Jack Dempsey and Harry Wills, the timeline

I don't doubt there are plenty of words that can be attributed to Dempsey, but I " very much doubt " cowardly is one of them. You just make yourself look a fukking idiot by posting that kind of junk.

 

It's called "Klomping"

 

I was wrong on the date of Norfolk v Greb ,it wasn't 1922 it was 29th of August 1921 so incorrect by 4 months.I made the
mistake by using Wills as the hub for my cross
referencing, confusing his 1922 fight with Norfolk. Thank you for the correction.
Nothing you have posted proves that Wills was the acknowledged number one contender for Dempsey's title in1919 or 1920 quite the opposite. One newspaper calling Wills a "Black Cloud" doesn't make him the outstanding challenger. you've cherry picked some quotes that prove nothing as far as those two years are concerned.
Willie Meehan picks Wills to beat Dempsey?
Well whoop de do! Langford and Jeannette picked Jeffries to kill Johnson so did Burns and Fitz, Corbett never picked the winner in his life! You've done exactly what you accused me of,picked every positive s**** on Wills and ignored anything negative.
The difference being I was respectful and civil to you, whereas you have insulted me.
I could go into your attitude towards anyone who even mildly disagrees with you on this forum but regular posters are already only to aware of it,so I'll leave it alone.
The bottomline is you say Wills was the number one contender for 6 years of Dempsey's reign and I say his record does not support that.
You say Dempsey ducked kid Norfok, and I say why would he?

What had Norfolk done during Dempsey's reign to justify him getting a title shot?

Jack Dempsey has two phobic haters on this forum:
Suzie Q and You!
Posters will make their own minds up as to the amount of objectivity they discern in either of your posts on the subject.

 

Coming from you, that means very little. You're the worst poster on this forum.

And yes, Dempsey not fighting wills was cowardly. Dempsey was not a coward, but him not fighting wills was a huge disgrace.

 

Huh?

 

Nice to see your objectivity in full view:good

 

Like you said, we can let the public decide, just like they did 100 yrs ago. But I didnt cherry pick any more information than you did with your timeline or that idiot fightfilmguy did either for his "the trouble with harry blog" and ive corrected plenty that you both got wrong, ignored, or didnt know. Dud wills have his detractors? Of course. So does Abe Lincoln. So did the cause of the North in the 1860s. That doesnt mean that the majority didnt support Wills. At least three major write in polls were undertaken while Dempsey was champion and Wills won each one by HUGE margins. Like I said, anyone who spends any time researching the yrs 1919-1926 cannot escape that wills was easily considered Dempsey's top contender by the majority. Its overwhelming. And yes, what he did was cowardly because people can blame Kearns and Rickard all they want (and they didnt want him to lose to Wills either) but when Dempsey was speaking for himself and handling his own business, he was very consistent in actions and words. Dempsey was more than happy to avoid wills. Dempsey himself tried to whitewash all of this in later interviews, as he did everything negative about his life and career, but anyone who isnt willing to buy the myth hook line and sinker and actually sees what was happening on the ground and reads the quotes and opiniins can see what was really taking place.

 

Is there any chance of you or someone else posting this list?

 

If Dempsey fought and knocked out Wills and Greb in early 20s, I think he has a serious case for top 3 all time. I think it would make him a near logic.

He did a great job cleaning out the 3rd-10th best contenders, he just forgot the top two. Which is the most important.

 

I dont think it was brilliant at all. It was actually very transparent which is why so many people called him out on it. If it were brilliant subtrefuge we wouldnt know about it.

Go back and read my post. I never said Dempsey used Madden as an obstacle. I said Dempsey had actively been trying to get Madden approved as yet another soft touch opponent. Wills fought him instead to remove yet another potential opponent for Dempsey and the press picked up on this. That isnt contradictory at all.

If he was really so bold he could have easily made that fight instead of going out of his way not to make it. Purely ridiculous, almost as bad as mcvey trying to make a weak-ass revisionist argument for Wills not being Dempseys top contender for at least 1920-26.

They played the same game with Greb to a lesser extant. It was pathetic and obvious what they were doing.

 

Difference is I didn't cherry pick I took those two reports fromBox rec I didnt' trawl through papers as you did which was why you weren't on here for a couple of days.

You never explained why Dempsey ducked 5'8" Kid Norfolk or whom Norfolk beat during Dempsey's reign to entitle him to a title shot.

I''ve always agreed Wills should have got a title shot and said Dempsey cannot be given a free pass for that not happening.
My only reservation is the statement that Wills was the outstanding number one contender for 6 years of Dempseys title tenure when I can see for myself that his record during those years ,makes that statement to be false.
And no amount of foaming at the mouth or personal insults on your part is going to change either his resume or my opinion.

 

To me and I know there are posters here that disagree, I don't think Wills looks very good in the fights that are available of his. In fact I think he looks mediocre. I will grant that he was past prime and ring worn so I do not rate him based on that version. However I do feel had Dempsey fought Wills anywhere from 25 onwards I think Dempsey stops him. My two cents.
I do agree clearly that Dempsey should of fought Wills and he did a disservice to a good man, to a race of people and to his own legacy by not getting the fight done.