You can’t really lay a charge of ducking at a champion’s door, unless the contender had done enough to force a title shot. Dempsey was well within his discretion to decline to defend his title against Langford, for any reason whatsoever.
Flowers lost to Langford in1922,we don't have the weights for the fight but 2 months later Flower scaled 160lbs for a fight. Dempsey did not fight in1922 ,but in1921 he was scaling 188lbs that is a 28lbs disparity not 17lbs. As I have already said Langford kod no Heavyweight or light heavyweight of any significance from1920 onwards . So his" punchers chance was in reality ,no chance. Langford was also half blind and 37 years old in1920. As well as regularly losing to Wills In1920 Langfordl lost to: Bill Tate 15-12-0 Dempsey's sparring partner. Lee Anderson12-7-7 Jack Thompson 16-2-4 1921 Lee Anderson21-9-9 Tate now15-15-0 1922 Tate 18-16-1 Tut Jackson by ko 1923 Clem Johnson12-14--2 kod him Bearcat Wright 5-5-5 kod him Sonny Goodward 14-4-6 No point in going further. It would have been a criminal mismatch to put Langford in with the Dempsey of 1920 onwards. You keep making it up as you go along, like the assertion that Greb fought Carpentier!atsch
Either name, and shame these posters who have DIRECTLY called Jack Dempsey a racist, and / or a coward, or go and quack with Burt somewhere else, duck egg. We ALL know that Dempsey lived in a racist country in his time, but it is simply ret arded to put the blame squarely on his shoulders for that train of thought. My personal view is that perhaps he was a big enough " name " to have stood against that filthy disease, but Burt put me right, and said the evil that pervaded Murica, at that time was bigger than any man, including the Heavyweight Champion of the world. I like to think that I accepted that reasoning, but unfortunately Burt can't see things that way, and he feels the necessity to defend J.D. against accusations that are NOT actually being made against the great man. For instance Burt, and others pointed out that Dempsey was indeed going to fight Harry Wills, but the money was not forthcoming, and I think the majority of posters accepted this, rather than accuse Jack of " avoiding " Wills. But Burt gets overly defensive of Mr Dempsey, and criticises people who dare to question Jack's resume. That is my point.
on page 3 of this thread mcvey is calling out seamus for bad mouthing Dempsey about slave ownership and worse and then Burt jumps in as well, go read it Foxy,,, thus I assumed that Burt was speaking to seamus as well as others that I have read bad mouth Dempsey in the past. Then you came in out of no where and somehow assume Burt is talking to you and then accuse him of being a fool when you had no clue what you were talking about. If you think I am LYING take it up with mcvey. He is a honest dude which is more than I can say about you Foxy, you sneaky deceitful trickster. Foxy, your hatred and possibly your drinking has put you into a confused state. I hope this forum is the only place that you act as you do Foxy.
So, finally a tepid response the question I ask, the crux of the issue at hand. Which one of the above truly deserved a title shot over Greb. Wills certainly. Greb had beaten #3, #4 and #6. Godfrey was losing (and to Greb victims) almost as much as he was winning. And how in the f*ck is Jim Maloney on this list since he debuted in 1924? I might even entertain but ultimately dismiss an argument for Firpo based on his beating an old Willard but he has nowhere near the depth of heavyweight success as Greb. Again, folks, give me your list of more deserving aspirants to a title shot from 1919 (because some can't understand that Dempsey didn't defend his title till 1920) to 1925. Because the above list is pure horsesh*t. And let's go deeper... Did Brennan deserve a shot over Greb? Did Miske? Did Carpentier? Did Firpo? Did even Tommy Gibbons?
How about you answer my reply to your statement that Greb had beaten plenty of decent heavyweights during those years[1920-1923]? Three actually Weinert.Madden,Renault. Here's your response to my post. Originally Posted by mcvey This content is protected The same guys slagging Dempsey for not fighting Greb would be slagging him if he had fought him and done a Carpentier on him," beating on a little middleweight etc". No, because Carpentier had not beaten a decent heavyweight in 7 years. Greb had beaten plenty of them recently. I pointed out,[as you did not ,] that Carpentier had spent 5 of those 7 years in the French Airforce during WW1 Previous to which he had beaten the man considered the best of the white hopes GunBoat Smith for the White Heavyweight Championship of the world and ko'd Joe Beckett in1 round for the European Heavyweight title. You said Greb was past prime in1925 and picked 1920-1923 as his years when he was a real threat to Dempsey. When I showed he only beat three decent heavies during that period you extended your timescale to include 1919 when he beat Brennan . Greb beat Brennan 4 times that year ,all by decision the first time they met was February1919 Dempsey had kod Brennan exactly a year earlier, flooring him 6 times for a 6 rounds stoppage and becoming the first man to floor and stop him. If you want to make a case for an opponent Dempsey should have defended his title against it is undeniably Harry Wills NOT Harry Greb. And certainly not Sam Langford, or Willie Meehan as our resident clown Mendozy has suggested.
So for all your irrelevant quacking you have actually named, and shamed, wait for it Seamus. Whoopee fukking doo. So naming one guy is proof of this pernicious campaign to besmirch the name of Jack Dempsey is it? If you had a brain you'd be dangerous.nut Quack off.
I haven't shamed anyone, seamus is entitled to his own views, if you want to judge them as shameful then that's YOU saying so Foxy. You deceitful trickster once again :nono :nono
Foxy calls me Duck Egg ,,, as for the rest of what Foxy and I are arguing about, holy that is way more confusing,,,,,, Foxy is on a rampage of judgements and misjudgements as usual.
Flowers fought numerous fights in the 170's and would be heavier if he fought bigger men. In fact he Ko'd men weighing 190, and 200 pounds. I checked, Flowers listed weight for the Greb in 1924, was 161 1/2, not 160 as you claim. But the point was Langford vs Dempsey, and by the early 1920's Langford was 180-190. Same weight possibly even more than Dempsey depending on the dates! . Godfrey fought in the 1920's. He's in the hall of fame. So were passed their prime types in Sam McVey. If you think Langford lost his power in the early 1920's you are mistaken. No, it would have been justice for Langford as Jack Johnson skirted him! By the way are you aware of the time Joe Jeannette showed up in the ring for a sub, and Jack Dempsey avoided him. HAHAHA I think you know I meant to type in someone else besides Carpentier. Should I do a comparison of whom Dempsey and Greb both fought to show you're very biased mind that Greb deserved a title shot based on beating the same opponents, some of which got title shots from Dempsey himself!
Originally Posted by janitor View Post An intriguing question, but there are a few pointers. Ring Magazine inaugurated its first rankings in 1924: Heavyweights 1. Jack Dempsey, Champion 2. Harry Wills 3. Tommy Gibbons 4. Charley Weinert 5. Quintin Romero Rojas 6. Jack Renault 7. Luis Angel Firpo 8. George Godfrey 9. Jim Maloney 10. Erminio Spalla. ZING. A ten count KO for Seamus over McVey.
Listen stupid, I said we did not have the weights for the Langford v Flowers fight but that Flowers scaled 160 lbs for a fight 2 months later .I never mentioned GREB! Here is my post! "Flowers lost to Langford in1922,we don't have the weights for the fight but 2 months later Flowers scaled 160lbs for a fight. Dempsey did not fight in1922 ,but in1921 he was scaling 188lbs that is a 28lbs disparity not 17lbs'" Flowers did not fight," numerous fights in the 170's". Flowers fought a total of 4 fights weighing 170lbs or over, in one he scaled 171lbs, another 170lbs ,another 170.5lbs and his heaviest ever 171.5lbs in his last fight It was you who brought up the Flowers fight to somehow bolster Langford's prospects against Dempsey in the 1920's! NB A couple of fights previous to the Langford one Flowers scaled 153lbs! You are off the wall! Now do you want to answer my question on the Greb thread concerning the purported film of Greb v Gans you were allowed to view?
Typical BS replies McVey. Nothing on Dempsey avoiding Jeanette in the ring as a sub! Nothing on Langford, not KOing name heavies in the 1920's Nothing on the weight disparity between Dempsey and Langford in the 1920's, which is the point. I'm not saying Dempsey vs Flowers you dolt! I'm saying Dempsey vs Langford! I was only pointing out that Langford had a few good wins in the early 1920's and Flowers was one of them. I'm in awe that you think Langford didn't have a puncher's chance. Dempsey was down a few times before becoming champion and a few times after from guys who did not hit as hard as Langford. GOT IT?! PS: I'd also like to see you " attempt " to reply to Seamus and the Ring Ranking in 1924. That will be amusing.
Dempsey was contracted to box an exhibition for charity his opponent failed to turn up .Jeannette challenged Dempsey to a fight and Dempsey sensibly turned it down. Why would Dempsey be afraid of a man whom a 20 years old Carpentier had taken down the wire , despite only scaling168.5lbs? Many thought Carpentier won that fight. Langford did not ko any heavyweights of any consequence from 1920 until he retired, he either stopped past it names, novices, or journeymen.and his record emphatically states that! It's very difficult to argue with someone who is sub- normal and cannot read English, not only difficult but unrewarding. My argument with Seamus is over his statement that Greb beat lots of decent heavyweights between 1920 and 1923 [his time frame],.I've proved he didn't, just as I proved Flowers did not fight," numerous fights weighing 170lbs and over". The time you spend here would be more profitably spent trying to graduate from 3 rd grade.