Today, as you know, is the 100th anniversary of the world heavyweight title bout between Jack Johnson and James J. Jeffries fought in Reno. It was a historic fight because Johnson, an African American, held the title and Jeffries, a former title holder, tried to win back the title for white America and was called the Great White Hope.

Johnson knocked out Jeffies in the 15th round and showed America black men could fight and had an essential place in American sports and culture. Joe Louis, Jackie Robinson and Muhammad Ali would reinforce this lesson.

When I was growing up, I faithfully read Ring Magazine. Its publisher, Nat Fleischer was an important advocate for Johnson. Fleischer reminded the boxing world Johnson had been a great heavyweight, maybe the best. This restoring of a faded reputation is similiar to what happens to writers. For a long time no one thought much about John Donne as a poet and then he was rediscovered and now people read and admire him. It is important to remind ourselves that Johnson suffered for his blackness and in our history he is a tragic figure.

In the past week I have read several articles about the Johnson/Jeffries fight and some of what I read troubles me. Johnson gets portrayed as a moral paragon and Jeffries is a bum. I don’t believe life and history are that simple. I am going to quote a New York Times article — the Times owns my paper — and the article I’m quoting is well-researched, well-written and informative. I quote the Times because it is the best paper around.

Two things trouble me.

1. The writer writes: “Black fighters like Sam Langford, Joe Jeannette and Sam McVey would have given Jeffries all he wanted. But Jeffries said no black man would fight for the title on his watch.”

No one knows how Jeffries would have done against Langford, Jeannette and McVey because he never fought them. So the assertion they would have given him all he wanted is not fact-based. It is to Jeffries’ lasting discredit that he would not fight them because they were black. He should have fought them. But you should know Johnson fought and defeated Langford once before he won the heavyweight championship but never fought him again. Langford punched hard and boxing historians speculate Johnson did not want to risk his title against this dangerous fighter.

Of course, Johnson did not refuse to fight Langford because he was black. But he still refused to fight him and that is to his discredit. If you want to stay with the racial theme which is all over this story, Johnson kept down a worthy black man by refusing to defend his title against him.

The writer of the Times article ends the piece this way: “Fairly or not, (Jeffries) is remembered as the ‘great white hope’ who was not so great.’

Just because Johnson was great does not mean Jeffries was not great. Let’s play fair. Jeffries had been the undisputed heavyweight champion. He won the title by knocking out Ruby Bob Fitzsimmons and he knocked out former champ Jim Corbett. Both were great fighters. Jeffries was elected to the Boxing Hall of Fame in 1954. So he was pretty good.

Before meeting Johnson in Reno he had been retired six years and his weight had gone up to 300 pounds. You try being retired six years and then fighting Jack Johnson.

Of course, Johnson was the better figther. Of course, Jeffries had a bad attittude about African Americans and it’s sad he allowed himself to be portrayed as a white hope. It certainly was the correct outcome for all of us that Johnson won their fight.

But please don’t portray Jeffries as some palooka. He wasn’t. He was an important champion and because he had been important, Johnson’s victory takes on even greater meaning.