hurt some fighters of his time and had them frozen out of the scene because of his character...
Caused riots and fatalities (although not sure he was all to blame) because of his success
His taunting and goading was less than tasteful.......
Brought bad publicity to the sport...If you don't go with the all publicity is good publicity line!!!
Brought racial tension to the fore...

Obviously I don't go too in-depth ..but it's a valid question...

Was Jack johnson good for the sport!! Would it have been better without him??

I believe I'm suggesting he is underappreciated

You suggested a few things in your interesting post...

Wasn't maligning you..it was good stuff..

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:You suggested a few things in your interesting post...

Wasn't maligning you..it was good stuff..

Who hacked TRUSSMANs account?

Scottrf wrote:

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:You suggested a few things in your interesting post...

Wasn't maligning you..it was good stuff..

Who hacked TRUSSMANs account?

I dunno but it's worrying isn't it?

The point with Johnson was that there were not a great top level white challengers out there. The likes of McVea, Jeanette and Langford were more qualified.

The event of black fighter winning the heavyweight championship was obviously a positive for boxing but the bigger question is that was the fact that black fighter happened to be Johnson a positive thing? I dont believe it was, all things considered because the consequences of his reign were devastating for black heavyweights and boxing in general. Quality fighters like Jeanette, McVea, Langford and Wills were frozen out. Would this have happened had Johnsons approach been different? I dont think so. He was well aware that by provocing white America he was damaging future prospects for his race. As I said above, he inherited a burden heavier than any other champion in history which was not of his making but he didnt carry this burden well which had, in my view, an overall negative impact at least for the next 20 years in the sport until Joe Louis.

In short, the fact there was a first ever black heavyweight champion is naturally a positive but the fact it just so happened to be Jack Johnson I think was, ultimately, a negative.

Interesting I can see where you are all coming from...Just think that it needed someone with Johnson's character to get a shot in the first place...

Maybe he was the price to pay for a black heavy champ in those days.

I still believe that had the aforementioned fighters been given the opportunity to fight for the crown, they would ultimately have succumbed to pressure and the title reverted back to the white man in double quick time. As stated in any number of books on Johnson, the promotors of the day were unhappy pitting black fighters with one another and I don't see this being different with the likes of Jeanette, Wills, McVea or Langford in possession of the title...but, just to play Devil's Advocate, who's to say those four wouldn't have possessed the same mentality as Johnson once they got their hands on the title?

There is no combination of words I could put on the back of a postcard
No song that I could sing, but I can try for your heart
Our dreams, and they are made out of real things
Like a, shoebox of photographs
With sepia-toned loving
Love is the answer,
At least for most of the questions in my heart
Like why are we here? And where do we go?
And how come it's so hard?
It's not always easy and
Sometimes life can be deceiving
I'll tell you one thing, it's always better when we're together

Yes, he was. Too many reasons to be bothered to list them.



Also, I thought coxy was taking the michael when he kept on about the 'recycling' of previous articles. How wrong I was.

Always get one d**k...

Back to Dave's question.....Would the public have bought an all black showdown..I doubt it..

Langford were prisoners of their time..not all Johnson's fault..

Either contribute your own stuff or go away Balti...silly billy.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Always get one d**k...

Back to Dave's question.....Would the public have bought an all black showdown..I doubt it..

Langford were prisoners of their time..not all Johnson's fault..

Is this aimed at me?

TRUSSMAN66 theres an argument to said that maybe he needed to rock the boat to get a shot but once he was a champion, his actions there were largely unneccessary. He drew the colour line himself and proceeded to goad white society not to mention take part in suspicious fixed bouts and claims of dives and fixes here and there.

As the first black champion he had the opportunity to really take relations and image further which would have benefited all black fighters and society in general but instead he made absolutely no attempt to advance the cause of his fellow fighters and race and at times seemed to do the opposite.

In general I dont like burdening boxers with social and political issues which is not their station but Johnson is unique in many regards and even the smallest degree of humility or attempt to reach out to white society could have gone a long way and was a far cry from the stance he adopted. In most other eras he would just have been a brash champion that wasnt given much more thought beyond that but its difficult t look past the circumstances and times he operated and what puts me off him is the fact he knew so well the consequences of his actions and the position he held.

No it wasn't aimed at you..but if you don't like the subject just ignore the thread...

I agree colonel but you not think it was his personality that got him a shot in the first place......Became the villain then and like I said before it's hard for anybody especially a black guy in them times to shed a label..

It's not that I dislike the subject but over the past week or two all your threads follow a very similar cut-and-paste template. Jack Johnson did some things which are to be applauded, and he did some which should be deplored.



The things he did which weren't good for the sport are things he wasn't the first or last to do.



Those things he did which were good for the sport are remembered because they hastened the arrival of significant improvements.



It's not a difficult decision.

Thing is I write about what interests me (most stuff like Dempsey is recycled)....I took the trouble to write it when I don't have to.....and I expect better from people like you ..than to have one line pops and then p**s off..

You're not union or Coxy ..expect more of a contribution if you choose to post...

DAVE667 wrote:I'd like to ask how many other champions have given titles shots to other fighters for truly altruistic reasons? Who in their right mind would offer a shot to someone with a real chance of beating them just to "do the right thing"? Johnson was Champion, liked being Champion and enjoyed the fame and money that went with it. Like everyone that went before him, he wasn't going to just throw it all away. I don't see him as unique in that respect.

In that era, I doubt whether ANY black HW Champion would be viewed favourably, as blacks were seen as inferior human beings and anyone seeking to buck that trend was going to suffer the consequences. Less strong willed/belligerent fighters than Jack would have caved in to public pressure, fought any and all white challengers until they were usurped and the "status quo" was returned.

Some good points Dave

Johnson is no diffrent from any other fighter that drew the colour line. Sure he was black, but he got his chance for a shot at the title on his own, he didn't have to give anything back, this was the early 20th century we're talking about here.

Don't think you're giving Burns enough credit for making the Johnson fight happen Truss, it was he who made it not Johnson, his doggedness to defend against the best fighters available led him to Johnson, he was also the first man to defend against a jewish challenger.

He was offered big money for Johnson who doggedly pursued him it must be said..

Credit for defending against a black man though for sure..

I'm sure he tried to outprice himself but the money was paid in Australia. Not sure if he really tried though.

I dont really agree with the view that Johnson siply did what anyone lse would do. He knew more than anyone how hard black fighters had it and his larely selfish actions crippled the opportunities for his fellow black heavyweights. This went beond merely enjoyig the perks of being a heavyweigh champion and make no mistake, Johnson knew exactly the consequencs of his actions. there has even been suggestion he wanted to be remembered as the only black heavyweight champion and thus was happy to see his fellow black heavyweights have the door slammed shut on them.

Rightly or wrongly Johnson inherited a burden and he knew what he carried on his shoulders. Much of his actions I think showed contemp for his fellow race and the sport in general. I dont qustion for second that he paid his dues in the sport and tht he was a quality fighter but for me his actions and demeanor as champion were largely a negtive impact for the sport and black fighters in general. His actions as a champion were almost entirely selfish, which is fine if you think thats the norm but you cant escape the burden he carried and I think one has to accept he cant have it both ways as a savior for the black cause and actions which suggest the contrary. I dont like being too negative on the subject because I think we can all recognise what an apalling burden Johnson had to inherit in the times but realistically I feel if it had of been a Langford or Wills that had broken the barrier the outcome would have been far more positive.

Good for boxing -yes someone needed to break the colour line, and I believe that it was a good thing that when it was broken it was by someone of great ability and hepled destroy the myth of white men being physically superior. It must have also been great for the black population to see Johnson refuse to back down and behave as the white man told him to, and take a postion that they could not without risking their lives. Inspirational where he intended to be or not

Found this article written in 1990.

It deals mainly with the complex relationship between Louis, Jonhson and black Americans.

I thought it was interesting.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1136911/1/index.htm

Truss he wasn't just good for boxing he was essential.

He broke down the shameful colour wall that was placed in front of black fighters at the time. He had the talent to back it up a defensive genius and one of the first heavyweights to adopt a style like that and maybe the best ever.

He loved the limelight and although he enraged many he loved life and the excesses that came with being heavyweight champ. If it was OK for a white man the it was OK for Johnson.

Without Johnson their may have been no Louis. An inspiration who has surely inspired more than one generation of black fighters.

I hate to criticise him to much for not fighting certain fighters because he wasn't the only one around who did it.

The fact their were riots wasn't his fault that society at the time who was to blame.

The taunting of opponents I can understand he was put down for being black and seen his people being treated the same way. I've always looked at this more as getting his own back.

Not sure about the bad publicity their was a section of the press who were very racist.

Is bringing racial tension to the fore his fault? I don't think so. The tension was their the fact a black man won a boxing match caused deaths and riots speaks volumes for the sense these people had.

I firmly believe Johnson was a pioneer and probably the most important fighter in the history of the sport. Boxing wouldn't be the same as the sport we love today.

Cant really agree with that. I just dont think it had to be Johnson and Johnson alone that was capable of breaking the colour barrier at heavyweight. I think it was coming. Already in other weights black fighters were claiming titles and pushing through the ranks, at heavyweight the blck fighters like Langford, Jeanette, Wills, McVea and so on were making it difficult to ignore the obvious and I think sooner rather than later the barrier was going to broken. It just needed the right timing and ingredients.

Also saying there might no Louis without Johnson is being extremelly generous when I think Louis was essentially in spite of rather than because of Johnson. There cant be any denying the immediate negative impact for black fighters post Johnson. He broke the colour barrier, but saw that it was firmly redrawn after him. So this wasnt opening the floodgates as much as walking through the door and closing it behind him.

There is much to admire and much to loath about Johnson. He was a fantastic fighter, he earned his shot and he payed his dues. One can even admire his anti establishment and unwillingness to bow to white authority. But the reality was his actions went beyond simply enjoying himself and he knew that his behavior was hurting the opportunities for his own race and he himself immediately slammed the door shut on his own race by refusing to entertain fighting them when this alone could have made a huge difference. Even if he wanted to avoid the real tests like Langford he could have defended against a more average black fighter.

The post Johnson years were a definate set back for black heavyweights and I dont think Louis had much to do with Johnson other than enough time had passed and opinions softened to allow another black fighter the opportunity to go for the title again tentatively.

It could have been one of a few but Johnson had a special attitude he wouldn't bow to authority. He courted publicity good or bad and wanted all of America to know who he was.

He may have broken the colour barrier and like you say closed the door behind him Although the fact Dempsey drew the colour line had something to do with it for a period of time.

My point on being no Louis without Johnson is more from an inspirational point of view. Before Johnson a black man knew his only chance at a shot was to bow to authority and be treated as a second class citizen even then he probably wouldn't get a shot. Johnson never stood for it.

I believe Dempsey drawing the colour line was more to do with a collective policy within boxing rather than anything to do with him as an individual. As a champion he essentially couldnt fight a black contender even if he wanted to mainly through politics. This was a direct reaction by white America to Johnsons reign.

Dont get your point regarding Louis because far from being the rebel to authority like Johnson, Louis actually got his shot and his reign by being rather subserviant for want of a better word and avoiding anything that could be seen as inflammatory to white society. I think this combined with Louis genuinely humble, calm and placid personality did for more to erase the colour line than anything Johnson did.

If anything I think black heavyweights in the aftermath of Johnson would have felt their career opportunities were more limited than ever and Johnson became an example of how not act if you were black and wanted to get ahead which is why such lengths were taken with Louis to ensure he did nothing that would rock the boat.

I appeciate that there is something to admire with Johnsons attitude and refusal to bow down, but its tempered by his own completely self serving interests and his understanding that what he was doing would have a detrimental impact on his fellow black fighters. So while I think one can admire his rebelliousness, I dont think hes entitled to the status of being this man who broke down the colour barrier and opened so many doors for black fighters and advanced their cause. This isnt the reality. He didnt do anything as champion that made things better for black fighters and was happy to avoid the biggest challenges from the black fighters whos position he understood all too well.

Was it Johnson fault the colour line was drawn in his aftermath?

Yes he never played the white man's games but why should he have? Johnson was treated with no respect all his life then got himself into a position where he could rub it in the face of a section of society who wanted to keep him down. Most people would have done the same.

How could he not be like that people were filling stadiums to watch these great white hopes that Johnson was a level above in the main.

Fighting black fighters made no financial sense for Johnson. The public wanted to see a white man beat him and payed money in hope more than expectation in a few cases.

Louis was the exact opposite of Johnson and I don't believe for one minute that this was not a pre empted decision based on Americas reaction to Johnson.

prettyboykev wrote:Was it Johnson fault the colour line was drawn in his aftermath?

Yes. Not wholly but at least partially because of his behaviour.

No coincidence that Louis was more media friendly and plenty of black boxers got title shots after him.

Scottrf wrote:

prettyboykev wrote:Was it Johnson fault the colour line was drawn in his aftermath?

Yes. Not wholly but at least partially because of his behaviour.

No coincidence that Louis was more media friendly and plenty of black boxers got title shots after him.

It must have been human nature to behave in the way Johnson did. He had been put down and was a second class citizen. Then he is the heavyweight champ and people want him to play the fiddle to the tune of the people who put him down for the sake of other fighters?

prettyboykev wrote:

Scottrf wrote:

prettyboykev wrote:Was it Johnson fault the colour line was drawn in his aftermath?

Yes. Not wholly but at least partially because of his behaviour.

No coincidence that Louis was more media friendly and plenty of black boxers got title shots after him.

It must have been human nature to behave in the way Johnson did. He had been put down and was a second class citizen. Then he is the heavyweight champ and people want him to play the fiddle to the tune of the people who put him down for the sake of other fighters?

I don't see why that means he was good for the cause. All the evidence points to him setting black challengers back a few steps, that he has a reason to behave in the way he did doesn't change that.

Scottrf wrote:

prettyboykev wrote:

Scottrf wrote:

prettyboykev wrote:Was it Johnson fault the colour line was drawn in his aftermath?

Yes. Not wholly but at least partially because of his behaviour.

No coincidence that Louis was more media friendly and plenty of black boxers got title shots after him.

It must have been human nature to behave in the way Johnson did. He had been put down and was a second class citizen. Then he is the heavyweight champ and people want him to play the fiddle to the tune of the people who put him down for the sake of other fighters?

I don't see why that means he was good for the cause. All the evidence points to him setting black challengers back a few steps, that he has a reason to behave in the way he did doesn't change that.

He was black, the heavyweight champion and he stood up to the white man. He is an inspiration. The fact black fighters were held back in the aftermath of his reign is society at the times ills not Johnson. It would have been fine for a white champion to behave in the manner he did so I don't criticise him for it.

You’re looking to level blame. I’m not, I’m emotionally neutral, I just don’t think black boxers were given more opportunities immediately after him than before, in fact the opposite.

Why should Johnson shoulder the blame for acting in a similar manner to what the majority of people in his situation would have.

It's a fact black boxers weren't given more oppurtunities after him but I don't blame him I blame society at the time.

I sort of look upon him as Ali before a black boxer was allowed to be Ali.

The question isnt really was Johnson to blame. Obviously the primary blame lay with society of the time. But the question is was he good for boxing?

Given the nature of his reign, his attitude and the aftermath of his reign I dont think the answer is an unequivacle "yes".

I dont see him being like Ali becuase Ali was making a stand for what he believed was his people and his religion at the time and was willing to sacrifice things personally to do so. As a champion Johnson was entirely selfish and froze out his own race and engaged in behaviour, often unneccassary which he knew full well would damage the image of his race and their prospects in boxing. I dont think Johnson ever did anything above or beyond the call of duty as a champion.

One can speculate back and forth how much he can be blamed and to what extent etc but in answering the overall question of whether he was good for boxing I dont think one can simply dismiss the subsequent 20 ears of his reign and his title reign itself in terms of the consequences for black fighters. His title reign heralded but a tempory colour line break whereas its entirely possible a less volatile black fighter could have seen it broken permanantly, as Louis did some 20 years later.

Colonial My Ali comparison is more about Johnsons lack of respect for authority and his 'place' within society at the time.

Does anybody think Langford, Jeanette or McVea would have been given a shot at the crown had Johnson not won it? Considering there were riots because Jeffries couldn't win the belt back, and a campaign to find a great white hope to win the belt back for the white race, i don't understand why everybody would sit back and watch two black fighters fight for the Heavyweight Championship.

prettyboykev wrote:

Scottrf wrote:

prettyboykev wrote:

Scottrf wrote:

prettyboykev wrote:Was it Johnson fault the colour line was drawn in his aftermath?

Yes. Not wholly but at least partially because of his behaviour.

No coincidence that Louis was more media friendly and plenty of black boxers got title shots after him.

It must have been human nature to behave in the way Johnson did. He had been put down and was a second class citizen. Then he is the heavyweight champ and people want him to play the fiddle to the tune of the people who put him down for the sake of other fighters?

I don't see why that means he was good for the cause. All the evidence points to him setting black challengers back a few steps, that he has a reason to behave in the way he did doesn't change that.

He was black, the heavyweight champion and he stood up to the white man. He is an inspiration. The fact black fighters were held back in the aftermath of his reign is society at the times ills not Johnson. It would have been fine for a white champion to behave in the manner he did so I don't criticise him for it.

You may be right in that you cannot blame Johnson for black fighters being held back after his reign although I think he needs to shoulder some of the blame, but you damn sure can blame Johnson for black fighters being held back during his reign. For me in Johnson's position knowing how hard it was being denied opportunities and the shots his talent deserves to then do the same to other black fighters as champion is shameful and pretty unforgivable

rowley wrote:

prettyboykev wrote:

Scottrf wrote:

prettyboykev wrote:

Scottrf wrote:

prettyboykev wrote:Was it Johnson fault the colour line was drawn in his aftermath?

Yes. Not wholly but at least partially because of his behaviour.

No coincidence that Louis was more media friendly and plenty of black boxers got title shots after him.

It must have been human nature to behave in the way Johnson did. He had been put down and was a second class citizen. Then he is the heavyweight champ and people want him to play the fiddle to the tune of the people who put him down for the sake of other fighters?

I don't see why that means he was good for the cause. All the evidence points to him setting black challengers back a few steps, that he has a reason to behave in the way he did doesn't change that.

He was black, the heavyweight champion and he stood up to the white man. He is an inspiration. The fact black fighters were held back in the aftermath of his reign is society at the times ills not Johnson. It would have been fine for a white champion to behave in the manner he did so I don't criticise him for it.

You may be right in that you cannot blame Johnson for black fighters being held back after his reign although I think he needs to shoulder some of the blame, but you damn sure can blame Johnson for black fighters being held back during his reign. For me in Johnson's position knowing how hard it was being denied opportunities and the shots his talent deserves to then do the same to other black fighters as champion is shameful and pretty unforgivable

White fighters did the same thing and financially it made no sense for Johnson to fight another black man. The public wanted a white man to beat him and were paying money to watch these great white hopes who in some cases had next to no chance of succeeding.

Would the American public have payed money to watch 2 black fighters fighting for the World heavyweight title? Given they would have been guaranteed a black champion and their reaction to Johnson winning the title absolutely not.

Why should Johnson have fought better fighters for less money? No fighter in history does that.

There was a lot of money on the table to fight Langford, kev. You can bet your boots it's more than he earned against Tony Ross or Al Kauffmann. Also, he did fight a fellow black, Battling Jim Johnson, in Paris. Just happened to be a particularly poor one.

I will take your word on the Langford fight Windy with age comes great wisdom!

It's a fight I wish Johnson had took. Regardless of colour Langford deserved the shot.

What were his reasons for not fighting Langford then because Johnson was an excellent boxer?

In my case it probably doesn't, kev, but that's an extremely nice compliment.

Thank you.

You see what I dont understand is that you are saying Johnson merely did what other fighters of the time did (not entirely true by the way as the were other fighters who had fought against black contenders such as Barbados Joe Walcott and Joe Gans and Hart himself was willing to defend against Johnson).

But even if you absolve Johnson of any blame for his fairly average title reign then I dont see why hes entitled to be placed on a pedestal as such a great figure for the advancement of the sport? He didnt do anything special in terms of advancing the cause for black fighters, he drew the colour line himself and he generally partook in easy defences with the occasional suspicion of a rigging or exhibition match.

It wasnt until Jeffries that there was a genuine "great white hope" as up to then it had clearly been a case of great white no hopers.

Also there is reasonable supporting evidence to suggest there was plenty of money to be made fighting Langford for instance with sizeable sums being offered and the evidence clearly points to Johnsons avoidance of the likes of Langford being far more to do with actual risk as opposed to lack of financial reward. (He fought Battling Jim Johnson for instance who was black).

Another thing is that this wasnt the tv ppv era so interest levels in the fights werent determined by who was going to tune on tv. There venues all over the world such as France and Australia that would have had plenty of interest in two top black fighters contesting the titles as well as Southern parts of the United States. Fights between the likes of Langford, Walcott and Gans had attracted plenty of interest in the past and were for early versions of the lightweight or welterweight titles.

I think if you want to look at Johnson purely as fighter then theres plenty to admire and some not so. But if you push him into the realm of being a kind of figure who transcends the sport in social and political terms then I think you have to look at more than just the fighting aspect and in this regard I dont think Johnson did anything special with his opportunity to forward opportunities for black fighters or help their cause and there was an element of going looking for trouble with him which went beyond simply enjoying his status as champion and had dire consequences for his fellow black heavyweights. So in a social/political/iconic sense I think you have to consider the fact he himself refused to face the top black contenders and was happy to milk his title and serve his own interests almost entirely.

Thanks for the offerings..

Enjoyed the debate....meaty subject..some great points!

It was a cracking article, Truss.