Is Harry Greb a top 3 light heavyweight H2H?

Ah, the prof couldnt resist, ok here goes since it's long I will break it up into a two parter:

Prof the house of dumb and dumber remarks, comes this one:

Didn't Mayweather and Pac finally fight? Didn't Tyson and Lewis finally fight?
Prof fyi, the Pac & May fight was the richest in history brought about by May's "stalling"lol. May "stalled" enough so that he made over 100 milion. The Tyson - Lewis fight, Tyson really was at the end of his career, $17.5 million comes in handy since post-Lewis Tyson went 1-2, both losses by ko. Tyson was no match for Lewis, May & Pac, still had some fight in them and was thought to be competitive. Another point you missed and should've factored in was Tyson's age as oppose to Carp, Tyson 36, Carp 30. I'll agree that Carp was no match for Tunney but he was somewhat of a match for Gibbons.

Unlike a child like you I actually know the difference between having names on your resume and having actual meaningful wins.
It didnt hurt Dempsey or Carp, then or now except for the few, that Dempsey fought Carp and didnt fight Greb or Wills means nothing to millions of admirers of Dempsey admirers past and present. It kills you doesnt it? They all fought who they fought that should be it. We all these yrs later can say they shoulda fought this guy or that guy but at the time they were fighting they didnt, they chose, and they had every right to choose their own career paths. Meaningful wins and actual names, please they do have names that were pretty good fighters in their times, but of course according to the hero of the stupid they were all bums cos a small MW beat them.
A nitpicker like you would say, "well he shoulda fought this guy and he didnt" and he was running, ducking and afraid. Again for both Wills and Greb the reasons are there, but you seem to know better then the people living at that time, and discount those reasons as trivial. Why not tell it like it was, instead you ignore what was real at the time. Why cos it dont fit your biased storyline.

Carpentier chose to fight guys like Gibbons and Tunney when he had nothing to lose and was long in the tooth enough that age alone was an excuse for losing, and guess what, lose he did, in one sided overwhelming fashion.

Of course in your revisionist version you ignore that Carp fought both Gibbons and Tunney at the ancient age of 30 lol. Both Tunney and Gibbons were bums according to your way of thinking. I know what your brilliant response will be that Greb beat them both. Same can be said of Tunney he beat all three Carp, Greb , Gibbons plus he beat the guy they were all after. Why dont you say that all three had their eyes on the prize which was to fight Dempsey for the HEAVYWEIGHT TITLE, and not no MW. Carp had plenty to lose, his standing, his position, his future earnings. On Greb, there are plenty of articles that state the feelings of the time Greb was too small. Of course this doesnt fit for you, but thats what was thought of at the time, but you know better. One other point which your clueless knowledge and understanding of the workings of professional boxing, is solely lacking, is that sometimes a fighter is the last to admit they are through, seems that was the case with Carp with back to back beatings which convinced him. But give Carp credit he went 15 rds with a prime Tunney.

 

Before I get into part 2, I found an interesting article of the "fix", of course the prof will say it's a bunch of BS. Make up your own minds. I am convinced there was no fix.

Part 1

Wednesday, 13 April 2016
The Mystery of the Velodrome: Battling Siki Versus Georges Carpentier

This content is protected

George Carpentier Versus Battling Siki at the Buffalo Velodrome, Montrouge
The history of prizefighting is one that is replete with unending controversy. Were Jack Dempsey's gloves loaded with 'Plaster of Paris' during his world heavyweight title-winning bout against Jess Willard in 1919? Would Gene Tunney have beaten the count had Jack Dempsey not delayed in proceeding to a neutral corner during their world championship rematch in 1927? Did Jack Johnson, the first black world heavyweight champion, feign being knocked out by Jess Willard under the broiling Havana sun in 1915? And was Charles 'Sonny' Liston ordered to take a dive in his rematch with Muhammad Ali in 1965?

The latter two examples concern the more lurid-based sort of controversy, namely that of match-fixing: the dishonest predetermination of the result of a sporting event.

Boxing is of course not the only sport to have been subjected to rumours of fixes, many of which culminated in scrutiny by administrative and law enforcement officials. The most famous fix in history is arguable that of the 'Black Sox Scandal'; the 1919 Baseball World Series during which eight members of the Chicago White Sox were accused of intentionally losing games to the Cincinnati Reds. Association Football has intermittently had its share of match fixing scandals as indeed has the gentleman's sport of cricket.

Sports are result based activities which garner the interest of betting syndicates, and it is the area of gambling which has often formed the subtext of match-fixing allegations. Yet, in the popular imagination boxing, with its famous associations with organised criminals, has seemingly always carried a reputation for this particular form of underhandedness.

The story of corruption and the stage-managing of fights memorably received both literary and Hollywood treatment in Budd Schulberg's iconic work The Harder They Fall, the story of Toro Molina, an Argentinian farmer and former circus performer of limited pugilistic skill who rises to the heavyweight championship by illicit means. Using the life story of the Italian heavyweight Primo Carnera as its template, Schulberg laid bare the mechanics of skulduggery and human exploitation as practised by the bosses of organised crime aided by their lackeys in the industry including promoters and pressmen.

Many of the allegations of match-fixing in boxing remain bones of contention. Plagued by rumour and innuendo, they calcify over the years assuredly defying resolution in the manner of the proverbial riddle wrapped inside of an enigma.

Why they remain this way is not necessarily hard to fathom. If it is true to say that underworld figures frequently form the backdrop to such endeavours, then the threat of homicidal retribution for not carrying out the prefigured result or of blurting out the truth looms over the conspirators like a Sword of Damocles.

There are also the matters of legitimacy and reputation. While it may be argued that uncovering the occurrence of match-fixing may provide the basis of a re-validation of the sport in so far as its rigorous adherence to the ethics of probity and fair-play is concerned, the opposite just as surely applies. For confirmation of such a scandal would tend to provide the basis of an affirmation of the underhandedness for which the sport is often accused of being mired in; this alongside the frequent accostment of the inherent depravity of a sport that is predicated on inter-human violence.

The sport of course has it heroes and and one needs to be mindful of this in so far as scrutinizing match-fixing allegations pertaining to its prominent figures. There may be an element of denial especially where such allegations concern the succession to a title. Proof of match-fixing may thus have the wrenching effect of delegitimizing both sport and lauded practitioner.

The world light heavyweight championship bout fought between Georges Carpentier and Battling Siki in September of 1922 provides one such example of a typically hotly debated instance of match-fixing. But it comes with a twist of its own. While most aficionados and historians of the sport do not doubt that the eventual outcome -a victory by Siki- was not fixed, there is disagreement as to whether the fight was made on the basis of a fix; an arrangement from which one of the participants, the challenger Battling Siki, allegedly reneged.

 

part 2 of Siki - Carp fight

George Carpentier, the reigning world champion was a French idol. A handsome, urbane figure who had served with distinction as an aviator during the First World War, he was the recipient of the Croix De Guerre and the Medaille Militaire. He had unsuccessfully challenged heavyweight champion Jack Dempsey the previous year in boxing's first million dollar gate.

Siki on the other hand was an African immigrant from the French colony of Senegal. Born in the port city of Saint-Louis, he had come to France as the charge of a French woman who later abandoned him. He took up boxing and fought at venues in locations such as Marsailles and Toulouse before the start of the Great War. During the war, he served in the French military and was present at various theatres including Gallipoli. Like Carpentier he also received the Croix De Guerre and the Medaille Militaire.

There the similarities between both men ended. Where Carpentier was the Gallic hero; an amiable and civil gentleman able to effortlessly transcend the brutal nature of his trade, Siki was often portrayed in stereotypically animalistic terms. His manager Charles Hellers once remarked that Siki was "a scientific ape"; adding, "Just imagine an ape that has learned to box and you have Battling Siki."

The bare details of the purported fix were as follows: Siki would be dropped once each in the first and second round before Carpentier finished him off in the fourth. In consideration for throwing the bout, Siki would receive Carpentier's purse of 200,000 Francs. Siki assented to the terms of the agreement on the condition that he would not get hurt.

The fight was scheduled for twenty rounds. In the inaugural round Siki temporarily dropped to his knee after a right hand thrown by Carpentier appeared to graze him.

In the third, Carpentier threw a powerful blow with his right and dropped Siki. Siki was quick in getting up and in the sudden rush towards his opponent, Carpentier slipped from the momentum of throwing two left hooks, although he quickly recovered his stance.

Carpentier continually measured his man with his left and unleashed a set of combination punches which caused Siki to lose control of his footing, bending at the knees although not descending to the canvas. Carpentier then chased after Siki until with the Senegalese trapped on the ropes, he unleashed a right hand which put Siki down.

Siki remained on one knee as the referee Henri Bernstein administered a count, but got up to exchange blows with Carpentier until both men fell into a clinch. After this, Siki began to show a willingness to come forward and pressure Carpentier. He unleashed a combination on Carpentier who sank to the canvas while Siki stood glaring at him before Bernstein pushed him back.

The fight resumed with each fighter seemingly wishing to tear the other's head off his shoulders: Siki with an array of short, brutish upper cuts, and Carpentier with a series of desperate right crosses. The round ended with Carpentier trudging back to his corner in a visibly bloodied state. It is claimed that he informed his seconds that he had broken the knuckles of his right hand.

The fourth began with Siki moving menacingly and determinedly towards Carpentier who willingly gave ground. Siki bullied him for some time before Carpentier unleashed a fusillade of punches in a desperate bid to end the bout. It failed, and Siki came back strongly against the champion who seemed as if he could barely stand at the end of the round.

Siki continued to dominate in the next round while Carpentier waned. Frustrated at the punishment he was receiving from Siki, Carpentier resorted to hurling racial epithets at his African opponent. At one point, he charged at Siki, head-butting his opponent to the canvas. Siki's protests came to nothing. Carpentier tried butting Siki while both were in a clinch and soon after charged him into a corner where Carpentier lost his footing. Siki's gesture of helping the champion back to his feet was rewarded with a swiftly delivered left hook to his unprotected face. The round ended with Siki complaining and walking towards Carpentier before his handlers dragged him back to his corner stool.

Siki pounced at Carpentier once the bell sounded for the sixth. He hit him with a series of hooks and uppercuts until he spun the bedraggled champion around. As he did this, Siki's left leg appeared to leave the ground, and whether by design or caused by the momentum, he apparently connected with either Carpentier's mid-section or his shin. Either way, Carpentier sunk to the canvas with his left leg perched on the lower ring rope. Bloodied and exhausted, his nose was broken and his right eye swollen shut.

Bernstein, who did not bother to issue a count, was quick to rule Carpentier the winner by way of Siki's disqualification. The crowd, outraged at this denouement, began to jeer, chanting "Siki is the winner" and "FIX! FIX!" Within the hour, the decision would be reversed and Battling Siki had succeeded in becoming the first African to win a world boxing title.

The question of a 'fix' dogged the fight from the moment Henri Bernstein had disqualified Siki and the reversal of the decision in Siki's favour did little to quell them. It had certainly been a strange fight. Rumours continued to bubble to the surface until Siki himself blew things into the open.

It happened after the federation declared Siki's title as forfeited after an incident which occurred during a bout in which Siki himself had worked as a second in the corner of another fighter. Siki is said to have entered the ring and struck the manager of the boxer his fighter was opposing. Siki made his complaint with the assistance of Blaise Diagne, the representative of Senegal in the French Chamber of Deputies.

It is useful to note that the modus operandi of a fixed-fight may take several forms. Crucially, both fighters do not have to be aware of the fix. For instance, James Napoli, a prominent figure of New York's Genovese family whose operations in illegal gambling intersected with his interests in the field of boxing had a particular technique centering on the compromising of ring officials.

'Jimmy Nap' would sort things out with a match official or two who needed relief from a gambling debt or who just needed an additional injection of cash. The thinking behind this was to favour an underdog who would be in a good position to get a win on points so long as he remained standing at the end of the bout. This was precisely the method used when Paddy DeMarco, a seven-to-one betting underdog, dethroned the lightweight champion Jimmy Carter by a surprise decision in 1954.

Napoli was also involved in another alleged fix in the 1969 world light heavyweight title bout between Bob Foster and Frankie DePaula. Federal Bureau of Investigation wiretaps suggested that DePaula had deliberately lost in the first round in order to secure a betting coup.

Perhaps the most famous dive was that taken by 'The Raging Bull', Jake LaMotta in a bout with Billy Fox who was under the charge of both Frankie Carbo and 'Blinky' Parlemo, the mafia figures who controlled boxing in the 1940s. LaMotta had been compelled to take this action in order to secure a challenge for the world middleweight championship.

In this case, Siki had reported that the conspirators in the endeavour were Georges Carpentier, Francois Descamps who was Carpentier's manager and Hellers. Referee Bernstein was also said to have been involved. Siki was alleging that both he and Carpentier had with the connivance of their managers effectively played a pantomime for a while.

 

Part 3

An investigation conducted by a committee set up by the French Boxing Federation declared in January 1923 that it was "absolutely convinced that the match on September 24 (1922) was not preceded by an understanding the object of which was to arrange the events of the match and fix the result."

The federation based its findings on what it considered to be the discredited talk by a boxer named Georges Gaillard who later denied making them during his testimony. The committee also put a great deal of weight on the decision of Siki not to testify before it. The decision was, it announced, underscored by the use of deaf mute lip-reading experts who reported nothing incriminating in the words spoken by Descamps and Hellers which were captured on film of the bout.

Nonetheless, there are those who challenge the findings of the federation as a whitewash intended to preserve the reputation of the sport and some very important names in French boxing. The most compelling evidence of an intended fix which in the end did not materialise comes from Siki himself.

Siki's accusations were detailed and remained unchanged. He proclaimed the intended fix in the offices of the newspaper L'Auto while Heller was present. Heller, he admitted, had declared him capable of taking Carpentier only when others around. It was different when they were alone. He emphatically told him: "You told me to take a dive."

I avenge myself. They disqualified me by inventing lies. They deprived me of my living. I have a wife, I have a kid and me. I was too good to the French, and it is the French who have attacked me. I avenge myself, but I don't want to (do it) against you Hellers, and if they hadn't attacked me, I would have kept your secret.

Siki is then said to have gone on to recapitulate his allegations which his manager did not contradict but only argued over certain details.

The Italian Gazetta dello Sport purported to correct early impressions given in French newspapers of a fix in Siki's favour to that of a fix which had Carpentier scheduled to win by a knockout before Siki had abandoned the ruse. One manager and two trainers who frequented La Chop du Negre, a cafe favoured by the boxing crowd visited the offices of L'Echo des Sports to report on the proof they had of a fix but backtracked when called before the federation's inquiry.

For his part, Georges Carpentier flatly denied involvement in any enterprise to have the fight fixed. The investigating committee reported him as saying, "I never in my life faked a fight nor prolonged one for the sake of the moving pictures."

Part of the resistance to accepting the idea of an intended fix lies in the image of Carpentier as an upright gentleman soldier and pugilist. His image as a war hero had been sold to the American public by the promoter Tex Rickard, as a contrast to the 'draft dodger' reputation of heavyweight champion Jack Dempsey.

The idol of France was in the public estimation beyond reproach. Nonetheless, it is worth noting that as co-promoter of the bout and the part owner of the Velodrome, he could afford to dispense with the winner's fee of 200,000 Francs in return for an easy workout against a dangerous opponent. Siki's story had Hellers conveying Descamps' deal as having Carpentier contenting himself with Siki's officially proposed share as well as with the receipt of newsreel royalties. If, as has frequently been believed, Carpentier failed to train properly for his bout with Siki, could the reason for this have been related not to overconfidence in his ability to take care of Siki, but to laxity on his part so far as the assurance that Siki would engage in a staged exercise?

When thirty years after Carpentier uttered the following words, it is unclear whether his bitterness emanated from a miscalculation of Siki based on his overconfidence or in Siki's 'betrayal' of the agreed course of action.

I've been beaten by Siki. I, Carpentier, have let myself be beaten by this ****** I could have stretched out at my feet....after one or two minutes of combat.
It is also worth emphasizing the damage to the name of Carpentier as well as to French boxing if Siki's version of events were accepted. Those who have watched the movie Paths of Glory a fictionalised account of a real incident during the First World War dealing with how the French High Command sacrificed soldiers in order to protect the reputation of the French army will appreciate the raison detre for such a cover up much in the manner that students of history know of the true story of Alfred Dreyfus, the Jewish army captain whose innocence of espionage was known to the authorities but regardless was allowed to rot in detention for years.

As with Dreyfus, it was not only a matter of preserving the honour of a French institution, but it was a question of not allowing a 'racial inferior' to expose corruption.

If Carpentier was attempting to protect his good image in a situation involving more than a whiff of scandalous behaviour it would not be the last. During the Second World War while the northern part of France was under Nazi occupation, Carpentier was involved with running a tavern alongside a known French collaborator. Situated opposite the grave of the 'Unknown French Soldier', the establishment was popular among the German interlopers.

Carpentier's close associations with the occupiers did not make for good relations with the French resistance. In March of 1944, the Germans sponsored Carpentier's 50th birthday celebration with a special boxing exhibition. Later that year, an American press report referred to him as a "Nazi chattel".

There was perhaps something of an Albert Speer about him. After the war, Carpentier's denials of pro-German activities were effective enough to at least spare him the fate meted out to collaborators. His service during the First World War had likely played a part in this outcome.

 

part 4

But if he has largely escaped the taint of match-fixing allegations with Siki, the stench of being a pro-Nazi collaborator remained. Seven years after his death in 1975, Gerard Oury's film L'as des As was an obvious attempt at salvaging Carpentier's reputation. The heavily fictionalised account of Carpentier's life via an anti-Nazi protagonist named 'Georges Chevalier' played by the former amateur boxer turned film star Jean Paul Belmondo can be viewed as an attempt to sanitize a legacy tainted by evidence of collaboration with the occupying Nazis during the Second World War.

And of Siki? His career went downhill after his victory over Carpentier. Siki suffered for blurting out the attempted fix by effectively forfeiting his ability to earn a living fighting in France and the rest of Western Europe. He was banned from fighting in Britain by the Home Secretary Winston Churchill who based the decision on the potentially unsettling effect interracial contests could have on public order across the British empire.

After losing his world title to Mike McTigue in Ireland, Siki travelled to the United States where he lost to the light heavyweights Kid Norfolk and Paul Berlenbach. His life spiraled out of control with alcohol abuse and confrontations with the police. He was found shot to death in the Hell's Kitchen area of New York in December of 1925.

Siki's reputation suffered in death as it had in life. But the lopsided view of Siki as a 'child of the jungle' maladjusted to the pressures of living in a 'civilised' environment is changing. He has been the subject of a number of books in recent years where his life and boxing career have been subject to a higher standard of research and analysis.

The exaggerated stories as well as the myths which for so long had been the staple of boxing wordsmiths have been corrected. For all his faults, Siki was a sensitive human being who contested the dehumanizing effects of racism in society. Unfailingly resplendent in his choice of attire, he was a cultured man who spoke a number of languages including French, Dutch and English.

His life journey has even provided the inspiration for a jazz suite.

As a fighter, Siki will never be ranked among the great fighters in so far as technique and longevity are concerned. But while there is much to agree with the supposition that he was lucky to defeat a champion who was past his prime, there is also much evidence that he was mismanaged and his potential not maximized.

While Carpentier, a respected ring technician, ranks higher in the esteem of boxing historians for his accomplishments both as a middleweight and light heavyweight, there may be a tendency to diminish Siki's victory on the grounds that Carpentier was ageing and physically unprepared.

Carpentier had, after all, not yet reached his thirtieth birthday. His physical appearance, that of a lithe and well-proportioned boxer which was familiar to boxing audiences, betrayed no evidence of excess fat in his abdominal area. Moreover, he would go on to knock out Marcel Nilles the following year; a fighter against whom Siki had only been able to win on points. 'Styles make fights' goes an often used phrase in boxing and it is possible that Carpentier was unable to deal with the problems caused by Siki's 'awkward' approach in the ring. This includes the idea of combating Siki by fighting him 'inside'and hammering away as suggested by Jack Dempsey. Siki was able to effectively close the gap when Carpentier measured him with his left and he also hurt Carpentier when they locked horns 'inside'.

Any summation of Siki and Carpentier cannot fail to grasp the manner in which each man transcended the confines of the squared ring. Where Carpentier was a national icon of France, Siki was adopted by the likes of Ho Chi Minh as a symbol of the struggle against colonialism. Each man was a decorated war hero who achieved a series of 'firsts' in boxing.

It would be a remarkable feat for any fighter to have negotiated a career in the boxing world at the time they were active without having to compromise on what would be considered to as sound ethical standards. Whatever is the truth behind the mystery of the Velodrome, it should be clear that in the final analysis Battling Siki was no more the devil than Georges Carpentier was a saint.

(c) Adeyinka Makinde (2016)

Adeyinka Makinde is the author of the books DICK TIGER: The Life and Times of a Boxing Immortal (2005) and JERSEY BOY: The Life and Mob Slaying of Frankie DePaula (2010)

 

One thing I'd want IBRO or any other organization to do is to have a kind of torrent tracker where members would share scans/clippings they have found during their research or produced themselves (by scanning boxing magazines). I have hundreds of thousands of pdfs and images from old newspapers saved on my HDD, containing boxing-related information, but I know it's taking enormous amounts of time and efforts to get full runs of sporting papers from most significant newspapers, say, to find and download all sporting pages from NY Evening World from 1900 to 1922 from the LoC site, day by day, thousands of files, containing tones of boxing write-ups.

 

Prof, no worries I will answer every one of your posts you gave me alot to make fun of be patient. Before I go I couldnt resist, you mentioned IBRO was a rag cos it cut and pasted articles from newspaper and magazines, so you are then saying that your book is one big fat 800+ rag, impersonating a book. Supposedly you've done the same thing. Gotta ask is your 800 pgs on Greb all original material written by you? You did say you have citations for everything, what are the citations about your thoughts? On such and such a date, I was thinking Greb made everybody run for the hills, lmao.

 

Senya you should suggest that to IBRO, love reading articles and reports from time to time I post articles from that era that I find interesting and share with everybody. I suggest everybody do their own research it's fun and easily available. It's alot like fishing, you never know what you'll catch when you cast the line.

 

From what I learned about IBRO is most of its members don't care to share the results of their research, if they do research at all. They just want to acquire the results of research by actual historians, they don't send in anything themselves. I'm generous, but not that generous, to just give away thousands of hours I've spent over the years, to people like that, getting nothing in return.

Like the example I mentioned above, I have saved sporting pages from every issue of NY Evening World available at LoC for years 1900-1901, 1904-1922, partial run for 1902-1903 which I still need to finish. NY Sun all sporting pages available at LoC for 1911-1920, NY Tribune all sporting pages for 1911-1922. Sure, they available for anyone, but there's a difference between having all files on your HDD and browsing through their site when you need to look something up.

 

Ah if I'd have known you meant a croquette of shi7 I wouldn't have laughed.

 

LOL at Dempsey1234 trying to teach me ANYTHING about Carpentier. I doubt there is a person outside of France who has studied his career in more depth than I have and I doubt there is anyone alive who has seen as much footage on him as I have.

"Carp was somewhat of a match for Gibbons" LOL. Carpentier lost every round to Gibbons, got the **** kicked out of him, and was thoroughly schooled. In fact the newsreels of the event seen in France were literally titled "Carpentier gets another boxing lesson."

Your response to me proves my point entirely, your rebuttals are based entirely on popularity and not substance. I couldn't care less which fighter makes more or has more fans. I'm not some moron who idolizes Floyd Mayweather because he can flash stacks of hundreds. I'm interested in these guys accomplishments. The simple fact that you can only find refuge in their relative popularity and not their accomplishments speaks volumes.

And yes, Carpentier was long in the tooth at 30. When Carpentier fought Tunney and Gibbons he had been boxing as a professional for 16 years. He had more fights and had been fighting at a higher level for longer. The day Tommy Gibbons turned pro Carpentier had already had 60 fights and his last fight was against Dixie Kid. By the time Tunney turned pro Carpentier had almost 100 fights. He was, by any figuring, at the tail end of his career. He knew it and so did everyone else then and now.

Had Adeyinke done his homework and read Carpentier's autobiography he could have saved himself a lot of time. Carpentier admits his complicity in the attempted fix, although, just like every other negative aspect of his career he attempts to spin it. The guy has more excuses than George Chuvalo.

P.S. While you were sitting there copying and pasting someone elses work, sitting in your basement with your thumb up your ass, I discovered an unknown Harry Greb film, maybe two. Which one of us had a more productive day? LOL.

 

According to you you haven't read my book, so how do you know what it is. If you really believe its just cut and pasted articles (which everyone here who has read it knows is a lie) then how can you criticize MY OPINION on all of these fights and instances? If my opinion is nowhere to be found in my book, according to you, that would mean that the prevailing opinion is that of a majority of sources from that time period cut and pasted into those pages and thus gives an accurate representation of the prevailing opinion of the day... But, that's not how my book was written. I guess I could have gone in the complete opposite direction and written a completely fictional account of Greb's life like say that book about Joe Jeanette...

 

I can only go by your posts on here and from what you, yourself post and what you say in those posts. When you blast people cos they happen to have a different opinion or they question something that you posted. You do tend to exaggerate, you do tend to spin, you do tend to be biased, you do tend to have agendas, you do tend to be a bit arrogant, your do tend interpret things to fit your POV, you do tend to cherry pick, you do tend to not know and have a dislike for the business end of boxing and boxers, you tend to ignore other posters views like your view is the only view, you sometimes take things out of context.

I give you examples, like the stalling, like the Dempsey contract, and now the Carp - Siki "fixed" fight and I have more. You say the that NY had many newspapers at that time. If there were 40-50 papers and each had a reporter covering, let's say a fire. Each reporter gives his take, one may do a story on the victims, another on the damage, another on the courageous firefighters but the core is always the same, and that was the fire. Same as covering boxing, each saw something different but the core remained the same which was the fight itself. All those reporters were in competition or rather their papers were to boost circulation so each had a different slant. I dont have an

Your total dislike of Dempsey, shows your biased pov, You even went through the trouble of putting together a vid of Dempsey being dirty, like that's all he did. And you cant say you didnt have an agenda. A book can be written just based on articles about Greb's dirty tactics, Dempsey is an amateur compared to Greb in that department.

The stuff on the Carp - Siki fight, you had to have known that you were taking the word of a drunk, and a guy in Siki who was reckless and who brought along his own demise. You put Carp down as a guy who couldnt fight but had a decent right hand, someone then posted a clip of Carp boxing. Your view is not the only view.

You mentioned in a recent post that Dempsey's contract was a sham and cited the passage in Dempsey's book. Only thing was you took it out of context, so I posted the whole statement. Kearns did the right thing, he put a time limit on it, you seem not to know that is SOP, nothing unusual at all. You must know you cant keep an open ended contract open forever. They had a time limit to do what they had to, within that time frame, to make the fight happen they didnt, you interpret it as Dempsey ducked, ran was afraid. These are basic things.

Look its great that you took the time to write a book on a great fighter, but you attack others by name calling, take a pg out of some other historians that post on here.
I am going on your posts, some are informative, but most seem to be only rants, and name calling if someone dares to question you, it leaves alot to be desired.

 

I dont blast people who have a different opinion. I blast people like yourself who have an uneducated opinion. I blast people like yourself who start with an idea, start an argument, THEN go read up on it after youve already stepped into it and only read the sources that support you. Thats you, not me. Everything youve described me above as is you to the tenth power.

You keep bringing this Carpentier-Siki fight as if Ive spun it some way. Ive described it exactly as it happened and Ive even quoted Carpentier himself. Im sorry if you cant accept that Carpentier chose to fight a lesser opponent than Greb for less money and attempted to fix the fight but that aint spin thats exactly what happened. It may not suit your agenda that Carpentier was this fearless dynamic and powerful fighter in addition to being a wise businessman but it dont change the fact that it happened.

And thats exactly why you go for as many of those sources as possible and dont just stop with the one that suits your agenda. You try to gain a consensus of ideas. Because generally speaking, if 40 or 50 eyewitnesses can agree on something its probably closer to the truth than the one unnamed source you can find in the Brisbane Courier.

Of course I had an agenda. I wanted to show your dumb ass that I could twist your nose. You fell for it. Congratulations stupid. If you think you can write a book about Greb's dirty tactics I suggest you do it. One of us has written a book on Greb and is better placed to judge the merits of that accusation. I was surprised in my research by how many sources called Greb gentlemanly, sportsmanlike, and clean. And, as I stated in my book, his "dirtiness" can be traced almost exclusively to one tactic that didnt become a top of conversation until later in his career: holding and hitting, necessitated by the loss of depth perception due to being blind in one eye. Its still a foul I grant you and one I dislike personally but I'll take that any day over being hit in the nuts like a speedbag or standing over a fallen opponent to hit him before hes even able to stand under his own power. As for me being biased against Dempsey, I will only repeat that Im the last person you can accuse of that. I started out as the biggest Dempsey fan you can imagine. I thought he was the greatest fighter in history. Then I started immersing myself in that era and smartened up.

Like I said: Ive forgotten more about Carpentier than youll ever learn. Thats not a boast its just the truth. And no, I dont just take Siki's word for it. I take Carpentier's word as well. He admitted it. Youd know that if you knew what you were talking about. Carpentier was and is ridiculously overrated and ridiculously one dimensional. Others may have a different opinion, they are entitled to it, but that wont stop me voicing mine and illustrating it. Get used to it. Im not going anywhere.

Actually you didnt post the whole statement. You cleverly edited what you posted to make it appear as if Dempsey's comments were less damning. I didnt jump on that because I dont care. That contracy was a sham. It wasnt even a contract to fight Wills. It was a contract promising to sign to fight Wills. It specified no date, not purse, no venue, nothing. It just said that Dempsey promised to sign to fight Wills if an acceptable promoter would make a reasonable offer. The problem is whats reasonable? Who is acceptable? Dempsey received a litany of offers from all over the world but non were acceptable TO HIM. It creates a bit of a catch 22 doesnt it? And thats exactly what Dempsey admitted to in his book. He stated that it was worded that way specifically so he didnt have to fight Wills. Dempsey had 7 years and umpteen chances to fight his most threatening challenger and refused. Get over it, accept it, or find some way to cope. The bottom line is he ducked Wills. Dont blame Kearns either because for the last year and a half of his championship reign Kearns was effectively out as his manager and Dempsey was making his own decisions and pulled the same **** Kearns did to keep from fighting Wills. Youve waffled all over creation flitting from one failed excuse to another on why Dempsey didnt fight that fight. Apparently now youve settled on the idea that a champion gets to fight who he wants to and its perfectly acceptable to avoid your contenders. Dont even talk that bull**** to me.

Why not? Everything else was open? Is that SOP too? To have a contract with NOTHING specified? Get out of here. Are you four years old? Contracts are deliberately designed to be specific, not vague. Yet the only thing Kearns and Dempsey will agree to is a time limit allowing them to kick the can down the road? GTFO. I wasnt born yesterday. I know a ruse, a ruse Dempsey admitted to, when I see one.

There is no other interpretation. Did Wills suddenly stop being Dempsey's top contender? No, the wording allowed Dempsey to avoid Wills. Instead his next fight was against a light heavyweight who had lost his title elimination bid to a MW, not the 6'3" black man who had been Dempsey's shadow for the past 3 or 4 years and would continue to be for the next 3.

I apologize if I hurt your feelings but I think if you go back and look at my history I only attack those with name calling when Ive been attacked myself. I dont start it but I can finish it with the best of them.

Like I said, Im sorry if I injured your delicate sensibilities. Please accept my heartfelt apology. Lets let bygones be bygones.

 

Like I said, Im sorry if I injured your delicate sensibilities. Please accept my heartfelt apology. Lets let bygones be bygones.
I accept your heart felt apology, I know you are sincere let's see if still feel the same way after I finish commenting on some of your recent posts.