Marcellus "Too Sharp" Johnson: First Ballot Hall of Famer.

he didn't

 

Never mind that probably half the sport's champions and top contenders were black in Johnson's day.

I cant believe we're even discussing this. You posted an article you supported and I gave you the benefit of the doubt by not assuming you favour that obscenely stupid view, but I can see that was too kind.

I guess it isnt TOO surprising, really, that a guy who contends Whitaker beat Chavez with a low blow could be convinced a guy who fought in the 90s and 00s could have his career frozen by being black :atu:

 

how many champions and or contenders at 115lbs and below where black, chief?

 

at those lower weights, black guys are not common at all and the audiences are predominantly mexican and east asian... Hard for a black or even a white american to make a lot of waves between 105-118... Tim Austin was seen about as often as the Loch Ness monster at a point in time when he was the best bantamweight in the world, because in America, especially, the little guys don't sell. A mexican-american can make some coin because there's a built-in fanbase, not at all the same with a black guy in those divisions.

While it certainly wasn't the Elmer Ray/Holman Williams/Lloyd Marshall/Jimmy Bivins style of OVERT racism (and I don't think Neil or Musze were actually saying that AT ALL), it's not hard to imagine that a real good black american fighter like Johnson would be a real hard sell as an opponent because the reward is smaller, the crowd is smaller.

Say you're Johnny Tapia:

You fight Danny Romero, you get 20,000 mexicans and mexican-americans buying tickets and you may even win... You fight Mark Johnson, the place is half empty and you probably lose... doesn't take a rocket scientist to see what a smart manager is doing there

 

i didnt bring up the race thing. of course we know who that was. it was certainly a factor in why those guys didnt face johnson, but the main factor was that he was simply too good/talented.

 

yup, risk/reward

 

Absolutely, I agree, but the old "Black Southpaw and Good" line is thick and outdated, It simply should not have been used. It should not have been used for Hagler and it should not have been used for Johnson.

Hagler had difficulties not because he was racially discriminated against but because he refused, rightly, to align himself with the correct promotional powers.

M.Johnson had difficulties because his blackness meant people took no interest in him. Its not like Marvin Root fighting Tommy Burns to the exclusion of Johnson and company. Tapia and friends did quite well fighting each other. Fighting somebody else didn't make as many dollars so it didn't make as much sense.

I am not saying Neil intended to state otherwise, but the article he quoted did.

 

Yeah, it was the article you quoted. Thats who brought it up. And it was wrong of them to so do it. Remember guys like Carl Thompson got frozen out and shabbily treated in England. He was treated as something of a Normal Norman, he was dangerous, and....boring. You might get your ass kicked AND you might not get paid a dime. I think 2000 people showed up for the rematch of his FOTY with Eubank. Nobody gave a fuck, not cos he was black, but cos he wasn't Nigel Benn. When he walked to the ring, his "dance" was described as resembling the "twitch of a malfunctioning Dalek" by one pundit.

Some guys just don't get the attention they deserve.

That "Good, Black and Southpaw" line is flung out there come what may. Its not like Tapia or Romero looked at him and said "we aint fighting that n**ga", they just shied away because he was a non-profitable hard-night.

And black folk didn't help Johnson by buying his fights cos they don't identify with Pygmies and they don't form a signficant purchasing bloc in boxing , especially at those weights.

His being black played a part. But it wasn't that part.

 

true, absolutely

 

Mark johnson resume shouldn't be a HOF, especially not a first ballot. His resume is too shallow

 

"First-ballot," used to be a rare and prized priviledge (and to me, it shouldnt really exist in the first place, except in maybe the most extreme instances)...now the likes of Tszyu & Johnson are getting the honour of induction while others continue to wait years upon years, even decades --- and knuckleheads like Neil applaud such things, blinded by their fandom (I would never support someone like De La Hoya, or either Marquez getting straight in just because Im a fan).

 

which johnson fights have you even seen, chump? go read some more books and form your opinion on boxers you have never seen in action. leave the boxing talk to folks who watch actual fights.

 

Tapia was tiny, that didn't stop him from being a big star, did it?

And Too Sharp would've beaten Tapia, like Neil said he got shut out because he was black, and thus not the same kind of draw a Latino fighter would be.

I think it's pretty hilarious how Irish jumps on that right away as "playing the race card" when he's the one whining about racism toward white people 24/7.. bit ironic

 

I don't like 24/7

Please go back and read my posts.

The "Black Southpaw and Good" statement which was originally leveled at Tiger Flowers is not of application in its true meaning when discussing Mark Johnson.

They are different things.

That was the point.

Johnson was frozen out IN PART because he was black, but not for the traditional reasons associated with being a black boxer.

The old Tiger Flowers description does not apply. It is lazy journalism.

 

The fact that you choose to interpret the reasoning through the lens of the 1950s or whatever is nobody's fault but your own. You see unjustified claims of racism by minorities under your bed at night, so of course that's how you assumed it was meant. Again, nobody's fault but your own..

 

1950's??

Flowers was 1920's.

And the expression {SBG} was intended to be understood by unsuspecting "Boxing fans" {such as people who though Tiger Flowers fought in the 1950's} as meaning that Hagler and Johnson were forced out or avoided thanks to overt "traditional" racism.

Using an expression which came into existence regarding the first Afro-American MW champion who fought in the 1920's and seeking to transplant that expression onto the travails of a flyweight in 1990's America is lazy journalism.

 

Cool story bro.

 

One must laugh at Neil. He denigrates the career of Oscar De la Hoya, yet appears overjoyed that a novelty fighter gets elected into the hall of fame with far worse credentials. Then again, Neil is the Kim Kardashian of fightbeat. He has never seen a black cock he doesn't want to suck.

 

Neil will surely tell us Johnson has better career credentials than De La Hoya.

 

That is laughable.

 

Watch it happen. The guy just picked Acelino Freitas to knock him out in a fight at 135.

His hate borders on lunacy. It really does.

 

He is a lunatic. Homophobic too, yet the only admiration he ever expresses is for Black Penis.

 

you continually misquote me. i realize it is difficult for you to defend a guy who asks russian hookers to violate him, but still you lack integrity.

 

johnson didnt get the opportunity to prove it, but he was a better fighter. more talented, skilled and entertaining.

 

:giggle::giggle:

 

I certainly don't misquote you. It was your error in the thread in question --- which you've since publicly admitted to --- which lead me to CORRECTLY quote you on a post you have since retracted after properly reading the thread.

 

youre right, for once. you have misquoted me on previous occasions, nonetheless.

 

I'm amused that you reached the conclusion I thought Tiger Flowers fought in the 1950s from that paragraph, in a post responding to my admonishing you for jumping to retarded conclusions.

 

I'm assuming that's when you thought he fought, though, maybe, I am giving you too much credit. When did he fight???

 

I meant to say the 1950s in that sentence (or that "didn't fight in the 1920s"), typo by distraction