Do you hold it against Jack Dempsey for not fighting Harry Greb?

I hold every did not happen fight against everyone who didn't make it happen but I do not allow that to equate to negating any of their successes or achievements. People make excuses in both directions for fighters and I'm just not into it.

 

Is this a fact that Greb said this ? I find it hard to believe .. maybe I"ll ask Klompton to prove it or maybe Greb told it to him ..

 

I doubt you will be asking Klompton.!

 

He had the use of only 1 eye when he last fought Tunney. The time before that Tunney's N.Y. pals did everything they could to make sure Greb lost. But he was at the end of his career by then anyway. By all accounts he destroyed Tunney the first time and subsequent decision losses were questionable.

Get the book!

 

Trash talker

6 title defences in 7 yrs suggests there indeed was not a keeness for the defending the title.

 

I think Dempsey should have fought Greb. Seamus has a point when he said that Greb was more worthy than most of JD's challengers and stood a real chance of beating him. And, as Mendoza said, we'd likely have Greb on film had the bout taken place. I think that such a fight would have brought out the best in both.

 

Well yes when the number one challenger does not get a title shot it does.

We cannot forget Rickards quote about the title not being worth a bucket of warm P*ss if a n**ger (gentleman of colour) were to win the title.

Let's be honest Dempsey was not overburdened with title defences in his 7yr diary of holding the title.

 

I have not suggested Greb shouldn't have had title chance.

 

I don't care that he didn't fight Greb but I just wish he had a more active title reign
He tried to get civilized, his title reign is alot of fluff.

 

. Of course it matters. Just putting it in perspective.

 

Tunney - Beat Greb - Multiple times
Gibbons - beat Greb as often as Greb beat him
Miske/Brennan - pretty sure (without checking) they fought greb multiple times and No Decision was reached. Is this not the case?

If Sugar Ray Leonard had beat Maxim, Charles and others, does it really mean that Marciano would have ducked him?

 

If Leonard beat Maxim and Charles, he may very well have had a Delorean at his disposal.

In all seriousness, I think that's a legit point, and I wish Dempsey did fight Greb, and think it would have been a fight for the ages.

 

ooops

 

I rate Dempsey clear above Tunney and Greb as a heavyweight.

So, No, I don't hold his lack of fighting Greb against him.

 

I don't hold it against him for Greb but when you duck Wills AND Greb it looks pretty bad.

As I say in my book fighting Greb was a no win situation. If you win big deal you were supposed to, it would have been a nice payday. If you lose, or even if you win in a competitive fight, then it really makes Dempsey look all too human and Dempsey's people were really trying to make him look like a superman. Where Greb comes into play is that if you are avoiding Wills for any of the lame reasons Dempsey and his team foisted on the public then its your duty to go out and find your next most threatening challenger. That was Greb. When you look at the guys that were dug up as opponents to face Dempsey (and yes some of them were literally manufactured for him to beat) then it really makes it look like Dempsey wasn't interested in facing threatening competition. Some people will disagree with that, based largely I expect on the Dempsey mystique, but I don't really see any other explanation.