Jack Dempsey's Ranking

A question, I would like to know I am not baiting. What then made Dempsey, Dempsey. We have heard all the negatives, Dempsey must have done something to rate all the acclaim over the yrs. So what is it, in your mind???

Mc, I think that's what makes this forum so interesting the 20 pagers. This one has 41 already.

 

Why do you find it so hard to accept the truth, Dempsey, whether you admit it or not, had some pretty good performances that are still viewed around the world with awe and for the past 90+yrs over those "scrubs". A guy as intelligent as you, has to know there were no Louis's, Marciano's, Tyson's, Ali's or whoever at the time Dempsey fought.

Please don't come back with he didn't fight Greb or Wills. That is the only thing that is a provable fact, that they didn't fight, the rest is speculation.

Why do you keep reaching for the same straw? You cant compare era's and fighters as a fact, which you seem to imply.

 

When he was still a light middle Langford and his manager, Joe Woodman, threw out challenges to all and everyone,but they very sensibly excluded the reigning champion Jim Jeffries.So I think we can assume that Langford saw Jeffries when he was prime.
You must know this?:huh

Langford began as a pro in 1902 so theoretically he could,have seen Corbett's challenge to Jeffries in1903.
Whether he did or not I have no idea.
So this gives us :Jeffries Hart,Burns,Johnson,Willard,Dempsey. and possibly the old 1903 Corbett who was clearly past it by then.

 

An argument can be made for just about every fighter considered an ATG for why they are not based solely on fighters beaten. Ali would be the only exception though.

 

Scientifically careful matchmaking, purchased press, exceedingly weak era as the post-Great War world put itself back together, aided by the color line which inhibited so much potential talent from rising into the ranks... a witch's brew that made fertile fields for the opportunist.

And obviously, Dempsey was a unique talent with a style perfect for exploitation in this new era of sporting excitement and promotion (and numbskulls, please don't equate it to Sullivan's era). You couldn't have inserted just any fighter into this equation. And they found THE PERFECT fighter, the last vestige of the dying wild west, embodying so much of the myth of American masculinity. And with physical tools to match the hype.

In the end it was perfect marriage of shadow and substance.

 

I think Jack Kearns summed up Dempsey best...

"His ring activities were the smallest part of his career, the most insignificant item in the building up of the greatest fighting attraction of all time."

Couldn't have said it better myself.

 

"so theoretically he could, have seen Corbett's challenge to Jeffries in 1903."

According to boxrec

Jeffries fought Corbett on August 24, 1903 in San Francisco.

Langford fought Kid Griffo on August 28, 1903 in Boston.

So four days later Langford was fighting about three thousand miles away.

I think it would have been physically impossible for Langford to have seen the Jeffries-Corbett fight.

*McVey--Senya pointed out in a later post that the fight between Jeff and Corbett was on August 14, so it is indeed theoretically possible that Langford could have watched it and been in Boston on August 28.

No real excuse for me. I have a cataract operation scheduled in a couple of months, and my eyesight right now isn't the best, but if I am going to quote something as a fact, I should be careful enough to get the fact correct, even if I have to use a magnifying glass.

 

Hmmmm was this before or after they split up? lol Kearns said a lot of things. So you cherry picked something Kearns said that fits your agenda and that makes it true. I am sure when he was with Dempsey he said a lot of positive things, why not post those too?

Your desperation is showing trying to make a point and are making none.

So keep them a-comin', ya see I do address your brilliant posts.

 

This was immediately after their split but it is rather arrogant of someone 100 years later to dismiss it so blithely when Kearns was no intimate with Dempsey's career. It really does encapsulate the Dempsey phenomena.

Now, I don't have a lot of free time and will probably get your responses in another 20 or so hours.

 

:|:| you mean to say I have to wait 20 flipping hours:--(

Oh ok! I can hardly await your next brilliant post, I'll be counting the hours til you post your excellent responses.