Aside from Wills and Langford, who are the best men of his day Dempsey never fought?

The rankings you refer to are those made by a poster here Matt Donellon, they are not those of any governing body or organization and were made by him retrospectively.
Now read this very carefully.
Johnson was in France in October1913, he gave 3 exhibitions there and defended his title against
Battling Jim Johnson .
He stayed there until March 1914 when he travelled to Gothenburg Sweden where he gave a further 2 exhibitions.
He then returned to Paris, France and ,in March of that year,[1914], he defended his title inParis against Frank Moran winning over 20 rds.
WW1Broke out onJuly28th 1914. 4 months later!
You're incapable of being wrong aren't you? I've said it before and I'm saying it now ,you just cannot bring yourself to admit you are wrong!

 

Obviously enough for an immediate rematch.

It was definitely viewed as a fight at the time:

Sacramento Union, Number 25869, 15 January 1922

SOME INSIDE DOPE ON HARRY WILLS AND TATE Dempsey’s Sparring Partner Not the Dub Folk Have Advertised.

Ily HAY MAKEHI A whole lot of the line of talk put out by Jack Kearns to the effect that Harry Wills must be something of a dub because he failed to beat Bill Tate the other day up in Oregon; of the statements that' Dempsey used to put Tate down for the count, almost at will, should be taken with a plentiful sprinkling of salt, or some other commodity which will freshen it up. Tate, as a friend and sparring partner to Jack Dempsey, necessarily went under cover as to bis real ability. Undoubtedly Kearns made it worth his while to get in the ring with the champion, during training sessions, and to take whatever Dempsey chose to hand out, and there is also a probability that Ttate might be a pretty good actor as well as boxer. At all events, it would never do for him, as sparring partner, to turn loose anything that might damage the champion. We also know that Kearns tried to engage Harry Wills as sparring partner to Dempsey, just before'the Carpenlier battle at New Jersey. Tate chose to bury himself in helping to care for Dempsey, but Wills refused to be so self sacrificing. It is easy to opine, then, that Kearns, readily preceiving that he would be unable to dispose of Wills as a contender in the same manner that had been used in the case of Tate, set about some other means of bringing about the end sought for. Therefore, the next best thing to do was to put Tate on the trail of the clever colored battler. INSIDE DOPE. For the real inside “info’ ” on the relative merits of Bill Tate and Harry Wills, listen to Marty Farrell, New York middle weight. Farrell and Dempsey began their careers together under guidance of Jack Kearns aCoui five years ago. When they arrived in New York, before the Willard scrap at Toledo, Tate was added to the staff as the champion's chief sparring partner, and remained on the job until after Dempsey's bout w r ith Brennan. Speaking of Tate’s ability and character in an interview to Dick Sharp of the Portland Oregonian recently. Farrell said; “Tate is one of the greatest heavyweights in the ring. Because he preferred to stick with Dempsey, his ring work for several years did not attract attention, but that did not detract from his ability to fight. Instead of working out his own career, he played the role of the faithful sparring partner, because of his friendship for Jack. OK EDIT Cl\ F.\ TATE. "The day that Dempsey beat Jess Willard, Tale could have turned the trick as easily as Jack did. But Bill was satisfied just to he in Dempsey’s corner and shake hands with the new champion after the bout. Dempsey gave Bill Tate all of the credit for his victory over Willard. After the fight Dempsey said to Tate, ‘Any place that I go. Bill, you go. too.” “When Dempsey loured the south with a circus shortly after winning the title he insisted that Tate travel right along with him. • Some complaints were made to Jack about having a colored man traveling in the regular railway coaches as a passenger, so Tate Avas pressed into service as Dempsey's nurse. “Tate, Panama Joe Cans, Jamaica Kid and I were with Dempsey when he prepared for his second championship fight at Benton Harbor, against Billy Miske. Tate on this occasion as on all others was r 'ck’s chief sparring partner and the only boxer who reported for work every day. while the others Excused themselves on the plea that their arms, legs or ribs were sore. Tate never missed a day. Aside from sparring with the champ. Tate supervised everything Dempsey ate, bought the provisions for the camp and looked after the champ like a mother. TRAINING I« DISLIKED. “Tate fought that great old fighter,' Sam BangCprd. <;n the Benton Harbor card. Langford still was ging great guns then and was rated as one of the best men in the heavyweight division. Tate was the only one who would take on Sam. Bangford remarked after the fight that if Tate hadn’t been a big. good-natured fellow he never could have gone the distance with him. “Tate was in good shape ami hit -Bangford with everything but the ring posts. Bill was popping old Sam with his wonderful left hand with such regularity that the crowd began to count the blows aloud. In the sixth round they reached the count of 14. Sam. ever ready with his humor, fell into a clinch after taking the 14th wallop on the nose and said to Tate, ‘You’d better bank the last one. Bill.’ “Tate's only fault, one that has kept many another fighter from the top rank, is his dislike of training. He always was ready to work with Dempsey, hut when the champ laid off Tate also went on the shelf. He could have had a dozen fights but that never meant anything to him. Bill tells me that he has reformed and is now keeping himself in the host of condition. To be frank, he does look in the pink. “The only time I have ever seen him in better shape was right after he had wound up a training camp session with Dempsey. ( IMM'ES THOUGHT GOOD. “As to Bill's chances with Wills, T think they are excellent? There is no denving that Wills is a great fighter. But so is Tate. Bill is a slow starter and has to get cracker! good and hard to rouse his fighting instinct, but once he gets his ire up. watch out. He has the best left hand I have ever seen on a heavyweight. And he knows linw to use it. He is just as fast on his feet as Dempsey and. best of all. he ran take a terrific lacing. Dempsey may have knocked him down a few times during the period he was training for Jess Willard. hut he never did it after that. As many times as I have seen Tate and Dempsey box together I never saw Tate dazed. And everyhne knows how Dempsey socks in training. “People were under the impression, after reading all of the wonderful accounts of the training camp routing, that Tate was a mere punching bag for the champion. This 1 know to be a very false impression. Tate always managed to extend the champ and I have yet to see him take much the worst of It from* the champ or anyone else. MATCH TO RE TOP NOTCHER, “A match between Harry Wills and Bill Tate would draw as much in Madison Square Garden as any attraction outside of a championship event that Tex Rickard could line up. Portland fans will see one of the real big league matches when Wills and

Tate step into the ring at Milwaukee tomorrow afternoon. "You ran quote me as saying that It will be a real fight, too. Wills’ main object in life at present is a match with Jack Dempsey for the title. He knows that unless he can beat Tate he can never hope to get that match. And Tate is determiner! that Wills never shall get the chance.”

The New York Times.APRIL 6, 1922

CHAMPION IN CHICAGO.; Dempsey Is Willing to Give Bill Tate Chance at Title.

Yes it was a title eliminator arranged by Rickard, and whoever had won it, Rickard would have been left with a black fighter as the outstanding contender.

Don't you find it rather off that Rickard did this, if he wanted to get Wills out of the picture?

Of course he could not have prevented these men fighting if they wanted to, but he could have tried to steer one or both of them in different directions.

He could have matched say Firpo against Gibbons, declared the winner to be the new outstanding contender, and most people would have probably agreed with Wills coming off this debacle.

 

He had no exhibition or non title bout with Moran.
Johnson was in Mexico from April1919,until July 1920 he had 7 fights there and 1 exhibition.
He then turned himself over to the US authorities.
He returned to Mexico for 3 fights in1926.
You don't know any of this ,yet you persist in trying to tell other people,and act as though you are educated on the subject its ludicrous!
As to my admitting I am wrong I was on this very thread and admitted it!
Here it is!
My reply to Klompton.

"No I was wrong! I was quoting from memory it was Firpo's fight with Dempsey for which Godfrey sparred with Firpo".

You have been wrong all the way through this thread but when shown to be so ,excuse yourself by dishonestly going off in another direction.

 

This long post is a preview of the first 1922 fight between Wills and Tate and has nothing to do with the second "fight" five days later for which supposedly neither man was paid.

What is interesting is the hype on Tate, who despite having been KO'd by Wills, Langford, Norfolk, and Jeannette among others, is built up as durable, and even puffed up as a potential champion. Almost nothing is said about Wills.

"Dempsey is willing to give Bill Tate chance at his title."

That is nice. Too bad the better contenders aren't mentioned. Nothing like winning a fight by a DQ in the first round when you are on the floor. Really proves one a dangerous challenger.

"Yes, it was a title eliminator arranged by Rickard, and whoever had won it, Rickard would have been left with a black fighter as the outstanding contender."

Frankly, you're point of view seems simply off-the-wall to me. There are historical facts here. Did the winner get a shot at Dempsey? No. Did Wills get a shot after KO'ing Fulton? No. After his one-sided win over Firpo? No. How many "eliminations" does Wills have to fight? It seems pretty obvious that the only fighter who would ever be eliminated was Wills if he lost. He didn't, so the eliminations keep coming until age finally caught up with him.

To spin this as Rickard being on Wills' side is more than bizarre to me.

To be fair to Rickard, I don't know what he was REALLY thinking. Rickard was the sort who played his cards close to his vest. But actions speak the loudest and Rickard never matching Dempsey and Wills clearly exposes his bottom line to anyone with an open mind.

Why did Rickard promote the Wills-Norfolk fight? Certainly the chance of getting rid of Wills once and for all could be on the table. In fairness to Rickard, while I think it really beyond any serious dispute that he was drawing the color line in Dempsey title defenses, or going along with Kearns and Dempsey drawing it, he might have had enough of a sense of fairness to allow Wills and Norfolk and other black fighters to at least earn a living.

"He could have matched Firpo with Gibbons"

Why should he? BOTH of these men got shots at Dempsey without fighting each other or Wills, and Gibbons after losing his elimination with Greb.

 

The implication would be that Tate was more dangerous than his record suggests, and the fact that he was able to hold Wills to a draw reflected this.

Furthermore he might have been sent by Kearns to sabotage Wills, in which case he had a significant measure of success.

If Tate drew against Wills, then on paper he was the equal of Wills, and Dempsey could theoretically have fought him instead.

I understand that Wills won a number of eliminators that were not honored, but presumably it would have been far less embarrassing for those concerned if he lost them?

Why then when Wills was in a position of weakness, would you offer him a title eliminator against another black contender, that would either restore his position, or put you under public pressure to grant a title shot to his conqueror?

The only explanation in my eyes, would be that you were not entirely against him.

The purpose of doing this would not have been to justify giving those men a title shot, but to remove the pressure to grant a title shot to Wills.

All that Rickard would have had to do to remove Wills as the top contender, would be to match the two best white contenders immediately after Wills debacle with Tate, then tell both of them not to fight Wills at any price.

The winner of that fight would then have replaced Wills as the top contender, and Wills would have been left to rebuild.

That is what you would do if you wanted Wills out of the picture above all else.

Instead Rickard does the opposite, and basically tossed Wills a lifeline.

Perhaps Wills was Rickard's plan B!

 

This is your previous ridiculous comment which I have blown completely out of the water with cold hard facts!
"P. S. In 1914 was France participating in the first world war, so Johnson was unlikely there when."
If you had a few more brain cells you would be a halfwit!
You say Moran fought Johnson twice.
I KNOW HE DIDN'T AND AS YOU ARE SAYING HE DID THE ONUS IS ON YOU TO PROVE IT!

Now do so !
Either provide proof he fought Moran twice or admit you are wrong, which I already know you are because I have Johnson's exhibitions and fights and 5 books on him.

NOW PUT UP OR SHUT UP! YOU ABSURD LITTLE TWERP!

 

The best Dempsey never fought.


1. Wills

2. Greb

3. Norfolk

4. Langford ( Dempsey's management said he was too good )

5. Jeannette. Older, but in the ring as a sub. Dempsey declined the fight.


^^ All of the above fighters were makeable.


If you want the most dangerous person Dempsey Never fought, that would be Godfrey who was ranked in Ring Magazine's annual rating debut in 1924.

 

Well,we just disagree. You assume Wills was in a position of weakness because of the Tate "draw" but he in fact won the poll that spring to choose Dempsey's top opponent.

"He might have been sent by Kearns to sabotage Wills"

it certainly smells of something underhanded. What in fact happened is that Wills KO'd Tate in one. Did Wills foul him? No way of knowing now but that is what the ref said. The two fight a second time five days later for no pay. I still wonder if this was really a fight or a sparring session for the benefit of the promoter and fans which was spun as a fight. Kearns was plenty sly and ruthless. I'll have a separate post on that coming up. I at least would consider that folks had been paid off in the Wills-Tate affair.

The bottom line for me is that a loss to Meehan and a draw with Miske did not eliminate Dempsey in 1918, so why should this bizarre turn of events eliminate Wills?

"If Tate drew against Wills, then he was on paper the equal of Wills."

Who thinks so except you. He had lost three times to Wills, twice by KO in 1921, and won on a foul when on the canvas. The bizarre no-pay draw proves equality? If folks thought so, why wasn't there a demand for a rematch to clear the air? Why didn't Rickard match Tate with Wills? The only one who seems to have thought all that highly of Tate was Dempsey who was talking up a title shot for him. Ultra strange.

On Wills and Norfolk--you keep assuming that only Rickard could stage a fight between them. There were plenty of promoters. If these two wanted to fight, they would have fought. Rickard might well have felt that if such a fight were coming off anyway, he might as well be the one to make money off it as anyone else.

"All Rickard had to do to remove Wills as the top contender, would be to match the two best white contenders"

Which is exactly what he did, matching Gibbons and Greb. They fought on March 13, 1922. Firpo had not even fought in the USA up to that point and had beaten no one of note. He was certainly unknown to the general public, and I wonder if Rickard at this point even knew who Firpo was. Firpo didn't emerge as a serious force in the heavyweight division until 1923 and the Brennan KO.

The problem with the "two best white heavyweight" match-up is that neither was even a heavyweight and the winner was a middleweight. The public isn't necessarily that stupid. Saying a couple of guys weighing 163 and 171 were the best out there rather than an athletic 6' 2" (or possibly 6' 4") 210-220 lb. man who has KO wins over some of the most famous fighters of the era isn't going to wash with the vast majority.

"remove the pressure to grant a title shot to Wills"

Rickard proved very capable of dealing with that pressure. Facts are facts and the facts are that Wills didn't get a shot for the whole seven years of Dempsey's reign despite being the top contender all or at least most of the time.

 

Just on Kearns being ruthless. This is from a column by Robert Edgren in the SF Chronicle on 6-10-1923,

"Dempsey has knocked out 25 of his opponents in the first round. Among his victims were some well-known fighters. Fulton was one, and Jim Flynn, Al Norton, Arthur Pelkey, Porky Flynn, Carl Morris, and Battling Johnson were not entirely unknown."

Battling Johnson is an interesting name on this list. He had drawn in a title fight with Jack Johnson. He also had a draw once with Sam Langford. He had a victory over Joe Jeannette and a KO over Bill Tate. He had lost quite a bit, but was durable, and other than an early KO loss, had been stopped only by Langford and Sam McVea. And best of all he had a "KO win" over Harry Wills in a fight in which Wills broke his arm and was forced to retire.

A one round KO over Battling Johnson was a big plus for Dempsey, and sportswriters, like the well know Edgren, used it in claims that Dempsey was better than Wills. The old Ring Record Books listed this one round KO but could only give the vague info that it happened in 1915.

Problem. There is no evidence this fight ever happened. Kearns just claimed it as a big Dempsey victory. There was no one to dispute him. Johnson had died in the Spanish flu epidemic on November 6, 1918.

This business strikes me as not only unscrupulous, but downright creepy.

And shows the lengths the white establishment was willing to go to downgrade Wills.

Until he lost to Jack Sharkey at 37, Wills in fact was 9-0 against common opponents with Dempsey, and so had the better record against the likes of John Lester Johnson and Willie Meehan among others. The phony one-round KO of Battling Johnson tilted the record back towards Dempsey.

 

The Battling Johnson on Dempseys record was not Battling Jim Johnson but a local Utah club fighter. If later men like Edgren mistook him for Battling Jim Johnson it was due to their own ignorance and not a conspiracy. Remember, in this era and where Dempsey was fighting at the time in these local club fights there wasnt a lot of national coverage, recognition, or interest and as such it would have been easy to assume several years later that this was THE Batting Jim Johnson even though it wasnt.

 

Could you list the date and place of this fight?

Neither box rec, nor the cyberboxing zone, nor Wikipedia list any fight anywhere at anytime with any Battling Johnson. As far as I can see, the only Johnson Dempsey is listed as ever fighting was John Lester Johnson.

I wouldn't call this a conspiracy. The most likely explanation is that Kearns made up the one round KO of Battling Johnson on Dempsey's record because it changed the equation with Wills and Battling Johnson was dead and could not dispute such a claim. The press just accepted the story w/o doing any research because, frankly, most wanted to.

I don't profess to know the bottom line facts here, but where did this claim of a KO of Battling Johnson originate? If you have info that box rec and the others don't have, I am anxious to hear it. If there was a fight with another Battling Johnson, what is the evidence for it?

 

It supposedly took place at the Garrick Theater in Salt Lake City in late 1914. The Garrick was a real venue that Dempsey had several fights at during this period and Battling Johnson was a real fighter based in Utah on whose undercards Dempsey sometimes fought. There was a weight discrepency between the two but I have no doubt this who they say Dempsey fought and it is entirely possible that they did fight. Cyberboxingzone and Boxrec both have the fight taking place in January 1915 but I believe it took place prior to late November 1914.

 

You are correct and I am wrong.

There is a fight listed with a Jim Johnson on 1/1/1915 for Dempsey in Salt Lake City.

The contender Battling Johnson was fighting in New York in December 1914 and January 1915

So this does give an "out" to how this mistake was made, I concede, so I will modify my take on the cynicism of the whole thing a bit. I guess I didn't look close enough at these very early fights. This is Dempsey's fourth listed fight.

That said, I still remain suspicious about how at least some of the press confused this Johnson with the Battling Johnson who had fought on equal terms with Jack Johnson and Langford and had a win over Wills. It could be sloppy journalism, but it also could be manipulation on Kearns' part, and was probably both. Battling Johnson being in New York City at the time should have been easy to confirm.

Whatever else is said, claiming a one round KO of the Battling Johnson who had a win over Wills definitely changed the balance between Dempsey and Wills back in the day.

Just a question. Was this Jim Johnson whom Dempsey fought referred to as Battling Johnson in press reports?

 

Yes, he was called Battling Johnson.

 

Some very informative posts here from different sources!