Jack Dempsey's Ranking

Not whilst they were champion they didn't'

 

Dude, it may not have been that cut and dry?

Just because white people didn't march down the street with pitchforks, it doesn't mean the fights didn't have violent consequences.

Sweeping that under the rug to bolster your argument of Dempseys cowardice is wrong in my opinion.

 

Your biggest mistake was watching Dempseys fights, and then believing he would duck anyone.

 

I AM talking about the implications of "superiority."

Dempsey and his team clearly didn't feel they were superior to Wills, or they would've faced him.

All those reigning and former champions fought the top black fighters of their era because THEY each believed they would win (regardless of whether anyone else thought so, they did). And some won, and some didn't.

All the reasons Dempsey and others gave for Dempsey not fighting Wills circled back to "If Wills beats Dempsey ... this AWFUL THING might happen."

Even though the last three heavyweight title fights involving a black man and a white man after Johnson-Jeffries were free of violence, as were those BEFORE Johnson vs. Jeffries. (Unless I missed the wholesale riots after the Johnson-Philadelphia Jack O'Brien draw and Johnson-Ketchel blowout.)

All the other former and reigning champs I mentioned (and their teams) believed they could win against the top black fighter they met.

None of them, despite rampant racism at the time, worried about violence if they lost ... because THEY INTENDED TO WIN.

On the other hand, Dempsey and his team seemed to not have much faith in a Dempsey win, because all their excuses stemmed around the trouble that "might" occur should he lose ...

Because a decade and a half earlier, there was rioting after a guy a LOT MORE POPULAR than Dempsey lost to a black man.

Even the RACISTS who fought Johnson, Wills and Louis didn't blame other racists for why they wouldn't fight those guys. They fought Louis, Wills and Johnson anyway. Because they thought they'd win.

Dempsey was the only one who stuck to the storyline that he couldn't fight the top black fighter of his era because of what racists outside the ring MIGHT DO if he lost ... since all the racists apparently loved Dempsey so much.:roll:

Such bull. Such a weak excuse.

It's just been repeated ad nauseam, so you guys don't see anything wrong with it.

The other "color line" guys you lump Dempsey in with - like Burns, Jeffries, Willard, Sharkey, Schmeling Baer and Braddock - ACTUALLY DID FIGHT the best black heavyweight of their era.

Dempsey was the one who didn't.

Dempsey was the color line.

And he drew it because he and his team didn't think he could beat Harry Wills. And they blamed racism to cover their ducking.

Why can't "YOU" see the difference?

 

The years 1917 to 1921 were probably the worst in US history for race riots between whites and blacks. 1919 was a particularly bad year with outbreaks all over the country.

Jack Dempsey's world heavyweight title fights were the biggest in history, hugely publicized events with massive media interest. People who weren't into boxing or sport at all took an interest or created an angle of interest. The big Dempsey fights transcended sport. They were front page news.

The idea that no person of influence in the US would have been concerened about such a huge FIGHT that would pit white man against black man and the possible volatile consequences of such an event is unrealistic.
Of course the politicians were concerned. It makes no sense to say that it wasn't a factor.

 

You interpret things how you want.I'm just pointing out that the champions that preceded Dempsey,with the lone exception of Burns did not defend against Black challengers. That is not up for debate it's a stone fact.

 

You've got it backwards.

Just because there were violent consequences after one fight in 1910 doesn't excuse a blatant duck that went on for years a decade and more later.

Dempsey wasn't seen as the savior like Jeffries was. Wills wasn't reviled as a devil like Johnson was.

There were heavyweight title fights involving a black man and a white man before Johnson-Jeffries, there were heavyweight title fights involving a black man and a white man after Johnson-Jeffries ...

Dempsey and Wills is never compared to those other meetings.

Just the violent one.

It was an excuse for Dempsey to avoid his top contender. That's all.

 

Your opinion not a fact.

Do some more research

These are your words only there is a difference

You really should do more research

Do you really understand what your writing? Cos it makes no sense

Now I am starting to feel sorry for you, you choose to ignore history and make your own revised history.

Oh jeez, stop already now you are being foolish. There was nobody more popular then Dempsey at the time, name this most popular HW, please

"er Louis fought when? Johnson fought when? And Wills fought who?

Your posts are getting dumb and dumber, keep showing us who the true racists is. Such bull exactly

[/quote]

Yes, why can't YOU see the difference.

 

He was involved in the first million-dollar gates. But there were duds in there, too. As many duds as superfights. Dempsey-Miske, Dempsey-Brennan, Dempsey-Gibbons were not the biggest fights in history. In fact, Dempsey-Gibbons was a total bust.

And saying one year was more violent for black-white relations than this other year is arbitrary. All the years were violent for black-white relations in the U.S. for most of the 20th century.

The year Willard beat Johnson and the year Johnson beat Moran weren't particularly non-racist years for blacks and whites in the U.S.

If Dempsey wanted to fight and he thought he could beat Harry Wills, he'd have fought him and beat Wills. He did neither.

And putting the blame on racists for not fighting Wills ... like Dempsey shunning Wills was actually doing blacks a "favor" by protecting them from the racists ... is downright evil.

Finally, Dempsey was a hobo, he married a prostitute, he dodged the draft in the first World War, he cleaned out three or four banks for the Gibbons fight and left thousands of people who had their life savings in those banks destitute.

Painting him as some guy who was "concerned" about what people thought or as someone who cared if anyone was hurt as the result of his actions doesn't exactly play. Peoples lives were ruined after the Gibbons fight. Find any quote from Dempsey expressing remorse for totally destroying the lives of thousands of depositors in those banks.

He ducked Harry Wills for his entire reign, and he excused it by pointing to the racists.

Even outright racist fighters back then didn't do that. The most racist fighters of the 20th Century fought the top black fighters of their era.

It was just an excuse.

 

Both of those fights took place in countries that did not have race issues how many Americans even saw them?
The second and third underlined statements tells us all we need to know about your objectivity on the subject of Dempsey. Waste of time talking to you.

 

Dempsey is definitely an all-time great whose dominance transcended the sport. It's hard to compare him to a lot of modern fighters. For impact alone, I'd take him over Liston, Wlad, and Holmes.

 

Who said Dempsey-Wills HAD TO FIGHT in the U.S.? Just another factor that is glossed over when defending Dempsey's color line stance. You could barely make an argument for it in the U.S. It made zero sense everywhere else. But give him a pass, even though every other man who held the heavyweight title in the 20th century fought the best black fighter of his era ... with the exception of Dempsey (and Tunney).

 

Well, his dominance over white fighters.

 

You're not wrong.

 

ESB should be now a political forum rather then a boxing forum it appears to me...
There are a few posters who are beating one subject to death and it is truly going to destroy this excellent and one time politically neutral boxing site..Why the heck don't the these bleeding hearts who detest Jack Dempsey today on this boxing site just dig up his body, put his corpse on trial and hang him.? I'm outa here...