Originally posted by Rusty Tromboni
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Why did Sullivan refused to fight any black fighters?
Collapse
-
-
- -Sam won a version of the title in Paris after the French stripped JJOHNSON after his miserably embarrassing showing against Battling Johnson.
The long lost footage shows Sam in full sway against Joe Jeanette, his best fight by far.
JJOHNSON was ducking both Sam and Joe when they were in Paris, so God Bless the French who finally did something right to give us a fight for the ages.
Sadly Sam never defended. Why?
Comment
-
Originally posted by Bundana View PostHow much do we hear about McFarland? Lots, I would say! In discussion about the best boxer never to win a world title, most of the time it seems to be between Langford and Burley - with McFarland often not far behind.
McFarland also gets eclipsed by Gans: the footage isn't great, but Packey definitely looks the better of the two. He was has more impressive scalps.
McFarland was probably the best fighter P4P at his peak. Probably the best P4P until the arrival of the unparalleled Harry Greb.
Can you muster any P4P top 10 lists featuring McFarland?
Comment
-
Originally posted by Rusty Tromboni View PostAnd I am not sure what warrants either of those men ranking over McFarland.
McFarland also gets eclipsed by Gans: the footage isn't great, but Packey definitely looks the better of the two. He was has more impressive scalps.
McFarland was probably the best fighter P4P at his peak. Probably the best P4P until the arrival of the unparalleled Harry Greb.
Can you muster any P4P top 10 lists featuring McFarland?
Matt McGrain did a Top-100 a few years ago, where Langford, McFarland and Burley were placed 1st, 19th and 25th, respectively… higher than any other non-champion.
Comment
-
Originally posted by QueensburyRules View PostJJOHNSON was ducking both Sam and Joe when they were in Paris, so God Bless the French who finally did something right to give us a fight for the ages.
Sadly Sam never defended. Why?
You might want to try getting your facts straight so you avoid pushing false information.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Rusty Tromboni View PostThey weren't considered very good. Kinda the way people in the General Forum half-jokingly talk about British fighters having no chin. Or people today talk about Black Quarterbacks or Black soccer players or Wrestlers.
Even post-war it was kinda considered a risk as a trainer taking on Black fighters. They were thought to quit too easily and to be easily broken mentally, and not too smart. Obviously, those opinions had largely subsided, but lots of people, especially Italians had that view. That's why it's impressive what guys like D'Amato, Dundee, Petronelli, and Clancy deserve a lot of credit. They saw past the ethnic bias.
Sullivan saw it an insult to fight them. So did guys like Loughran and Tunney, a full generation later.
Until after WWII, Boxing was mostly dominated by the White ethnicity du jour. After WWII, European emigration to the U.S. was all but ceased, and Whites rapidly advanced economically. Plus, other sports took over. The best Boxers were no longer White, but the best athletes still were.
Quit too easily? Easily mentally broken? Not too smart? And where did these assessments come from? In their fights against...other black fighters?
You have shown that you have some deep rooted racial issues. Seek help.
By "dominated by whites," I hope you mean via exclusion.
Sullivan didn't want to fight a black boxer because he was a racist. As simple as that.
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by OctoberRed View PostOr his managers were racist
Comment
-
Blacks were considered like children. That shows up in the literature again and again. John L. would not beat a child in public.
Comment
-
Comment