Was Jack Johnson good for Boxing???

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??

Yes, I think he was Truss. Even if it is just for breaking the colour line. Johnson did bring a lot of negative aspects to the sport but if it wasn't for him doing eerything in such a public way then the careers of black fighters in boxing could have been held back for another 30 or 40 years.

His highlighting of the racial tension at the time served to bring more publicity to the fore and in a roundabout way brought more people to watch boxing, just to see him get beat. I don't think he can be blamed for the riots although his personality didn't help.. There was some other great black fighters about at the time e.g Langford but they didn't have the ability to break down the barriers that Johnson was able to.

At the time Johnson was obviously seen as being bad for the sport but in hindsight I'd definitely say that he did a good job and there aren't toomany people who have done more to bring boxing forward.

Johnson was a victim of the times, if he was about these days nobody would blink an eye, there no doubt he rubbed people's noses in it but nobody knows the kind of abuse he may have put up with growing up. It was a white mans world back then but Johnson was Heavyweight Champion of the world and wouldn't accept second best. His days as Heavyweight Champion was a turning point for Black society in America at the time.

It's a debatable issue Mate.....Perhaps if he had been more a Joe Louis character then I'd agree with you..

Then again if he'd been more of a Louis character would he have got a shot in the first place..

Cheers..

Not sure about bringing the game forward though.....although his style was pretty pioneering.

The Boss wrote:There was some other great black fighters about at the time e.g Langford but they didn't have the ability to break down the barriers that Johnson was able to.

Wasn't Johnson part of the reason fighters like Langford didn't get a fair crack at the whip?

Was always under the belief Johnson avoided Langford when HW champ like the plague. Could be wrong however.

I quite admire Johnson for his attitude with white America. He refused to tow the line and went totally against the grain with how a black man should act at the time.

If anything he certainly got people watching boxing, even if it was to watch him lose.

Turning point for black society??? debatable although he did show the way to some.

Some might argue the civil war was the big turning point...

But he obviously was a prominent figure in Black society although he was manichean and hated his own race..

I don't really mean bringing the boxing game forward in that sense, Truss. I mean more along the lines of advancing it in the case of black fighters.

Badgerhands, from what I can remember Johnson did avoid Langford as champion but if Johnson hadn't have put the pressure he did on the world of boxing to be given his title shot then I don't think any of the other black heavyweights had the power of character to force themselves into a title fight, great fighters though they were.

I would say yes on balance. He certainly was a pioneer, defensively he was way ahead of his time, that's for sure. It is hard to comprehend just how courageous a character he was for standing up against predjudice, whilst still maintaining a full and prosperous boxing career. Being a black icon in those days must have been a full time job on it's own, let alone being the first black heavyweight champion. The thing I love about him, is that he more or less carried on as if black and white were non-existant. I am sure it must have been a conscious decision, but the way he just disregarded the whole concept of racism on occasions is a testament to his couage.

He did taunt people, especially in his title fight with Burn's, but I guess that was just all his anger and frustration coming to the surface. He had chased Burn's round the globe to get the fight and was then subjected to more abuse before and during the fight. He did block certain other black boxers from title fights, and I guess that is a mark against him, but for me, not enough to tip the balance against him being good for the sport.

While his title reign was a disappointment, I'd still say a huge yes - Johnson was very good for the sport, and a key figure in the history of it.

You have to remember that as well as suffering discrimination on a personal level, there was always a wide-held belief amongst some that not only were blacks inferior people, they were also inferior athletes. Johnson went a long way towards changing that perception by achieving Heavyweight champion status; obviously, men such as Joe Walcott, Joe Gans and George Dixon were having success even before Johnson, but the lower classes were not even close to being as prominent and revered as the Heavyweight division was back then.

I certainly think you're right in saying that he served as an inspiration to his fellow blacks, Truss, much like Joe Louis would do some thirty years later. As Ali said, "Before Jack Johnson, black folks felt like they had nothing to be proud of - but then along came Jack Johnson, and he made black folk feel proud, made them feel like they had something to fight for, something to look forward to."

On the other hand, I feel you saying that he 'brought racial tension to the fore' does him a disservice and is massively unfair. Racial tension was there long before and after Johnson's career, and his constant desire to 'stick it to white America' was more a product of the problem, not the cause or root of it. Given what he had to do just to get a crack at the title, it's half understandable that Johnson wanted to milk the crown - but if I had to say there was a black mark (no pun intended) against him, it would of course be that refusal to take on the likes of Langford and his other outstanding black contemporaries during his tenure.

In terms of fulfulling what we expect from a world champion, be it in etiquette or taking on the very best, Johnson was perhaps a disappointment. But in terms of breaking down barriers, inspiring people to do the same and giving us boxing fans great tales to learn even more than one hundred years later, it's hard to deny his incredible impact. On the whole, he was very good for the sport I feel, a couple of issues aside.

A two way sword the black advancement as I mentioned in my thread...

Held back guys at the time it's safe to say.. but encouraged no doubt a stream of young blacks to realise they could fulfil their dreams later on!!

Guess it's whichever you think is more important...probably the latter.

Good point boss, Johnson wasn't handed his shot at Burns,he had to hassle Burns for years, so i don't see why Langford just gets handed a shot as a black fighter because Johnson became champ. Wasn't a turning point at the time Truss but it threw a huge spanner in the works for the future.

As I said : http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/606/F17817430?thread=7572943&show=50

Although the problem didn't really lie with him, but society, his actions didn't particularly help the black cause. Louis did, even though his principles weren't perhaps as strong.

Respect him though for doing what he wanted to do and not bowing down to others.

Good argument Chris and I forgot the black were thought to be inferior bit which is a helluva good point......

Like the other posters you make some great points but I'll take issue and say he did bring racial tension to the fore.....whether on purpose or not by his ruthless goading and belittling of his white opponents and just by the mere fact of being black and superior in the art..

http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/606/F17817430?thread=7572943&show=50

Seems to struggle with coming up with something new, not for the first time either.

Some of the things against him that are to do with race were more against the times than anything else, which to be honest was above boxing.

Look can't we debate on here without silly people getting involved.

This isn't the old 606...

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Look can't we debate on here without silly people getting involved.

This isn't the old 606...

In fairness to the Trussmeister, and I am braced for the "buttlicker" comments from the old school on here, I never posted once on the BBC 606 and so to me it is a "new" topic. I can undertand that some of you have been through this particular mill before but not all of us have.

I would have to say no as i've always considered Joe Louis more important in breaking the colour line but aside from that he did more harm than good to his fellow black fighters with his attitude. In todays society nobody would give his actions a second thought but at the beginning of the 20th century he was so far from the norm that it impacted on negatively on everyone else, he should have had the right to carry on as a white man would have done but in considering his impact on boxing it's not good. During the 1920's for instance it was very rare for a black fighter to fight for a world title with Tiger Flowers being the first for many years to win won.

Interesting stuff Ghosty......You're a negative for Boxing believer....

Kind of inclined to agree the negatives probably outweigh the positives however he did obviously show the way..and in a way was a leader.

It's a tough one and thanks for the mature response to the thread.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Look can't we debate on here without silly people getting involved.

This isn't the old 606...

I answered it with a link, and no dig.

The much missed contributor to the old BBC forum, LRR, ( who despised Johnson, ) used to say that Jack never displayed in the ring the immense courage he displayed outside of it. Bit of a generalisation, ( Johnson took on everybody on the way up, ) but I believe he's pretty close to the truth.

I don't suppose any of us who live in the free world can begin to imagine the appalling prejudice which Johnson faced, and he faced it with immense courage and no little humour. In this regard, he is surely an inspirational figure.

Undoubtedly a great fighter, too. Two strikes against him are that the surviving film doesn't do him justice - there isn't enough of it - and we need to make the adjustment that, in Johnson's day, the lower weights had cottoned on to movement and throwing combinations but the heavies hadn't. There was still a lot of wrestling and, while we see flashes of Johnson's brilliant handspeed ( v Flynn, Moran and Willard, for example, though in flurries, as opposed to bona fide combinations, ) his marvellous athleticism ( v Burns, ) state - of - the - art infighting ( v Jeffries, ) and his blocking, feinting and fo0twork, ( Moran and Willard, ) we also see an awful lot of John Ruiz type holding and mauling. Were we to have access to the complete fights - I believe the entire Willard fight survives, though I have probably a little under half of it - we would enjoy a better perspective.

Johnson could have and should have been a hero.

As it is, his championship tenure was a shambolic disgrace, and this is where LRR's point makes so much sense. Once having climbed the mountain, Johnson lacked the courage to entertain ( a bigger and stronger ) Sam Langford for a second time, and also shut the door on his old friends Jeannette and McVea, preferring to fiddle his way through a motley crew of nobodies, an ATG lightheavy ( with whom he drew, ) an ATG middleweight ( which was a farcical affair, ) along with a Jeffries who was coming off a six year layoff.

All in all, I'd say that any fighter with a profile so high as that of Johnson and with the ability to match must have been good for boxing, but I also believe that there were significant negative aspects as well.

Making a silly point...The fact that most articles here a re re-productions ie who wins Hagler v Monzon, Manny v Floyd etc means to me you were being silly.

We'll drop it..

Great input Windy and I remember LRR well.....

Would two black fighters fighting for the heavy title not made the problem worse???? Ducking issue, political issue or did he just dislike his own kind.??.

Always felt he wanted to be White rather than encourage civil rights per se!

But you certainly make a good case..

And as for the article:

Long term did he help America and the racial issues at hand? Undoubtably as he was pretty much the first black sportsman to stand up and do his thing, yes it caused almighty short term issues - but countries don't evolve in a matter of years.

Would we have had Ali, Liston and co if he wasn't pushing the boundaries for the black race in getting title shots/respect for what he was accomplishing in the ring? Impossible to say, but i can't for one minute contemplate that what he did was anything other than a massive lift for boxing, more so black boxers, in America.

Go and have a beer.

I think Jackie Robinson/Joe Louis did more than him. When was the next time a black man fought for the title after him?

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Great input Windy and I remember LRR well.....

Would two black fighters fighting for the heavy title not made the problem worse???? Ducking issue, political issue or did he just dislike his own kind.??.

Always felt he wanted to be White rather than encourage civil rights per se!

But you certainly make a good case..

Thanks, Truss.

Hard to say about black v black, but I do know that there was plenty of money on the table for a Langford v Johnson showdown.

Jack didn't want any part of it.

Would you have picked Langford//I thought he was much smaller....

Mate I'm interested in Jack Johnson always have been with Corbett, Curry and Holmes the four fighters I'm most interested in.....

Please don't hijack my thread..

Double edged sword for me, obviously Johnson was a massively important figure and his role in dispelling the myth of black physical inferiority cannot be overlooked. However as others have said his refusal to allow opportunities to other black fighters who represented in many cases his toughest potential challengers is pretty shameful. Also whilst it is always tricky to slaughter a guy from the comfort of 100 years on as none of us were black men in turn of the last century America so cannot imagine what Johnson faced it has to be said that Johnson's conduct did close the doors for a lot of black fighters who followed.

Would not be too much work to construct an argument that were it not for Johnson's conduct Wills would have got his shot at Dempsey, even as late as Joe Louis the aftershocks of Jack's conduct were felt so while a black fighter winning the title and dispelling many of the stereotypes about black fighters was obviously a good thing suspect there would be many a talented black fighter who operated in the post Johnson era who may argue differently

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Would you have picked Langford//I thought he was much smaller....

Hard to say, isn't it ?

Langford was around 180lb. by 1910 or so and he fought like a forerunner of Dempsey. Plenty of speed and movement, and throwing genuine combinations. Johnson was a genius in picking punches out of mid air, but he was, for the most part, facing men who rarely threw more than two punches at a time.

Nat Fleischer swore that Langford would never have beaten Johnson, whereas Charley Rose, who also saw them both from ringside, reckoned Sam would have prevailed second time out.

Take your pick, I suppose.

Report his post and move on, no one is interested.

Scottrf wrote:I think Jackie Robinson/Joe Louis did more than him. When was the next time a black man fought for the title after him?

It's no coincidence that directly after Johnson that barely any black boxers got title shots when they were more than deserving of them and compare this to the impact Louis had on the sport with the emergence of men such as Charles, Moore, Robinson, Armstrong not long after.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Would you have picked Langford//I thought he was much smaller....

Truss he was indeed much smaller but by the time the fight was viable and attempts were made to bring it off Sam was regularly fighting and beating big men such as Jeanette and McVea so had learned how to handle himself in with the bigger guys. Is almost an impossible fight to call because Jack was so superior to the guff he fought as champion he was often lazy or unfocussed so hard to call how good he was when motivated because we rarely saw it. However based on their first fight and comments he made have to think he knew just how good Sam was so have to think we see Jack at his absolute best and fully focussed. However Jack's reign pretty much coincided with Sam's best form where he was beating good guys but very often acknowledged carrying them so again hard toknow how good he could have been if fighting for a title, impossible fight to call.

Sounds more negative than positive Rowley....

Interested in the giving black fighters a chance aspect...Surely it was hugely controversial him fighting for the crown in the first place what would happen if two blacks fought for the greatest prize in sports!!!

Surely he'd be stripped for such a daring proposal..........

Not sure how much blame is to be attributed to Jack for avoiding such a proposition...certainly a very political issue!!

If Dempsey generally escapes with avoiding black fighters are we to harsh on Jack????

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Interested in the giving black fighters a chance aspect...Surely it was hugely controversial him fighting for the crown in the first place what would happen if two blacks fought for the greatest prize in sports!!!

Not really the issue for me, but more the adverse publicity he created meaning promoters would be less willing to promote a fight against a black fighter for fear of the public reaction.

Imperial Ghosty wrote:It's no coincidence that directly after Johnson that barely any black boxers got title shots when they were more than deserving of them and compare this to the impact Louis had on the sport with the emergence of men such as Charles, Moore, Robinson, Armstrong not long after.

Precisely.

Think hell is about to freeze over Scott.

Like most I think is a split issue. Its difficult to say how things would have panned out had say a Joe Louis or Sam Langford figure won the crown rather than Johnson but the gut feeling is it would have been better. Johnson became championed amongst the black people but ironic he was hurting their status more through his actions both in and out of the ring and I think its possibly a case of one step forward with Johnson as champin followed by two steps back in the aftermath.

Theres also reasonable evidence to support the possibility that he wasnt an altogether pleasant guy and he was more than aware his actions were causing a crippling hinderance to his contempories like Jeanette, McVea and Langford and later Wills who saw any hopes they had at glory all but disappear by Johnsons actions and quotes from Johnson like "Im the first ever black champion and Il be the last" seem to indicate he was more than aware of the damage his actions were causing. His actions are usually tempered with the argment that he was in sme ways etitled to after given the treatment he had suffered in those days but the vast majority of black fighters back then did not feel the need to rock the boat so badly and I think had it been Langford, Jeanette or Wills that had broken the line first the short term benefits would have been far greater. Its really only the arrival, personality and talent of Louis some twenty years later that really put things in motion and the fact we can tell that Louis had a much more positive impact on the colour line indicates a less volatile black champion before him would have done alot more for their cause overall.

I think Johnsons biggest acheivement was debunking the myth that blacks were inferior heavyweights and I suppose you could say he gave the black people at the time something to be proud of. But my personal view was that it was only a matter of time before the colour line was to be broken back then anyhow and that ultimately a more refined character such as a Wills or a Langford would have been so much better for the sport and the black people in general.

Certainly held those of his era back....Think however we were living in different times when Louis came a long...Think white America had softened some what in it's attitude to blacks..So I'm not sure it's a valid comparison.

Imperial Ghosty wrote:I would have to say no as i've always considered Joe Louis more important in breaking the colour line but aside from that he did more harm than good to his fellow black fighters with his attitude. In todays society nobody would give his actions a second thought but at the beginning of the 20th century he was so far from the norm that it impacted on negatively on everyone else, he should have had the right to carry on as a white man would have done but in considering his impact on boxing it's not good. During the 1920's for instance it was very rare for a black fighter to fight for a world title with Tiger Flowers being the first for many years to win won.

Can't believe I find myself agreeing with Ghosty word for word!

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Certainly held those of his era back....Think however we were living in different times when Louis came a long...Think white America had softened some what in it's attitude to blacks..So I'm not sure it's a valid comparison.

Partially, but Louis was far more careful in his media portrail. Even in Johnson's time I fell he would have been much better recieved if he was more humble and tried to ruffle feathers less.

Of course he shouldn't have to act in a certain way but that's the reality.

It was his ruffling of feathers that got him a shot in the first place...

Surely the cast was dyed...After his beating of Burns he was never going to be accepted anyway.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Sounds more negative than positive Rowley....

Interested in the giving black fighters a chance aspect...Surely it was hugely controversial him fighting for the crown in the first place what would happen if two blacks fought for the greatest prize in sports!!!

Surely he'd be stripped for such a daring proposal..........

Not sure how much blame is to be attributed to Jack for avoiding such a proposition...certainly a very political issue!!

If Dempsey generally escapes with avoiding black fighters are we to harsh on Jack????

The thing is Truss for me that argument about how controversial or difficult it would be to match two black fighters only really has any validity if one assumes Jack gave two figs about what the powers that be thought about him and god only knows that is about as far from the truth as it is possible to get. Also whilst it may have been a tricky proposition in the states Jack was offered a significant chunk of money to fight at least Langford in Australia without taking it, reality with Jack is he had no consideration of the political ramifications of giving a chance to the woefully unqualified Battling Jack Johnston, and the only real difference between him and the likes of Jeannette and Sam is talent.

For me the difference between Jack and Dempsey is eventually Dempsey did sign for Wills and to the bst of my knowledge there was no real attmepts by promoters to make the fight, same can certainly not be said of Jack and Langford.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Certainly held those of his era back....Think however we were living in different times when Louis came a long...Think white America had softened some what in it's attitude to blacks..So I'm not sure it's a valid comparison.

In between Johnson and Louis how many black champions had there been at any weight class, Louis wins and there is a sudden breakthrough for black fighters, social tensions will have lessened in that time but we still had circumstances of the black murderers row not getting there chances because they were both good and black.

I accept your point and it's a valid one....but if we are honest there is probably a world of difference in American perception and tolerance in the Louis era than the three or so decades before it...

Only 30 or so years on from slavery...

Sure Louis was a better role model but would he have been accepted so readily at the start of the century????

Maybe they had softened but ask yourself if instead of Louis they got a reincarnation of Jack Johnson and a black champion that rocked the boat in every possible way? Would it have been tolerated or enhanced the cause. I think it would have just damaged things further.

The firm reintroduction of the colour line post Johnson was largely down to him and his behaviour. It was only through the passing of a couple of decades before another black heavyweight was tentatively allowed to reign and even then it was carefully managed.

I agree with you Colonel but the whole reason Johnson got his crack in the first place was because of his goading and relentless perseverance...

Would Louis have prevailed in attracting burns and making him put the belt on the line..

Double edged-sword.

Perhaps the question should be split into two eras - the immedaiate aftermath of his reign and the long-term impact of it.

In the short term, the reaction to him was mixed. Many black scholars believed Johnson proved beyond doubt that the black race was were equal, and in some areas superior, to their white counterparts. They felt he inspired a generation of downtrodden black people to believe that they too could make something of themselves and there was an swell in black pride when he defeated the great Jeffries. However, Johnson's reign also led to an upsurge in white power movements and the reviving of such organisations as the KKK and the introduction of the Mann Act (although this was perhaps more to do with Johnson's courting of several white women which was still deeply frown upon, they didn't seem to recognise that Johnson was actually an equal opportunities womaniser!)

In the long term, I think Johnson deserves more recognition and respect than he gets. The likes of Sonny Liston admired him greatly and you can clearly see the anti-establishment attitude in the likes of Ali, Tyson and, to some degree, Floyd Mayweather. The world has always have a love/hate relationship with these characters and let's be honest, it would be a far duller place without them. Even the antithesis of Johnson, the great Joe Louis, benefitted to some degree insomuch as his demeanour (which was in direct contrast to Johnson's) allowed many people to see past the colour of his skin and appreciate his in-ring skill.

Yes, Johnson could have advanced the cause of black fighters by agreeing to bouts with the likes of Langford and yet, he refused to stand up to promotors who failed to arrange these bouts citing the fact that "the public wouldn't pay to see two black men fighting". However, newspaper reports of the day demonstrated that crowds appreciated great fighters irrespective of their skin colour. Johnson was incredibly self serving but it cannot be denied that overall, his influence of boxing cannot be seen as anything other than positive.

I dont think it neccessarily a given that its a positive myself. I think it depends on alot of things. My own opinion was that in those days it was only matter of time before the colour line at heavyweight was broken. Johnson may have advanced the event by 5 or 10 or maybe even 15 years but caused it to be redrawn more firmly than ever in his aftermath.

It grates a little to see him championed as figure for black peoples advancement because he did little of the sort and in my view failed completely in his role as an ambassador for both boxing and his race.

If you take the point of view that it was going to take a figure like Johnson to break the colour line and shake things up with anti establishment then I can understand the view he was positive overall but I cant help feel that sooner rather than later blacks were going to get opportunities at heavyweights and Johnson put a spanner in the works in this regard delaying the process by a couple of decades longer in his aftermath.

Its also hard to look past his utterly selfish policies as heavyweight champion which is fine in most cases but given there was so much at stake when Johnson was champion and given he knew fully well the implications his behaviour and policies would have on his entire race I believe he had obligations to fullfil. A heavy burden to carry, no doubt, but one which he didnt carry well at all.

I dont think his reign opened up many doors and in many cases they were slammed shut as soon as he left the scene which I dont think would have been the case with most other black champions.

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.

Think as the colonel said it was a timing issue......

However like I said earlier..Johnson goaded Burns into a fight and made the monetary compensation worthwhile to persuade Burns to defend the crown...

would Louis have a got a match????

As for DAVE some good points...although whilst he was a huge figure not sure he had as big an impact as you perceive him to have had.