Greb and the Heavyweights- Tommy Gibbons

I don't think that's true actually. He was ranked behind Stribling in 1928. Stribling lost in early 1929 - Godfrey lost twice in 1928 and once in early 1929. So I don't see how this could be the case.

 

This is total BS. As i've already discussed, WW2 - more recent, more important - was revised in numerous different areas years and years after the fact and that revisionism is generally held to be true. To be held as untrue it would have to be revised again.

Many, many areas far more crucial thank boxing history have been re-evaluated to a more concrete truth years after the fact by people who didn't live through the times. From Dempsey's time, the role of British officers in the trenches in WWI has been heavily revised from opinions from that era and for 90 years afterwards to a more concrete truth based upon fact.

What you are saying holds zero weight.

 

I wouldn't be surprised either, but that's not the same thing. Frankly I don't think it would muddy the waters where my original point was concerned even if it was true (which I'm not at all convinced it was), although it would be a very interesting thing to find out about.

Regardless, the only time I can see him making #1 would be after his defeat of Uzcudun in early 1928 after which he was immediately defeated by John Risko.

 

Yeah, i never said people can't have opinions - i've gone out of my way to say the absolute opposite.

I'm saying that your opinion relates to the business of boxing. And mine does not.

It's not my opinion that sports legacy is vital. 99.99% of chat about boxing history is about legacy. Who a fighter was and what he did. Perhaps I should write "x%" because I have no scientific proof of that figure, but it seems ridiculous.

And in the end, it doesn't matter - i'm just saying that the business side of boxing doesn't really impact sports legacy.

I'm astonished that you say that, especially as i've gone out of my several times to stress that i'm not holding Dempsey accountable for the fight not happening. But here it is for the third or fourth time:

I'm not holding Dempsey accountable for the fight not happening.

I'm interpreting what his failure to fight Wills and Greb means for his sporting legacy.

I've done no such thing. At this point i have to question if you're actually reading the posts you're replying to because none of this appears to be in response to words I actually wrote.

I didn't say Jack Dempsey said in his own words that he cared about his sports legacy while he was fighting. Please respond to what I actually write.

Having never seen his words, I am very sure that he cared. That's because everyone i know cares. Everyone. I imagine there are some cases where people literally don't care how they remembered as a professional, people that don't care if they are regarded as a ****ty lawyer or a terrible journalist or a bad greengrocer. But I don't know anyone like that. Maybe when I was a kid.

I accept that people like that do exist. I accept that Dempsey may be one of them.

 

Not really, at least not the issue I was talking about (And you don't know what that was).

However, i've no urge to get into it at all. My point is that Perry's opinion that history is a locked door that has had the key thrown away by those that "were there" is total nonsense.

And it is.