How good was Dempsey's title reign?

With respect to Tunney, you know full well that what he did to Tommy Gibbons is what proved to the public at large that Gene was somebody who could put a tough man away. (No way he does that to the Tommy Gibbons of Shelby though. I'm not sure the Dempsey of Toledo or Louis of the Max Baer fights could have pulled that trick off.)

In the case of Dempsey, I think it does. Mike Gibbons may have bitched about kid brother falling in love with his power, but the abundance of knockouts which resulted helped get him to Shelby, and was probably a factor in getting Tunney to want no part of Tommy until 1925. Brennan was nicknamed KO Bill for a reason. 52 of his 53 wins had been by knockout (Battling Levinski being the sole exception in a 1917 Boston 12 rounder). All of Carp's six post war opponents had been knocked out, and much was being made of his laser right with blinding speed.

All the contemporary news reports I've read about Miske during Dempsey's rise to contention say he wasn't as good as Jack, but he was recognized as a dangerously slashing puncher, and the severity of his illness was successfully cloaked from the public at the time, and he had previously held his own with Dempsey better than Brennan had. Firpo was the only other man to ever take Brennan out, and he squashed Willard's comeback after Jess had made a credible return against Floyd Johnson.

Greb's knockout of Gunboat Smith was huge, but it was still an anomaly, and he couldn't be proposed as having the potential to knock Jack out, probably a necessary prerequisite if he was going to be represented as a legitimate title threat. (Let's not forget that only Marvin Hart had ever lost the heavyweight title via decision, and he did not dethrone a reigning defender to win it. Ironically, Dempsey was the first to both win it sitting down and lose it standing up. Carpentier himself essentially ruled in 1914 that Moran could only dethrone Johnson via a knockout, and opted for the same in challenging Dempsey.)Greb-Dempsey, it very obviously would have been huge.

 

Well, he said Greb was "too small" before he went, and he said Greb was "too small" when he came back.
I guess he didn't find any more reasons. Too busy screwing Parisian show girls probably.

 

This was all after Dempsey and Kearns had split, right ?

 

WTF are you talking about??? Hardly lost rounds? Based on what? Its one thing to "hardly lose rounds" against fodder like Beckett, Wells, Grundhoven, Moreau, etc. Its entirely another thing to make such a claim when he stepped up and won a gift over blown up, faded, WW Willie Lewis (after being dropped several times), or win a gift DQ over Gunboat Smith, or suffer brutal beatings at the hands of Klaus, and Papke, or win a razor thin decision over Jeff Smith who was much smaller, or a cheap shot KO over TK Lewis, or fixed fight over Levinsky, or get hammered in a fight you tried to fix against Siki (who was pretty poor), or take part in a fixed fight with Townely, etc etc. I probably have more footage on Carpentier, from dating from the time he was about 17 or younger until his death, than anyone in the world and Im absolutely convinced he is one of the most overrated fighters in the history of this sport. He was as predictable as he could be and anyone who wants to argue he was dominating all these fights on points better be prepared to back that claim up with film, because I sure as hell can and I can tell you even in his better performances like the Jeff Smith fight he wasnt dominating anyone. I could care less if he dominates stiffs like Townely, Beckett, etc, or if he blows away Wells (who lost every fight by KO brutally). That means nothing. That means he was better than the club level fighters that europe was producing. Look at the long list of American contenders who feasted on those guys as well. They would vacation over there to make "easy money". So in essence, Carpentiers career was built on fighters that were considered "easy money".

 

Its easy to get a knockdown when your promoter has paid the opponent to lay down.

 

He was talking about your boy, not Carp.

 

You dont know what your talking about in regards to Greb-Smith or Dempsey-Miske. Miske was not considered a dangerous defense in 1920. Period. In fact several of the major outlets refused to pay to send sportswriters, opting instead to cover baseball, because the fight was considered a joke.

Greb KOing Smith was not big at all. Dempsey had been ridiculed prior to the Greb-Smith fight because he was trying to get a match with Smith in Boston. Smith was well known to be past it and the match was banned. Smith was hoping that if he beat Greb he would prove himself worthy of a shot at Dempsey. Now take note of that, Greb, light hitting MW, was considered a stepping stone to a possible HW championship fight, that should tell you something. Instead Smith was knocked out. The fight was fairly meaningless for Greb. It did little to boost his stock, it wasnt huge, and the only notable result of such a fight would have been if he had lost to Smith.

Now you can talk about all of Carp's KOs you want but look who they were against and then come back to me. As I said, he had to have a legit opponent to KO, preferrably with a title, in order to springboard to a Dempsey match. Enter the aging Levinsky who had been ham and egging it for years living off a title he himself didnt particularly care about and suddenly he has a chance to cash out. Then add the investigation afterwards into the fight and the news stories that went on for the next six months about it. It doesnt take a genius to figure out that Carpentier, who had never KOd an opponent of Levinsky's calibre (of of his ability to not get KOd which he survived on in the ND era) got that win via a wallet and not his right hand.

 

Oh LOL I misread it, I thought he was talking about Carpentier.

 

Yes, PLEASE edit to break it up. I did take the time and effort to read it, and now my eyes hurt. It's a very entertaining and fiery **** and vinegar stream-of-consciousness post in information and content. I don't mind at all that it's a disagreement with my views, but I do mind that a knowledgeable historian like this can have a lengthy rebuttal ignored simply because it's not broken into paragraphs.

There are kids here interested in learning about the past of the sport, and this is the sort of thing which gets lost in the shuffle just because of a lousy text wall. I realize we're not all writing for publication, but if it's not readable, it might as well not have been typed and submitted in the first place.

 

Unless Im mistaken it was in 1925. A poll was taken of midwest sportswriters and boxing experts as to who Dempsey's next opponent should be. Greb was selected and Dempsey agreed. Greb hopped a train and headed for Chicago to sign papers but before he could get there Dempsey stated that he had decided he wouldnt fight Greb or anyone else until the following year.

 

Carpentier v Levinsky was a big ballyhooed fight for the "Light Heavyweight championship of the world", promoted by Tex Rickard. Levinsky, rightly or wrongly, was world's champion.

Greb's KO over a washed-up Smith was some relatively unimportant backwater happening, as far as I'm aware.
Correct me if I'm wrong.

For you to suggest that the size of the promotion (the coverage, the ballyhoo, the prestige, the title, etc.) are not relevant to the public perception and promotional potential of a fighter as a "puncher", or that I'm talking on some mad tangent, is absurd.

I'm talking about perceptions, build-ups, "reputations". In professional boxing.
It's pretty easy stuff.
That's all I was talking about, when I brought it up. Greb was said to lack the heavyweight KO punch, Carpentier and Firpo etc, were said to possess one, even Gibbons and Tunney. That's all.

You just like to argue. Good luck with that.

 

Why does the goal post keep getting moved? Greb was too small. No wait, there was no money in it. No wait, there was no demand for it. No wait, he had no punch.

Come on, why dance around the issue that this supposed mankiller Dempsey chose less risk for greater reward throughout his career? Thats the bottom line. Dempsey ducked Greb. Period.

Personally, in terms of a business decision. I can almost justify it if you frame it as: Greb was a very durable, very fast, and very difficult fighter, who made a nice career out of beating the **** out of HWs. If Im a HW champion and I fight the guy. Lets say I win. Big deal. The public says "what do you want, a cookie? You just beat a MW. You were SUPPOSED to win!" If I lose, even a No-Decision, Thats bad. Ive just lost to a MW. Suddenly my "cloak of invincibility" is gone and along with it a lot of my drawing power. I could also be made to look bad in winning. Thats not good. Or I could win easily but still be taken the distance. That was bad enough against Gibbons imagine against a guy who was 10 pounds lighter, smaller in every measurement, and couldnt punch. And lets face it, how many guys blew Greb out of the water or beat him up badly...

Say what you will about Dempsey but he was only human. The odds are this fight goes the distance and thats bad news for Dempsey.

So framed like that, you or I would have avoided Greb like the plague as well. My problem is all of his bull**** excuses and double talk and the fact that if someone offers you $100,000 for an 8 round ND bout in 1922 or a similar sum for a 10 round bout in 1920... Well, I dont know. Thats a lot of money with or without a hit to your rep.

Combine that with another host of excuses and double talk to get out of fighting Wills and the hit to his rep, IMO is as bad or worse as if he had taken those fights and not looked so great. The problem is, and this is what Kearns, Dempsey, and Rickard banked on, that there will always be a sucker out there that you can sell this myth of invincibility to, who doesnt care if you have actually earned it in the ring, or if theyve just read it so much that its become fact to them. Those are the guys who have kept the Dempsey myth alive for so long when a quick examination of the facts proves otherwise.