Great info and historically accurate. http://fightfilmcollector.blogspot.com/2014/01/the-trouble-with-harry-harry-wills-vs.html?m=1
I have never bought into the "Dempsey would have beaten Wills anyway" argument. Perhaps he would have, but we cannot award him the win, without even climbing up the steps to the ring. I also think that a lot of people are looking for a simple explanation, for a complex sequence of events, on both sides of the argument.
I think the history as discussed in that article accurately portrays the events surrounding the proposed Dempsey Wills bout. Add to this that in later years Wills stated himself that Dempsey was not to blame for the bout not occurring. In fact all the history surrounding this bout has been known for many decades. Dempsey was exonerated regarding blame before any of us were born. Yet the haters continue to hate.
It's not that many pick Wills to beat Dempsey. It's just that, in boxing, if you don't beat your #1 contender when you're champ, that leads to frustration on the part of boxing people. It makes them sad and angry. Why wouldn't it?
Very different times. You cannot look through today's eyes at past events. Again... Wills himself exonerated Dempsey from blame. In truth this debate was ended many decades ago. No new information has surfaced or will surface that will change things.
All of that is true, but fans would still be irritated by a fighter not fighting his #1 contender. No amount differentiation of times or exhortation can change that. A reign will always seem incomplete in these circumstances, and that's just the way it is - no blog can change it.
I've never personally blamed Dempsey for that fight not coming off. business and politics can complicate a good many things and a sporting event is no exception. there are many components that go into making a championship fight where lots of money is on the line. You have managers, promotors, attorney's and numerous others who have to come to terms on various issues. It almost has nothing to do with the fighters themselves at all.. So anyone who thinks that such an event is decided by one guy saying to another " fight me or you're a chicken shiit" has the mentality of a 14 year old... Simple as that...
It should have happened but it didn't. As I asked you on the other post, where do you put your money in these two fights? Dempsey v Greb Dempsey v Wills.
I'd probably pick Dempsey to beat both at his very best, but they are more difficult than anything else he was ever in IMO.
Mc, Today only on ESB has their been a "clinical" obsession with Dempsey and Harry Wills not hooking up, THOUGH they signed once for that fight which was canceled due to the Michigan promoter, who was unable to come up with the contracted funds... Only on ESB today is it so viral..I have been reading tons of boxing lore since the 1940s about Dempsey and Wills pertaining to their times, and seldom have I read that the fact that Dempsey "FEARED" fighting Wills was THE FACTOR in that bout never occurring. The times of those long ago days were so different than today that Dempsey was never deemed an ogre, or hated so ludicrously as a great fighter then, as he is now by "some" people who just despise the name of Dempsey.. Even Harry Wills never blamed Jack Dempsey. WHY in heck should his detractors ninety years later on ESB still have such misplaced wrath ???
Exellent post M . Add to the fact that following the terrible riots and deaths that occurred following the Jack Johnson / Jim Jeffries fight in Reno, promoters and financial backers across the country were reluctant to match a black and white for the heavyweight title, fearing a repeat of those riots happening again. All these contributed to Dempsey not ultimately fighting Harry Wills who SURE deserved a match..cheers M...