Jack Dempsey and Harry Wills, the timeline

He didnt have to. He did exactly what he was supposed to do. Why should he have to do "more" than what is required by him and what was required by most to see him as the top guy? Did any of Dempsey's other challengers? None of them did. Period. Ive always said I give Dempsey a pass for Carpentier because that fight was simply too big not to be made. But the other guys he defended against did less. No question about it.

 

You saw what happened: Nothing. More maneuvering, ducking, dodging, etc. What would have changed if Wills had defeated Gibbons or Brennan or any of those other names you mentioned? Its not like those guys had never been beaten by men less imposing than Wills so they would have fallen by the wayside as "also-rans" or somehow been used to question Wills performance. Some probably would have said "oh, but those guys were already beaten and were never that good anyway" and just kept on ignoring Wills. Others would have continued to trumpet his cause. I dont really see how victories over those guys change the equation at all.

 

Jack Dempsey rabbit punched a dying man, and the man still didn't die !

 

I think mcvey's posts properly illustrate how Wills' status during those years was kept alive largely on publicity and reputation, and in fact Wills spent many of those years milking his status towards some substantial paydays.

I don't think we have to "re-interpret" fights against Jack Thompson, Homer Smith etc. ... I'd be very surprised if many neutral observers thought they were good opponents at the time.
Were they really the best opponents Wills could find ?

People in the media, boxing people who should have known better, and fans, built Mike Tyson up as Lennox Lewis's "logical and most dangerous challenger" too,in 2002, when it was obvious that he was a faded has-been ticking over against hand-picked opponents. Sometimes it's okay to go back and examine these things and say, no, that man's record didn't quite justify the "overwhelming feeling on the ground" (ie. what gets printed in newspapers).
I'm sure you have no problem going back and dissecting Dempsey's record and reputation.

Maybe he was ducking Lee Anderson ?

 

The thing we can say about Harry Wills is that he was better than every fighter Dempsey successfully defended against. Overall, and overall across those years too, taking the entire period as a whole.

 

I have interpreted nothing ,I have posted the results, giving credit for the good wins and reminded
posters of the declining abilities and ages of some of the scalps on Wills record during this time .
Wills was given poor reviews for his win over Firpo , one paper said he disqualiifed himself from a title shot.
Here is the Milwaukee Journal's view under the heading
"Wills No Match For Dempsey"

The Milwaukee Journal headlined, “Harry Wills No Match for Champion Dempsey

". Wills general ability as a fighter would not be sufficiently high to stand the champion off. Firpo not only telegraphs his wallops, but sends a letter of warning…but Dempsey doesn’t telegraph. His punches come from a short distance and behind them lurk oblivion"




After his second win over a half blind 36 years old Langford in1919 , Wills was said by the papers to have suffered a damaged reputation because of his performance.
The Syracuse Herald reported that it was a very disappointing fight and that it wasn't important 'whether Wills won or Langford won or it was a draw.' It did report that Langford's eye was closed and his mouth cut at the end, while Wills only suffered a damaged reputation.

Where is the ," overwhelming feeling ",there?
At no time have I said Wills was a non entity ,that is you, putting words in my mouth I did not speak.

Dempsey drawing the colour line after he won the title does not mean he did it specifically to avoid Wills that is YOUR interpretation of his action.
Just as you stating," Dempsey ducked Kid Norfolk"
is soley your interpretation.
I mentioned in my earlier post that's Wills did not fight:
Tunney
Godfrey
Renault
Miske
Brennan
Rojas
Gibbons
Maloney
Greb
At no time did I say he ducked them .Spot the difference?

The fact that you voluntarily conceded," there was no other threatening black challenger "for his title in July1919 seriously devalues Will's wins over Langford,Norfolk,McVey and Tate during Dempsey's reign!

Bottom line the best wins on Wills record during Dempsey's title reign are. Fulton and Firpo. both men were previously kod by Dempsey in a total of 4 minutes and 20 seconds.
If you want to debate the records of :
Langford
McVey
Clark
Norfolk
Between July 1919 &September 1926 [Dempsey's title reign].
I am happy to do so.

I repeat, please point out any inaccuracies in my post, and we can debate them.:good

After Wills fouled out against Sharkey the respected writer James P Dawson of the NY TImes said.

“None who saw last night’s battle can doubt that Dempsey would have annihilated Wills four years ago, three years ago, or a year ago.”

 

Ring records and results speak more eloquently than any opinions ever will.:good

 

Nothing you have said anywhere above in any of your posts changes or illustrates the fact that Wills was considered the most threatening challenger from as early as 1920 and likely earlier by the vast majority of people until Dempsey lost his title. Its ridiculous to argue that point. It completely ignores the actual climate of the time. Can you find the odd paper here and there that either because of racism or bias didnt believe or didnt want Wills to be the most qualified challenger? Yes. Of course. You can also find the odd paper making reference to ******s, tar babys, and talking about how the color line is acceptable. If you want though I can post a hell of a lot more papers and opinions from peole who regarded Wills as the top challenger and can even illustrate that by their loud and long arguing against Wills those same "anti-Wills" papers illustrate just how highly he was regarded, because they sure werent complaining about Tut Jackson, or Bob Martin? Why? Because very few people took them seriously as contenders. Its beyond ridiculous to suggest Wills wasnt Dempsey's top contender for that period. Its either stupidity or bias and I know you arent stupid.

Even your pathetic pot shots at fighters like Homer Smith on Wills' record show an appalling lack of understanding for the context of the time. Was Homer Smith the best guy out there? No but two months prior to Wills fighting Smith Smith went the distance with Firpo who was already signed to fight Dempsey. Smith was the only man on Firpo's american tour prior to facing Dempsey to go the distance. Firpo was heavily criticized for his performance in the Smith fight. Wills immediately signed up to fight Smith and then knocked him out in two rounds.

Here is what George Underwoods article said about Wills-Smith afterwards:

No one knows that any better than
do Manager Jack Keartis and Promoter
Rickard. •
Dempsey would be taking a desperate
chance with Wills. Jack isn't
with Firpo, Gibbons, Brennan, Miske.
Carpentier or the others.
That is why Harry Wills never
has been given the championship opportunity
to which he is clearly entitled,
and why he never will be given
that opportunity as long as Tex
Rickard and Jack Kearns hold the​

boxing game in the hollow of their hand...
...Wills will be left out in the cold,

as usual.
Harry will never get the coveted
match with Jack.​

The cards are stacked against him.

The funny thing is that when Firpo was interviewed in Omaha just prior to his match with Smith he expressed a desire to wait and not fight Dempsey just yet but said Rickard was forcing the issue and admitted that Wills was the more popular choice for Dempsey now.

Further illustrating just how and why the Smith fight was made as a means of comparison between Wills and Firpo here is the New York Times headline:
WILLS

KNOCKS OUT
SMITH IN 2D ROUND​

Heavyweight Who Stayed Ten
Rounds With Firpo Makes
- ^Poor Showing Against Negro.​

GOES TO FLOOR SIX TIMES

Interestingly just after Firpo failed to stop Smith and had been saying he wanted to wait to fight Dempsey in favor of Wills getting the shot Kearns refused to fight Wills unless a $250,000 forfeit was posted. This was unheard of. This was Joe Vila's ****ysis of that situation:

Feeling absolutely confident that
Dempsey will settle Firpo as easily as
he has disposed of his other victims,
Kearns has jumped at the chance to put
the champion into the ring with the
South American, and. at the same time,
lias thrown up no such insurmountable
hurdle as a $250,000 forfeit.
The only conclusion to be drawn.
after reviewing the facts, is that Kearns
is afraid he'll lose his meal ticket if he
lets Dempsey mix it up, with Wills.​

 

Then I will ask again:

What fights did Dempsey's actual opponents win that got them their title shots??

 

Isn't there a chance that some of them had seen him and just didn't rate him that highly ?

I mean, opinions will differ. You don't always have to ascribe a differing opinion to racism and/or bias, or corruption, or some other evil motive.
Certainly not in something like assessing boxers. Often, people just don't rate them the same. We on these forums should know that.

 

We both agree Wills deserved title shot ,what we disagree on is you saying he was the number one contender for 6 years.

I say his record does not support that statement.
When Tut Jackson ,whom you've just mentioned fought Wills there was an investigation into his record.

You also mentioned Homer Smith and the fact that Wills stopped him in 2 rounds.

Smith in his previous 27 fights had won 10 of them.

Going into the Wills fight, Smith had won 3 of his last 5 and they were over nobodies.

After the Wills fight Smith had a further 45 fights and won just 16 of them ,being kod multiple times.
No I'm not stupid ,neither am I biased, you are not stupid either, far from it, but I have to be honest, on the subject of Jack Dempsey I find you totally biased against him. You excuse all the negative comments on Wills as racial bias, James P Dawson of the NY Times is one of the premier writers of the time was he racially biased?

I'm sorry you find my posts pathetic, I don't find yours so, just sadly lacking in objectivity on the subject of Jack Dempsey .
I've never seen any post by you ,or Suzie Q that had anything but negative comments to make about Dempsey.
This adversely affects your credibility to the point of nullifying it completely.

I didn't embroider Wills record ,I didn't interpret it, I didn't attempt to make hay out of poor his fights with Tate.

I just presented the facts.
Maybe they are too unpalatable for you to digest?

 

Carpentier
Went from 1913 until 1921=8 years 25 fights lost one a disputed dec to Joe Jeannette of the 24 wins he scored 21 kos.
Beat among others
Bombadier Billy Wells Euro title x2:
Jeff Smith
Battling Levinsky
Joe Beckett Euro title
GunBoat Smith White title


Firpo
Had won 19 of last 20 fights 17 by ko.
Beat among others
Brennan
Willard
Weinert


Gibbons
Had won 34 of last 36 fights 28 by ko
Beat among others
Bartley Madden
Billy Miske
Porky Flynn

 

I think you just proved my point, not yours.