Jack Dempsey beat Fireman Jim Flynn, Carl Morris, Bill Brennan, Fred Fulton, Gunboat Smith, Battling Levinsky, Billy Miske, Jess Willard, Georges Carpentier, Tommy Gibbons, Luis Firpo and Jack Sharkey. Do these opponents constitute a 'weak resume' for the Manasa Mauler? He did not face Harry Wills, I understand that. But 'weak resume', really?
Weak only in the context where he has been rated historically, as GOAT by many for a long while. Not weak for, say, top 15, but does anyone say it is?
Flynn was a journeyman. Miske was a good win. Brennan was solid. Fulton was a good win though Fulton lost badly to Harry Wills. Fripo was crude but powerful so a solid win. Carpentier wasn't a heavy and wasn't super proven at heavy so not a major win by any means. The Sharkey win is controversial due to the low blows. Willard was past it. Gibbons is a good win despite his small size. Not a weak resume but he missed out on Harry Wills (not his fault) as well as Sam Langford circa 1916-17. His resume isn't as good as Ali, Louis, Holmes, Lewis, Frazier, Holyfield and a few others. It is comparable to Marciano but Marciano cleaned out everyone in his time while Jack missed a few guys due to politics. Good enough for top 15. Not enough for all time top 10.
You are too narrowly focused on the top names representing the white and black fighters of the era. Most the names that prop Dempsey up also fought black fighters. It's no secret black fighters were forced to fight under less favorable conditions and so often have less glorious resumes and so the white fighters had an edge and were expected to do better. We still expect boxers with an economic edge to do better, those without are journeymen. Well, a lot of white fighters that make up Dempsey's resume got beaten by black fighters who themselves have a **** poor resume. Billy Miske is a resume win for Dempsey, 43-3, sounds great. He's also a win for Norfolk, who has 27 losses. Generally speaking, in terms of all time resumes, being propped up by a guy who lost to a professional loser isn't so good. Other ATG HWs have wins over guys with just as many wins, names, and losses without ever having lost to a professional loser. Norfolk was one of the most talented men to ever lace up and his resume does not reflect that. Likewise, that poor reflection of his talent is found in his era's top resumes. Langford, Godfrey, Gans, there's heaps and we'll never know who was truly great. It is unfortunate but you know all Jack had to do was end the colorline. It's sad it took a world war and literal nazis to get that done. IMO, it's fair, he left us with a question mark more than an answer. IMO, colorline champions are not even legitimate world champions.
No thats a great resume for his era. The issue was entirely Wills. The extent to which Dempsey had otherwise cleaned out the division is the main reason he got away with that. Otherwise not fighting for 3 years would have been a problem even then. If we view Wills as a interim champ after Dempsey/Wills fell through it shows the extent to which Dempsey had cleaned out the division. Wills fought Firpo who Dempsey beat then Weinart and Floyd Johnson before fighting and losing to young Jack Sharkey. When Tunney entered the picture he fought an eliminator with Tommy Gibbons who Dempsey had beaten. In terms of late 1910s HWs feats the only other name he DIDN'T get to was Jim Coffey and the aformentioned Weinart who lost most of his eliminators at the time. Coffey had a bunch of close fights with Brennan and Levinsky and was more of a factor before Dempsey hit the scene.
It is certainly not a weak resume. It is the kind that very few heavyweights have put together, in the history of the sport. Yes he missed some key names, and that is a very fair criticism, but he is not the only ATG that this criticism can be leveled against.
I don't think that any heavyweight in history, was ever better at overcoming a size disparity, than Jack Dempsey. I include Langford, Louis and Tyson in that argument.
I don't believe his resume is weak at all. That said, I do believe more of his best scalps were in his pre title come up. The 6ft 6 225lb Knockout artist Fred Fulton was number 1 contender when Dempsey knocked him out in the first 18 seconds of the first round. The 6ft 5 230lb Carl Morris was the 2 contender when Dempsey knocked him out in the first. The highly ranked contender Gunboat Smith also succumbed to an early KO. Jacks Second Round dispatch over 6ft 4 contender Luis Firpo is also legendary once you consider his injuries sustained after being punched/shoved out of the ring. Harry Wills despite often landing at will was unable to stop him in twelve. His post layoff victory over a peak top ranked Jack Sharkey should also not be forgotten. While it is often claimed Jack was being manhandled by Sharkey or was losing the majority of the rounds before landing his knockout left hook, Jack was actually ahead on two of the three judges scorecards at the start of the 7th round. No doubt we must include ATG LH Tommy Gibbons, theirs was quite a technical one, where Dempsey showed his ability to box on the backfoot. His third round KO over ATG Battling Levinsky and 4th (dubious) over Carp are also noteworthy scalps, as was Billy Miske, who Dempsey dominated on several occasions. All of these guys were skilled, great boxers (I'd say Carp not so much as the others), but they were also all Light Heavyweights. Bill Brennan was a generally consistent and good contender, but not quite as great a win as many above. Jim Flynn rather was more of a journeyman, a bit raw in technique and was starting to decline. His smashing 1st round KO over the 6ft 8 Homer Smith is more impressive if you ask me.
