Louis & Dempsey in the ring together on TV 1951

:roll: he did fight black fighters prior to winning the title and many of his sparring partners were black.

 

Dempsey picked Maxim over Charles

 

Correction. He did fight black fighter (singular) prior to winning the title.

And he didn't like the experience so much.

 

Obviously he turned out to be wrong but it really wasn't a bad pick considering that Maxim had given Charles a close fight in 1949, hadn't lost a fight since and had picked up the light-heavy title.
Maxim had actually outboxed Charles for long spells in the 1949 fight from many reports, scored well with the jab and hook, and perhaps threw the fight away by coasting the last two or three rounds.

Hindsight is a beautiful thing.

 

I am sorry but this is preposterous.

The guy had over a hundred profesional fights, many of which are unrecorded.

How can you possibly say that he only ever fought one black opponent?

 

He fought more than one black fighter.

He said a lot of his fights were painfully tough on the way up.
Dempsey's own account of the J L Johnson fight is the cornerstone in this whole silly thing about 'not wanting to fight another black after that experience' BS. Some of the ringside reports had Dempsey winning.
But J L Johnson wasn't the only fighter Dempsey said gave him a beating in those early years.
There are similar stories and quotes about Gunboat Smith, Billy Miske, and others.
Some people here have said that Dempsey exaggerated how tough these early fights were, and exaggerated how little he got paid for them.

The logic that has Dempsey avoiding all black fighters because J L Johnson was a tough fight is really "1 + 1 = 3" stuff.

 

I know of at least 2, perhaps 3, other than J L Johnson, he fought on his way up.


He fought several black fighters in his 1931 comeback tour too. But these are usually classed as 'exhibitions'.

 

I try to respect everybodys position, but when people try to imply that Dempsey developed an irational fear of black fighters, based on zero evidence other than a tough fight with John Lester Johnson early in his career, that is prety hard to respect.

It is hard to respect, because it is the worst kind of distortion of the evidence, to further an utterly negative aganda.

 

Do you two care to name those scores of unlisted, unrecorded black fighters that he fought? And please, no Bill Tate. Sparring don't count.

It's like saying, I have a 12" joint but it's never been measured.

 

Actualy, if you are claiming that he only ever fought one black fighter, the onus is on you to prove it, not on others to disprove it.

My position is that we can't know one way or the other based on the evidence that you have been able to put forward.

Whose position do you think stands scrutiny better?

 

I am supposed to prove the negative and you do not have to prove the positive?

I hope I'm never on trial in front of you, judge...

 

And I luv Dempseys technique

 

So did Louis. No wait they had to be washed up first.

 

Can't you just enjoy the two fighters instead of trying to diss one of them? Dempsey flattens Louis anyway.

 

You are arguing the negative. If you feel that you cannot prove a negative, then you are rather undermining your decision to argue it.

I am not actualy arguing the positive. I am saying that the data do not suport a definite conclusion one way or the other.

If you are digging yourself into a hole, it is best to get out and stop digging!