Johnson vs Langford 1909

[QueensburyRules]

[QUOTE=Ivich;n31692455]

Johnson was stripped of his title by the French Federation.
BEFORE HE FOUGHT BATTLING JIM
ON NOVEMBER THE 6th 1913 TO BE PRECISE!
JOHNSON DID NOT DEFEND AGAINST BATTLING JIM UNTIL 19TH DECEMBER 1913!

IF YOU HAD ANY BRAINS YOU WOULD BE EMBARRASSED BY YOUR COMPLETE IGNORANCE OF THE SUBJECTS YOU TRY AND PONTIFICATE ON!

WHAT A MORON!

- - Stripped and reinstated by the French and stripped after the Battle fight so Joe and Sam could put some honor back into his disgraced title.

Moron is all it takes to be infinitely smarter than U addled on U fried snails.

[Ivich]

[QUOTE=QueensburyRules;n31692755]

- - Stripped and reinstated by the French and stripped after the Battle fight so Joe and Sam could put some honor back into his disgraced title.

Moron is all it takes to be infinitely smarter than U addled on U fried snails.

Nope, Johnson,as I have already explained ,was stripped of the French Federation's recognition of his title a month BEFORE he fought Battling Jim.The Langford v Jeannette fight, a day after the Johnson v Battling Johnson fight was recognized by the French Federation as for the worlds title.
Three weeks and four days later the French stripped the winner of the Langford v Jeannette fight , [Langford ],and reinstated Johnson as champion,outside of the French I don't think anyone else noticed!
Do try and keep up! That goes for your tag team partner Ghost Of Despair too.lol!


ps Escargots are not served fried,but then you would know as much about "Haute Cuisine" as you do about boxing,ie **** ALL!lol
Escargot
Escargot, or cooked snails, are a beloved French delicacy that is usually served as an appetizer. Before preparation, the snails must be purged, removed from their shells, and cooked, usually with garlic butter, chicken stock, or wine. Their tender texture and clean, woody flavors pair especially nicely with herb-infused butter - garlic, thyme, and parsley are the most common choices.

Cooked escargots can be served on toasted pieces of baguette, but they are more commonly placed back into their shells and served on an escargot plate. In that case, special snail tongs are needed to hold the shell while extracting the meat with a two-pronged snail fork.

[billeau2]

[QUOTE=MoonCheese;n31681613]

I'm not saying this as any form of counter point, just thought it was interesting.

6K in 09 adjusted for inflation is about 200k in 2022

30k is near a million

A motivational speaker once pointed out that in the trade for Manhattan the Indians were given goods worth around 30 dollars. If that money had been invested since the inception of the stock market, with all splits, compounding and such included, the value as of ten years ago, would have easily eclipsed the value of Manhattan by a good margin.

[billeau2]

[QUOTE=Ivich;n31692790]

Nope, Johnson,as I have already explained ,was stripped of the French Federation's recognition of his title a month BEFORE he fought Battling Jim.The Langford v Jeannette fight, a day after the Johnson v Battling Johnson fight was recognized by the French Federation as for the worlds title.
Three weeks and four days later the French stripped the winner of the Langford v Jeannette fight , [Langford ],and reinstated Johnson as champion,outside of the French I don't think anyone else noticed!
Do try and keep up! That goes for your tag team partner Ghost Of Despair too.lol!


ps Escargots are not served fried,but then you would know as much about "Haute Cuisine" as you do about boxing,ie **** ALL!lol
Escargot
Escargot, or cooked snails, are a beloved French delicacy that is usually served as an appetizer. Before preparation, the snails must be purged, removed from their shells, and cooked, usually with garlic butter, chicken stock, or wine. Their tender texture and clean, woody flavors pair especially nicely with herb-infused butter - garlic, thyme, and parsley are the most common choices.

Cooked escargots can be served on toasted pieces of baguette, but they are more commonly placed back into their shells and served on an escargot plate. In that case, special snail tongs are needed to hold the shell while extracting the meat with a two-pronged snail fork.

Burgundy... known for its pino g****s and for snails! I love Escargot. Just do not look at a common garden snail and get any ideas lol.

[QueensburyRules]

[QUOTE=billeau2;n31693024]

Burgundy... known for its pino g****s and for snails! I love Escargot. Just do not look at a common garden snail and get any ideas lol.

- - Vitch is well known for his mangled threads in every thing he posts, hence every response is subsequently mangled as this one is.

[Ivich]

[QUOTE=QueensburyRules;n31693213]

- - Vitch is well known for his mangled threads in every thing he posts, hence every response is subsequently mangled as this one is.

If you had any sense of self respect, with the constant humiliation and correction you receive here you would have quit this forum by now,but you don't.So like a fart you hang around, just a bad smell that reminds us that for every good poster here for the community to enjoy we have two **** you and Ghost of Despair to suffer as the price of that enjoyment.
Your pitiful attempts to respond without ever once supplying any facts to support your infantile remarks are akin to a debuting amateur climbing through the ropes for the first time to take on a worlds champion,being immediately exposed once the first bell rings and being hurriedly escorted back to the safety of your corner for your own welfare by a compassionate referee.
Queensbury Fool The Charlie Zelenoff of the History Forum! lol

[QueensburyRules]

[QUOTE=Ivich;n31693251]

If you had any sense of self respect, with the constant humiliation and correction you receive here you would have quit this forum by now,but you don't.So like a fart you hang around, just a bad smell that reminds us that for every good poster here for the community to enjoy we have two **** you and Ghost of Despair to suffer as the price of that enjoyment.
Your pitiful attempts to respond without ever once supplying any facts to support your infantile remarks are akin to a debuting amateur climbing through the ropes for the first time to take on a worlds champion,being immediately exposed once the first bell rings and being hurriedly escorted back to the safety of your corner for your own welfare by a compassionate referee.
Queensbury Fool The Charlie Zelenoff of the History Forum! lol

- - Vitch serving up French Fried Farts...priceless...

[Willie Pep 229]

I am a touch su****ious of the Joe Jeannette quote above.

To me it doesn't sound like Jeannette in attitude, or word choice. In other quotes Jeannette comes across as a more gentlemanly person.

This missive is angry and hateful.

If the article is a transition of a Jeannette interview then OK I guess it was just an angry Jeannette that day. Considering all the frustration I can see that happening.

BUT

If it turns out that this is actually a transcript of an "Open Letter" given to the newspapers by the Jeannette camp, i.e. a PR release announcing his departure to Europe,* then maybe we need to think this might well be the work of Dan McKettrick and not Joe Jeannette.

Just my usual questioning everything. Sorry to those that annoys.

*The mention of the European excursion is the only actual news in the article.

[Ivich]

I am a touch su****ious of the Joe Jeannette quote above.

To me it doesn't sound like Jeannette in attitude, or word choice. In other quotes Jeannette comes across as a more gentlemanly person.

This missive is angry and hateful.

If the article is a transition of a Jeannette interview then OK I guess it was just an angry Jeannette that day. Considering all the frustration I can see that happening.

BUT

If it turns out that this is actually a transcript of an "Open Letter" given to the newspapers by the Jeannette camp, i.e. a PR release announcing his departure to Europe,* then maybe we need to think this might well be the work of Dan McKettrick and not Joe Jeannette.

Just my usual questioning everything. Sorry to those that annoys.

*The mention of the European excursion is the only actual news in the article.

It doesn't annoy me ,I'm wondering myself if Jeannette had anything to do with it,remarks sayingJohnson won the title in Reno and that Jeannette had already beaten him several times are just false hoods.
Jeannette knew full well that Johnson had floored him multiple times in their series but he had never been able to to replicate that.so why would he say he would ko Johnson?
I would need a primary source proving this was Jeannette speaking before I gave it any credence.

The fool who posted it would accept anything negative about Johnson as gospel.just because he is a fool.
Fool enough to say that the Johnson v Burns fight was stopped because Johnson's seconds got under the ring and shouted for it to be stopped!
This during a fight in which Johnson had won every round and was enjoying punishing Burns for his earlier insults.
The same moron states the BBC edited the Ali v Cooper fight removing the few seconds of delay .When asked what would be the motive for such actions he of course has no response.
You can't interact with a subnormal troll like that its like trying to have a sensible conversation with a ******ed chimp except it is less rewarding.

Houdini made an excellent thread and this POS has to pollute and infect it with his pathetic monosyllabic drivel
It's a shame such moronic imbeciles post here

[QueensburyRules]

It doesn't annoy me ,I'm wondering myself if Jeannette had anything to do with it,remarks sayingJohnson won the title in Reno and that Jeannette had already beaten him several times are just false hoods.
Jeannette knew full well that Johnson had floored him multiple times in their series but he had never been able to to replicate that.so why would he say he would ko Johnson?
I would need a primary source proving this was Jeannette speaking before I gave it any credence.

The fool who posted it would accept anything negative about Johnson as gospel.just because he is a fool.
Fool enough to say that the Johnson v Burns fight was stopped because Johnson's seconds got under the ring and shouted for it to be stopped!
This during a fight in which Johnson had won every round and was enjoying punishing Burns for his earlier insults.
The same moron states the BBC edited the Ali v Cooper fight removing the few seconds of delay .When asked what would be the motive for such actions he of course has no response.
You can't interact with a subnormal troll like that its like trying to have a sensible conversation with a ******ed chimp except it is less rewarding.

Houdini made an excellent thread and this POS has to pollute and infect it with his pathetic monosyllabic drivel
It's a shame such moronic imbeciles post here

- - , Einstein, per boxrec:

• The fight was stopped by the police. Burns always claimed he could have continued had the police not intervened. Lightweight boxer later admitted to promoter that he and a pal had crawled under the ring prior to the fourteenth round and shouted for the police to stop the fight. Unholz worked Johnson's corner and had bet a large sum of money on Jack winning.
• The New York Times reported: "The end came in the fourteenth round when the police, seeing Burns tottering and unable to defend himself from the savage blows of his opponent, mercifully stopped the fight. Previously it had been arranged that if the police interfered a decision would be rendered on points, and referee McIntosh without hesitation declared the big black man the winner