Jack Dempsey openly stated he would not fight black challengers

Dempsey's record is incomplete. So i am not sure if he fought others.

I wish Jack took on Joe Jeannette. I believe Jeanette surprised everyone when he showed up instead of Jack's scheduled opponent. Jeanette was 40 and Dempsey would have ko'd him but it would be nice if Dempsey would have fought him.

Dempsey did sign on to fight Harry Wills of course so his statement of not fighting black challengers was something he clearly changed his mind on.

Anyway i used to rank Dempsey in my top 5. However, a closer and more objective analysis revealed to be that he just doesn't have the resume of a top 10 all time heavyweight. There are too many guys who are too good and have too deep resumes to place Dempsey in the atg top 10.

Ali
Louis
Holmes
Foreman
Liston
Lewis
Holyfield
Frazier
Marciano
Tyson

Try as i may, i can't see any reason why Dempsey should be rated higher than those guys. Yes, Dempsey was more talented than Frazier or Rocky (faster, longer reach, better two handed power than Joe etc.) but Frazier beat a 29 year old Ali who is miles ahead of anyone Jack beat. And Marciano beat all his challengers leaving no doubt he was the best of his era.

So yes, it does affect his legacy.

 

It does.

 

Excellent point. Tommy also made something like 13 defenses of the title I think and took it around the world a bit. Interesting character, Burns. Deserving of a decent rating in P4P terms I would think.

 

Yes agreed. I believe Tommy Burns was of German heritage. His family would likely have dealt with some prejudice when they came over even though they were European. My guess is that the discrimination faced by his family may have influenced Tommy to be against racial discrimination.

 

Dempsey was a commodity and management managed it's commodity .. I have little doubt that Dempsey would have fought anyone but was completely guided by Kearns and Rickard ... this does not mean that I believe Dempsey beats a prime Wills as I simply do not know ... I do believe that Wills was far better than revisionists give him credit for .. we do not know and that is the single biggest void in Dempsey's resume .. it is a big one.

 

When I first developed an interest in boxing history, many years ago, I assumed Burns was a glaring omission in the various top 50 (& similar) p4p lists I'd read. At 5ft 7ins, typically around 168-175lbs in his prime and the 4th (not including ABC straps) most wins in HW World Championship fights, I assumed people must not properly be factoring in his size to their p4p analysis.

Many years and countless hours of research later, I'm comfortable Burns isn't a top 50 p4p all timer. Many of his title defences were against fighters who weren't world class, let alone the most deserving challenger. That said, I still think his relative lowly ranking amongst HW champs, means he can be a little underrated as a boxer. I have him at #12 p4p in the decade of the 1900's, based solely on fights in that decade. He went 43-3-7, 13-1-1 in HW title fights and beat - Marvin Hart, Jack O'Brien (with whom he went 1-1-1, the "loss" being in a 6R newspaper decision), Jim Flynn, Bill Lang and Bill Squires x 3. Other than O'Brien, his only defeats were to Jack Sullivan, who he also drew with, and the 29lbs heavier Jack Johnson.

 

I haven’t put countless hours of research in like your own good self - so I’ll wisely defer to your informed take at this point in time - and, tbh, based on my own broad and much less qualified view (than your own), I would’ve agreed that Tommy probably wouldn’t make the top 50 anyway, whilst still viewing him as a creditable P4P performer.

 

Cheers. There are plenty of posts I've read of yours that I've found informative and have added to my own knowledge. There are different areas of boxing history we've each reviewed in more depth.

Agreed, Burns was an extremely good fighter for his size.

 

He was not very consistent on the issue.

He initially said that he would draw the color bar.

He later announced that he was dissolving the color bar.

Then he flip flopped back and forth.

Like with Jack Johnson, I suspect that you could have found his price.

 

I don't think anyone doubts that Jack got knocked back a few pegs against Johnson. That whole trip of his to New York was a mess. He wasn't getting regular meals and slept at times on a park bench.

The aforementioned Sam Langford, arguably the greatest boxer of all time, also referred to Dempsey as unbeatable a few years after the Johnson bout.

As for other black fighters, Langford was too good when Dempsey was too green. He had an opportunity to face in old Jeanette in an exhibition but beat his feet out of the ring. Norfolk never was at the top of the heap. Wills stands out as the glaring opportunity.

 

Certainly hurts his legacy, whatever the reason for it. Uninviting black men from a sporting contest is like uninviting French people from a cooking contest.

 

All true, but I still don't buy the apologias and place the blame on Dempsey and Rickard for not defending against Wills. And Dempsey was not bound to Rickard, so it was more his fault than anybody else's. You can argue Dempsey was a victim of his time all you want, but Wills was even more of a victim.

 

This content is protected

 

Why Dempsey didn't fight Wills is more or less irrelevant.

Whether he didn't do it because he was wicked and cowardly, or he was eager for the fight but was sabotaged by his cynical handlers, the bottom line is that the fight didn't happen.

Personally I think that Dempsey was seriously considering it at one point, but my original point still stands.