Harold Johnson: Amazing Technician

[SuzieQ49]

[Only registered and activated users can see links]


Have you ever seen better technique than what this guy produces? I don't think he does one thing that is not strictly by the book. What a proffesor. What an amazingly timed right hand knockout punch. They don't get any better than that! WoW! :shock::shock:




- Such a shame Harold never got HW matches with Marciano, Patterson, or Liston, or Ali

[Maxmomer]

That KO was magnificent.

[SuzieQ49]

Yes it was. Harold is easily a top 10 ATG. He backs it up both in resume, longevity, and his skills on film.

People underestimate his entrance into the heavyweight picture. At 5'10 175lb and lacking a big punch, he was giving up considerable size to the men in the division. However, His Technique, Skill, Defense, Handspeed, Jab were so good he was able to overcome his limitations in the division and had a succesful campaign.


Defeated aging but good names Arturo Godoy and still dangerous Jimmy Bivins early in his career. Knocked out in 3 by Jersey Joe Walcott, but this became a learning experience for Harold after getting outclassed. Beat Archie Moore in a over the weight match when Moore was a top heavyweight contender himself. Beat Top Ranked puncher Clarence Henry as a stern underdog, then shut out future # 1 contender 6'3 210lb Nino Valdez on the cards 10 rounds to 0!! He also knocked out Heavyweight Puncher Bob Satterfield in 2 rounds. He was scheduled to take on a Young Sonny Liston in 1954, but a late injury pulled johnson out at that last minute. He took some time off after his loss to Archie for the light-Heavyweight title, then went back into the heavyweight mix at an aging 33 to score a magnificent upset win over top rated contender Eddie Machen. Johnson challenged Team Patterson, but Damato wanted nothing to do with it.

[McGrain]

What # do you have him at LHW Suze? (Too lazy to check).

I do really rate him. Wish there was more readily available film on him.

[GPater11093]

i like this guy, very solid technician. One of the best jabs for a LHW aswell.

In fact his fight with Pastrano is one of my favrouites of all time.

I have about 4 or 5 DVDs of him

[SuzieQ49]

Johnson was well past his prime by the time of the pastrano fight. Still, I thought Johnson was robbed in this one and Johnson deserved the decision. If you want to see a masterclass boxing performance, watch Doug Jones vs Harold Johnson

[GPater11093]

i got Jones vs Johnson as well ill give it a watch as i havent seen it yet.

Definitly Johnson was past prime but it was 2 masters doing there own defensive/counterpunching style on each other, one of the best tactical fights ever.

I thought Pastrano won it by a round with it coming to the last round

[Muchmoore]

How do you see Johnson doing with a pre 1958 Liston, Suzie?

[ChrisPontius]

A beautiful boxer for sure. High guard, fast hands, light on his feet. The epitome of an aesthetically pleasing boxer, in my opinion.

That knockout is literally one of the best i've ever seen. Never seen it before, thanks.:good Pity there is so little film of the man. I kind of regret not having him in my top10 for Rumsfeld's poll.

[Chinxkid]

What a shot! I think he took out his mother his Uncle Harry and a few of his unsuspecting descendants with that shot. True beauty. Thanks Suze. :good

[Sweet Pea]

Pastrano was just as far past his prime as Johnson was in their bout. I think he'd have always troubled him greatly.

[red cobra]

i like this guy, very solid technician. One of the best jabs for a LHW aswell.

In fact his fight with Pastrano is one of my favrouites of all time.

I have about 4 or 5 DVDs of him
You and me both GPater...it's a bitch that the Pastrano-Johnson fight (all 15 rounds) has been removed for some reason from YouTube.

[red cobra]

I LOVED that fight...Pastrano-Johnson..lke others go for Hagler-Hearns or Ali-Frazier 3..a scientific technician/strategists delight..for purists, to be sure.

[red cobra]

Pastrano was so cool..a refreshingly honest guy, who in that great Peter Heller book of boxing interviews "In This Corner" said "man, I just got lucky, that's all" in talking of his title winning bout with Johnson..

[GPater11093]

Red cobra you was teh one who got me into Johnson vs Pastrano

[red cobra]

Oh, and not to neglect the subject of the thread..I believe Harold Johnson was the supreme technician/purist..a genuine master, who was shafted abit, you might say, as was Rodrigo Valdez, Esteban DeJesus and Curtis Cokes, in being in the wrong era's..with one guy each, who proved to be their nemisis.

[red cobra]

Red cobra you was teh one who got me into Johnson vs Pastrano
I knew you'd appreciate it..for the same reason's I do!!

[red cobra]

GPater, I think you and I would both agree that the scientific/technical/defensive side of boxing is far more alluring and fascinating than even the slugger/bomber/brawler side of this magnificent sport.

[GPater11093]

yeh i like the more scientific side like Johnson and Pastrano.

[Manassa]

I made a big error in that light heavyweight thread and forgot Harold Johnson :mad:

[red cobra]

Manassa, you know, in times past, I would have done the same thing, in omitting Johnson from a top ten list of great lightheavies. I would have listed the usual suspects like Conn, Moore, Loughran, Foster, etc., but in recent years, I have come to appreciate Harold Johnson as the great scientific tactician of the sport, who may not have been the crowd favorite in his time, but to the purist, who realizes what seperates boxing from all those clown spectacles like MMA, and USB and the like, then Johnson HAS to occupy, IMO, a spot in the top ten.

[SuzieQ49]

Pastrano was just as far past his prime as Johnson was in their bout.


Umm No

I think he'd have always troubled him greatly.


Um No




I think you are giving Willie Pastrano too much credit here. Not only did he recieve a gift decision over a near 35 year old harold johnson, but harold in his prime was simply the much better fighter in every department. It does not take a rocket scientist to figure that out. Resume wise it is not even close. not to mention Pastrano could not even beat a 46 year old Archie Moore! Harold picked up a victory over a prime archie moore and was ahead on the cards after 14 rounds in there epic title fight. Harold also had far more success in the heavyweight picture than Pastrano did.

[GPater11093]

Umm No




Um No




I think you are giving Willie Pastrano too much credit here. Not only did he recieve a gift decision over a near 35 year old harold johnson, but harold in his prime was simply the much better fighter in every department. It does not take a rocket scientist to figure that out. Resume wise it is not even close. not to mention Pastrano could not even beat a 46 year old Archie Moore! Harold picked up a victory over a prime archie moore and was ahead on the cards after 14 rounds in there epic title fight. Harold also had far more success in the heavyweight picture than Pastrano did.

Suzy i thought Pastrano won the fight by 1 round with it coming down to the last round. I thought it was a fair result and i would have thought Pastrano won but not been annoyed if Johnson got the decision.

Pea said Pastrano would always give him trouble. Resu,me has nothing to do with it although as you say Johnson is alot better in that area.

As for not beating a 46 year old Archie Moore style make fights and fighter A can beat fighter B but lose to fighter C who in turn lost to fighter B. So common opponents isnt something to put too much on.

Also again there bout wa at Light Heavyweight, there Heavyweight work shouldnt really come into it. Although Pastrano did some good heavyweight work and Johnson perhaps did slightly better

[Sweet Pea]

Umm NoOk then, explain.


You are vastly overating Willie Pastrano. Not only did he recieve a gift decision over a near 35 year old harold johnsonFirst of all, you're the only one who thinks he got a gift. Second of all, Pastrano was at the exact same stage of his career as Johnson was when they fought, albeit younger. As you should know by now, age is just a number in boxing, so that's pretty much irrelevant. Bottom line is, both men were past their primes and near the end of their careers.

but harold in his prime was simply the much better fighter in every department.Well that's very obviously bullshit. Pastrano had much better footwork and movement, something Johnson didn't like dealing with as he didn't like to lead. He preferred to pick and choose his punches based on the openings his opponents gave him, which is why he was troubled so much by Pastrano's movement. He was forced to play the lead against a very skilled defensive fighter, counter puncher, and jabber in his own right in Pastrano. One with a much more fluid style than the more up-right approach Johnson applied. I'm surprised you don't think more highly of Pastrano, the guy was about as close to a LHW Willie Pep as there's ever been.

Resume wise it is not even close. not to mention Pastrano could not even beat a 46 year old Archie Moore! Yeah, but he did beat Johnson, which probably counts for a bit more when discussing a matchup between the two. Especially at LHW, considering Moore outweighed him by about 15 pounds in their fight. And I suggest taking another gander at Pastrano's record. It may not be of the same quality as Johnson's, but it's still a very good one, very consistent. Anyways, what does a fighter's resume have to do with how they matchup with each other in the ring? That's typically what people bring up when they want to steer themselves away from the analytical aspect of it. Pastrano was a bad matchup for Johnson.

Harold picked up a victory over a prime archie moore and was ahead on the cards after 14 rounds in there epic title fight. He did pick up a victory, that's true. He also happened to pick up 4 losses. Pastrano never lost to Moore, therefore by your logic he should hold the edge, right?

Harold also had far more success in the heavyweight picture than Pastrano did.Irrelevant.

[john garfield]

[Only registered and activated users can see links]


Have you ever seen better technique than what this guy produces? I don't think he does one thing that is not strictly by the book. What a proffesor. What an amazingly timed right hand knockout punch. They don't get any better than that! WoW! :shock::shock:




- Such a shame Harold never got HW matches with Marciano, Patterson, or Liston, or Ali

To put this textbook KO in perspective, SQ, and give Johnson the full credit he deserves, Paul Andrews -- though slower-handed than Johnson -- could really bang -- was VERY dangerous.

Cus D'Amato, no matter how Paul begged him, would never let Patterson spar with him.

Had Andrews not pissed his career away on booze, he'da been a formidable litmus test for any contender.

[SuzieQ49]

Pastrano good work at heavyweight? LMAO

Johnson only "Slighty" better? LMAO


How bout Pastrano did jack shit at heavyweight, and harold did ALOT better



Lets compare the wins


Harold beat:

Clarence Henry- Top 5 Ring Magazine heavyweight contender. Dangerous puncher, one of the best contenders of the 1950s

Ezzard Charles- Ring Magazine # 2 heavyweight Contender, ATG, who would go on to give Marciano a 15 round barnbuner the next year.

Archie Moore- Over the weight lightheavyweight match. Moore was a top ranking heavyweight contender and a obvious ATG.

Nino Valdez- Ring Magazine top 10 and Future # 1 heavyweight contender. 6'3 210lb with top power and top jab. Johnson SHUT HIM OUT.

Eddie Machen- Ring Magazine top 5 contender. One of the best heavyweights never to win a title in history.

Wayne Bethea- Ring Magazine top 10. Strong Durable 200lber

Jimmy Slade- Ring Magazine top 10. Good Skills

Bob Satterfield- Ring Magazine top 10. One of the most dangerous punchers of the era




Pastrano beat


Rex Layne- top 10 rated but Layne by 1955 was prett far washed up

Pat Mcmutry- Undefeated HW prospect. Decent fighter, who never amounted to world class.

Willie Besmanoff- top 10 but a very average fighter talent wise

Brian London- top 10 but a very average european fighter. London actually KNOCKED PASTRANO OUT in the rematch.

Tom Mcneeley- Unrated. More of a Toughman Combatant that Proffesional boxer.



I believe I made my point that Pastrano does not even belong on the same planet compard to Johnson in terms of Heavyweight Success.

[SuzieQ49]

First of all, you're the only one who thinks he got a gift

O really. Perhaps you need to start pulling out your historical references. I have mine.


Angelo Dundee, who trained Pastrano, admits in his biography that Johnson was robbed of his title by a split decision. Russell Peltz, the legendary Philly promoter, said so too and so did almost all the ringsiders.

Also a posters who posts here under the name "Albinored". He is actually a boxing historian who wishes for me to keep his name secret, although I am allowed to quote him. He was apart of Team Ezzard Charles camp back in the day. Here is what he had to say

"Johnson had an answer for ever move jones made...johnson was known for his ability to block a punch with his hand and then turn that same move into a counter punch.....but in this one he made it into an art form. superb boxing...good sharp hitting...a masterpiece. when willie pastrano was told he was matched with johnson he referred to just this aspect of johnson's skills and admitted he was afraid. (As it turned out, the fix was in and pastrano just ran for fifteen rounds and johnson was robbed)"


He swears to this day that the bout was fixed

[GPater11093]

Pastrano good work at heavyweight? LMAO.

So a light Heavyweight moving up and beating several top 10 rated contenders isnt good work. I'd say it is.


Johnson only "Slighty" better? LMAO


i admit Johnsons was alot better just mis worded it.



How bout Pastrano did jack shit at heavyweight, and harold did ALOT better

so jack shit is beating several top 10 contenders. Pastrano beat alot of European top contenders ins Bygraves, London, Richardson etc...




Lets compare the wins


Harold beat:

Clarence Henry- Top 5 Ring Magazine heavyweight contender. Dangerous puncher, one of the best contenders of the 1950s

Ezzard Charles- Ring Magazine # 2 heavyweight Contender, ATG, who would go on to give Marciano a 15 round barnbuner the next year.

Archie Moore- Over the weight lightheavyweight match. Moore was a top ranking heavyweight contender and a obvious ATG.

Nino Valdez- Ring Magazine top 10 and Future # 1 heavyweight contender. 6'3 210lb with top power and top jab. Johnson SHUT HIM OUT.

Eddie Machen- Ring Magazine top 5 contender. One of the best heavyweights never to win a title in history.

Wayne Bethea- Ring Magazine top 10. Strong Durable 200lber

Jimmy Slade- Ring Magazine top 10. Good Skills

Bob Satterfield- Ring Magazine top 10. One of the most dangerous punchers of the era


Beat Clarence Henry a top 5 contender

Beat Ezzard Charles admittadly a great win for him. way better than any of Pastranos wins.

Beat Moore once out of 5 fights, so thats 4 losses to Moore which aint so good.

Beat Valdez a top 10 contender

beat machen a top 10 contender albeit a good win better than pastrano

then beats Bethea, Slade and Satterfield (loses 1 outta 3)



Pastrano beat


Rex Layne- top 10 rated but Layne by 1955 was prett far washed up

Pat Mcmutry- Undefeated HW prospect. Decent fighter, who never amounted to world class.

Willie Besmanoff- top 10 but a very average fighter talent wise

Brian London- top 10 but a very average european fighter. London actually KNOCKED PASTRANO OUT in the rematch.

Tom Mcneeley- Unrated. More of a Toughman Combatant that Proffesional boxer



You seem to dismiss Pastranos opponents way more than Johnsons but in fact these were of the same level as some of the Johnson wins you listed

double standards

[SuzieQ49]

Second of all, Pastrano was at the exact same stage of his career as Johnson was when they fought, albeit younger


Don't give me that. Pastrano was in the prime of his career. He recorded his career best wins around the time he fought johnson, pastrano was actually quite average in the 50s. He couldnt hack it against even 2nd rate heavyweight contenders so he dropped down to 175lb vs Johnson. Harold on the otherhand had been through many wars in the 50-early 60s..he was getting worn out by this time. He was a fighter who relied on his speed and reflexes.


Bottom line is, both men were past their primes and near the end of their careers.


Wrong. Pastrano's prime was around that time he took apart Gregorio Peralta.


Pastrano had much better footwork and movement, something Johnson didn't like dealing with as he didn't like to lead.


Johnson had very graceful movement himself. The key thing is Speed. Harolds hands in his prime were much faster than in 63. Pastrano hated Speed. Also Pastrano if he could not outjab his man, he was not going to win the fight. To think pastrano would outjab a prime harold johnson is preposterous. The Harold of the mid 50s, back in his prime was far more aggresive than the one of 63. Pastrano did not like effective aggresion. Pastrano would play right into harolds hands getting out jabbed, then getting outlanded in close by quick johnson combos. He would lose the boxing match at every concievable angle. That extra speed johnson had in his youthness would allow him to have his way with Willie.

[SuzieQ49]

but in fact these were of the same level as some of the Johnson wins you listed


How. Who of those men I listed in Pastranos resume were as good as peak versions of Clarence Henry, Nino Valdez, Ezzard Charles, and Archie Moore? Please tell me. And Please do not name a washed up Rex Layne. Clarence Henry alone would have knocked out every single man on Pastranos list.



You seem to dismiss Pastranos opponents way more than Johnsons


None of those guys were top ranking heavyweight contenders in contention for a title shot the way Johnsons victims were. Nino Valdez was a # 1 contender 2 years in a row, and even the great rocky marciano is accused of ducking him. Clarence henry was a top 5 contender 3 years in a row and is arguebably a top 50 heavyweight of all time. Ezzard was an ATG, and Moore was a # 1 heavyweight Contender favored to win the vacant belt in 56. Eddie Machen was top ranked and so feared patterson wouldnt give him a shot.


Brian London and Pat Mcmutry both got blasted away easily by Nino Valdez, and these are pastranos best wins. I have Mcmutry vs Valdez on film, its embarrasing the first right hand Nino Lands Pat goes down and out he looked so badly outclassed.

So a light Heavyweight moving up and beating several top 10 rated contenders isnt good work. I'd say it is

Ha thats just the thing. Pastrano was a HEAVYWEIGHT starting out, who simply could not hack it against the 2nd rate contenders so he was FORCED to move down to lightheavyweight so he could finally compete at a world class level.

[SuzieQ49]

Honestly anyone trying to put forth and Arguement of Pastrano having even close the heavyweight resume Harold Johnson has is fighting a losing arguement. Save your energy.

[SuzieQ49]

ns but in fact these were of the same level as some of the Johnson wins you listed



Once again Gpator I challenge you to name one Prime Heavyweight opponent Willie Pastrano beat that was on the same level as a win over Ezzard Charles, Nino Valdez, Archie Moore, Clarence Henry, and Eddie Machen. PLEASE I am waiting....

If you can't just concede that you lost

[Sweet Pea]

Don't give me that. Pastrano was in the prime of his career.How the fuck do you come up with that? Directly after beating Johnson he lost to Grgorio Peralta in a bout that clearly showed he was on the decline. His rematch with Peralta was a great performance, but pretty much the last hurrah for Pastrano. He went all out in that fight, which he rarely if ever did before and the commentators remarked as much.

He recorded his career best wins around the time he fought johnson, pastrano was actually quite average in the 50s. He couldnt hack it against even 2nd rate heavyweight contenders so he dropped down to 175lb vs Johnson.Pastrano was clearly a natural LHW, and a fighter whose style fit the weight class much better due to the natural size and strength disadvantage he endured at HW. Even so, his HW resume has already been documented in this thread, and clearly shows that he could more than hold his own against these "2nd rate Heavyweight contenders" you speak of. He wasn't as good a HW as Johnson, but that hardly means anything in a matchup between the two of them at LHW.


Harold on the otherhand had been through many wars in the 50-early 60s..he was getting worn out by this time. He was a fighter who relied on his speed and reflexes.
Whoah, whoah, whoah. Johnson relied on his speed and reflexes? That's kind of contradictory to your original thread intentions, isn't it? I thought the entire point of this thread was to remark on his technical skills? If anything Pastrano relied a whole lot more on his fleetness of foot and physical characteristics than a textbook boxer like Johnson. Where are you going with this?

Wrong. Pastrano's prime was around that time he took apart Gregorio Peralta. That was at the end of his career, which I already explained.

Johnson had very graceful movement himself. The key thing is Speed. Harolds hands in his prime were much faster than in 63. Pastrano hated Speed.Pastrano hated speed. Oh, OK, thanks for that info. Anything to back it up with, or are you once again talking directly out of your ass? I could just as easily say the same about Johnson.

Also Pastrano if he could not outjab his man, he was not going to win the fight. To think pastrano would outjab a prime harold johnson is preposterous.If he were to stand in range and try to trade jabs, probably not. If he were to fight like Willie Pastrano, I could see him getting the better of it. Again, it all comes down to his movement. A mover like Pastrano rarely allows his opponent to get himself set well enough to throw off the combinations you speak of. Not only did he fight well of the backfoot, but he also used angles masterfully. A great angle fighter is also hell for a combination puncher, or an up-right, textbook boxer, which Johnson was. Pastrano had all the moves to give Johnson a a hard night every time. Not saying he'd win every time, but he'd always give him a run for his money.

The Harold of the mid 50s, back in his prime was far more aggresive than the one of 63. Pastrano did not like effective aggresion.Who does? Anyways, I don't think it was necessarily controlled aggression that gave Pastrano problems. A bigger, taller, stronger guy like Peralta gave him troubles because, like Saddler with Pep, he was able to get inside his reach and go to work on him in the inside. This wasn't Johnson's game. He'd be more or less content to box with Pastrano off the front foot, which is where Willie was most comfortable.

Pastrano would play right into harolds hands getting out jabbed, then getting outlanded in close by quick johnson combos. He would lose the boxing match at every concievable angle. That extra speed johnson had in his youthness would allow him to have his way with Willie.You're selling Willie's speed short here. I think he was clearly a quicker fighter overall than Johnson, even though their handspeed may have been similar. The bottom line is, Willie isn't going to be fighting Johnson at close quarters, and I don't think Johnson is going to fight him like Peralta did. This fight is a boxing match, one that I see having split verdicts in multiple fights, it's that close. I stand by what I said though, Pastrano would've always given Johnson a hard time.

[red cobra]

Honestly anyone trying to put forth and Arguement of Pastrano having even close the heavyweight resume Harold Johnson has is fighting a losing arguement. Save your energy.
I myself made no mention of Pastrano's "resume" once known as a record...but you're being an extremist in seriously underrating Willie.

[GPater11093]

O really. Perhaps you need to start pulling out your historical references. I have mine.


Angelo Dundee, who trained Pastrano, admits in his biography that Johnson was robbed of his title by a split decision. Russell Peltz, the legendary Philly promoter, said so too and so did almost all the ringsiders.

Also a posters who posts here under the name "Albinored". He is actually a boxing historian who wishes for me to keep his name secret, although I am allowed to quote him. He was apart of Team Ezzard Charles camp back in the day. Here is what he had to say

"Johnson had an answer for ever move jones made...johnson was known for his ability to block a punch with his hand and then turn that same move into a counter punch.....but in this one he made it into an art form. superb boxing...good sharp hitting...a masterpiece. when willie pastrano was told he was matched with johnson he referred to just this aspect of johnson's skills and admitted he was afraid. (As it turned out, the fix was in and pastrano just ran for fifteen rounds and johnson was robbed)"


He swears to this day that the bout was fixed

I thought Pastrano won and most people i have talked to think Pastrano won.

How. Who of those men I listed in Pastranos resume were as good as peak versions of Clarence Henry, Nino Valdez, Ezzard Charles, and Archie Moore? Please tell me. And Please do not name a washed up Rex Layne. Clarence Henry alone would have knocked out every single man on Pastranos list.

No there not the names i said were on the same level i said Slade, Bethea and Satterfield.



None of those guys were top ranking heavyweight contenders in contention for a title shot the way Johnsons victims were. Nino Valdez was a # 1 contender 2 years in a row, and even the great rocky marciano is accused of ducking him. Clarence henry was a top 5 contender 3 years in a row and is arguebably a top 50 heavyweight of all time. Ezzard was an ATG, and Moore was a # 1 heavyweight Contender favored to win the vacant belt in 56. Eddie Machen was top ranked and so feared patterson wouldnt give him a shot.


London got a title shot.

Nino was top contender for 2 years but he was inconsistent and I personally dont rate him highyl anyway. but i dont disagree with your points here i think you have misunderstood me im saying Bethea, Slade and Satterfield were on the level which Pastrano was beating.


Brian London and Pat Mcmutry both got blasted away easily by Nino Valdez, and these are pastranos best wins. I have Mcmutry vs Valdez on film, its embarrasing the first right hand Nino Lands Pat goes down and out he looked so badly outclassed.


Again not what im arguing

Ha thats just the thing. Pastrano was a HEAVYWEIGHT starting out, who simply could not hack it against the 2nd rate contenders so he was FORCED to move down to lightheavyweight so he could finally compete at a world class level.

I'm aware of that but he was a natural LHW. The guy skipped training regualry liked drinking and women instead of fighting and was overweight. He then started training and got down to LHW.

Honestly anyone trying to put forth and Arguement of Pastrano having even close the heavyweight resume Harold Johnson has is fighting a losing arguement. Save your energy.

that is not what im arguing im arguing that your being harsh on Pastrano because your biased towards Johnson.

The pastrano opponents you listed were on the same level as Bethea, Slade and Satterfield

Once again Gpator I challenge you to name one Prime Heavyweight opponent Willie Pastrano beat that was on the same level as a win over Ezzard Charles, Nino Valdez, Archie Moore, Clarence Henry, and Eddie Machen. PLEASE I am waiting....

If you can't just concede that you lost

you have completely missed my point.