Do you give Dempsey credit for rematching Miske and Brennan?

Discussion in 'Classic Boxing Forum' started by McGrain, Jul 18, 2012.


  1. McGrain

    McGrain Diamond Dog Staff Member

    111,835
    45,551
    Mar 21, 2007
    Easy Burt.

    My point is, we give Johnson hammer for not fighting McVey, Jeanette and especially Langford as champion even though he'd beaten them all (or at least I do), but you also see Dempsey drawing criticism for "feasting on his own carcasses". But then, Brennan was one of the better HW's around during Dempsey's reign so this was likely a good defence.

    Miske is touchier for obvious reasons but, Dempsey hadn't beaten Miske convincingly previous to their title bout.

    Yes, he was sick, but if Dempsey had skipped him and Miske had put on that impressive run...he would have drawn criticism wouldn't he?

    I don't value Miske that highly (at this point - reading the Moyle book now) but perhaps, rather than the "give an old mucker a good payday" story the real story is that fight had to be made?

    Thoughts?
     
  2. Legend X

    Legend X Boxing Addict banned Full Member

    6,315
    664
    Mar 18, 2005
    Defending against Miske is not much different from Marciano defending against LaStarza. We don't have to debate the degree of Miske's illness or how far LaStarza had declined, but acknowledge they were attractive matches in spite of the fact that Billy Miske and Roland LaStarza were going in the opposite direction to their champions who had blossomed .... and that Dempsey and Marciano almost certainly didn't take these challenges lightly.


    Brennan, I'm not so sure.
    A decent fighter but Dempsey beat him worse the first time than the second.
    A third match was probably more justified than the second - if that makes sense.
     
  3. SuzieQ49

    SuzieQ49 The Manager Full Member

    37,067
    3,694
    Sep 14, 2005
    So Dempsey decided to fight the loser of title eliminators? Harry Greb easily beat both of these guys, yet Dempsey chose the losers instead of the winner.
     
  4. PowerPuncher

    PowerPuncher Loyal Member Full Member

    42,723
    260
    Jul 22, 2004
    I don't think he was, he was dominated by Greb and lost to Miske, later ko'd by Firpo. He then was on a winning run against nobodies, with the highlight been a win over Meehan and a draw with Miske

    I mean he was decent but never top5

    His run coming in to the Dempsey bout wasn't impressive though and he was coming out of retirement. The prior year he was dominated by Greb and Kid Norfolk and also lost to Levinski. His best results that year were probably the win over Brennan draws against Gibbons and Brennan. HE seemingly did go on a good run post Dempsey but not really except against Gibbons who got the better of him

    I think it was either a favour or a cherry pick at that stage
     
  5. PowerPuncher

    PowerPuncher Loyal Member Full Member

    42,723
    260
    Jul 22, 2004
    I'm not sure what evidence there was that Lastarza had declined at the age of 26. HE lost some fights granted and he wasn't the top of the division by any stretch
     
  6. McGrain

    McGrain Diamond Dog Staff Member

    111,835
    45,551
    Mar 21, 2007
    He went 20-1-1 post Greb and the only loss was a newspaper loss which tended not to impact a fighter's pedigree in the same way. Top five? Maybe not but certainly top 8 type fighter. What happened afterwards doesn't impact the situation.



    Yes, but I spoke of the run after Dempsey, "wouldn't he have drawn criticism." So, Dempsey struggles twice with Miske pre-title, Miske tries to make the fight but Dempsey doesn't make the fight now he goes 22-1-1, Dempsey has ducked him and we have Burt and Janitor telling us that he was sick and didn't deserve the shot.

    Right?
     
  7. FastHands(beeb)

    FastHands(beeb) Well-Known Member Full Member

    2,495
    404
    Oct 28, 2010
    Personally, I give Jack Dempsey credit for being Jack Dempsey.
     
  8. TheGreatA

    TheGreatA Boxing Junkie Full Member

    14,241
    150
    Mar 4, 2009
    Not too much. They would have made for decent title defenses, if not for Dempsey's pace of defending his title barely once a year.

    Dempsey had beaten Brennan very decisively already and there were several classier opponents around. Brennan had not beaten a single world class heavyweight and his performance in the rematch against Dempsey probably goes down as his very best, which doesn't necessarily look good for Dempsey.

    Miske as we know was ill and coming off one of his worst stretches. He did have to beat Miske decisively at some stage in their careers though so he cannot be blamed for taking the fight. It's just that fights against the likes of Wills and Greb would've been better.
     
  9. PowerPuncher

    PowerPuncher Loyal Member Full Member

    42,723
    260
    Jul 22, 2004
    The Glenfiddich 18 didn't last long did it :lol:

    Yes but who did Brennan go 20-1-1. Top8, I don't know, for the era I think I'd rate him below Dempsey, Wills, Tunney, Greb, Firpo, Gibbons, Norfolk. And by the early 20s I'm not sure about how he matches up with the remaining black dynamites like Bill Tate, Langford, Lee Anderson. A few years later you have the likes of Sharkey and Godfrey amongst others

    To be fair Brennan gave a decent account of himself against Dempsey

    Ahh so Dempsey faces Miske after his 22-1-1 run instead of when he did or gives him a rematch after he'd starched him in 3? Nah I think it's still getting some stick if not more when Wills and Greb weren't getting their shots, especially in a rematch scenario
     
  10. Pachilles

    Pachilles Boxing Addict Full Member

    6,294
    27
    Nov 15, 2009
    lo, viceral hatred from NAYSAYER YE OLDE ballet legs la vida loca, i am leaving the forum lest you beg me to stay though not really, i am insulted by nothing lo millions and millions of boxing writers Nat Fleicher, who can blame him? then i am in good company, Mc

    cheers
     
  11. janitor

    janitor VIP Member Full Member

    71,198
    26,473
    Feb 15, 2006
    Obviously it is a positive if a champion defends against any top 15 fighter of the period, but I don't think that either bout was necesary.

    Dempsey had beaten Brennan verry convincingly in their first encounter.

    The first fight with Miske was close, but I think the second was a clear win for Dempsey. A third might have been waranted if Miske had still been on form, but he wasn't.
     
  12. burt bienstock

    burt bienstock Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    18,285
    388
    Jan 22, 2010
    Interpreter please...?:patsch
     
  13. burt bienstock

    burt bienstock Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    18,285
    388
    Jan 22, 2010
    Mc. I see my name is on your post, when I have not been on this thread...
    Please, I have enough trouble when I do post...I will notify my eldery attorney who is now in prison...He is 90 years old and was arrested on charges of Assault With A Dead Weapon !!!
     
  14. McGrain

    McGrain Diamond Dog Staff Member

    111,835
    45,551
    Mar 21, 2007
    :lol: no.


    How much does it matter though? Once a fighter is established he maintains this sort of ranking with this sort of form. Haye just beat an unranked HW and jumped to #4. Obviously HW was a little deeper then, but it's 20 wins with never a referee or judge ruling against him in the time...he's got credentials even if we can agree there were more deserving men.

    I think the guys you are listing there are pretty much done, though you could make a case...and what comes after isn't really relevant.

    It's a given that he takes a hiding for the Wills and Greb situations but yeah, if Miske goes unmatched during Dempsey's title reign, based upon the trouble he gave Jack prior to this and his form in those years he would catch fire for it IMO.
     
  15. McGrain

    McGrain Diamond Dog Staff Member

    111,835
    45,551
    Mar 21, 2007
    :lol::patsch