Does Harry Wills have a case to be ranked higher than Jack Dempsey?

Clearly this guy is out of all of our leagues. 12,367 vCash says so

 

It might be a a bait question in intent, but I see nothing in the question itself that's loaded or tendentious. Surely this is a question anyone sincerely interested in the era will inevitably get around to asking regardless of what one might prefer the answer to be.

 

"9 of his15 fights with Langford were when Langford was 34,34,35,35,36,36,36,37,38."

Hoooly ****. I'l bet by some time around fight seven they were so familiar with each other that they were punching each other's fists, like two gunfighters whose bullets keep colliding in midair.

 

The white guys Wills, Jeanette, and McVea fought sucked. Langford is an atg so I'm not surprised he demolished all of the white guys you mentioned.

Norfolk lost to Greb, Wolf Larsen, Tommy Gibbons, and Gunboat Smith. Two of which Dempsey beat (a knockout and a wide decision). Greb wasn't even a heavyweight and Larsen was a journeyman.

You can name just as many black guys and white guys from the era but the ones that go down as all time greats are Dempsey, Wills, Langford, and Gibbons (not at heavyweight).

 

They were much better than their white contemporaries in their primes, but they were clearly surpassed by them as they got into their twilight years.

When Jess Willard gave his reasons for drawing the colour line, he started with "firstly because there is no black contender in the championship class."

While this wasn't strictly true, it probably appeared to be true at the time!

 

Here I would have to disagree.

He was the best name that either man beat (as in highest on my all time heavyweight list), but it was not the best win they had between them.

Dempsey's win's over Fulton, Willard, and Sharkey, could be argued to be more impressive.

 

OK, lets throw out Willard, because I can't be bothered with the argument.

Do you think that that version of Sam Langford, was a better scalp than the version of Jack Sharkey that Dempsey defeated?

What about Fred Fulton?

He had been the outstanding contender for some time, which Langford clearly was not when Wills beat him.

Was that version of Langford, even a better scalp on the day, than somebody like Tommy Gibbons?

 

Someone remind me of Gibbons great record at heavyweight. Boxrec is currently down and my brsin is foggy.

 

Wills was shafted almost as much as Langford was.

Wills probably beat better fighters than Dempsey did. Yes--he has a case.

Too bad the match never happened, I'd for Dempsey.

 

Very little, given that nobody was world class, when those fights took place.

How much credit do you give Kid Cotton for his victory over Harry Wills?

There is, because Fulton was the outstanding contender, over a long period.

One of the best on paper, never to get a title shot!

You can't deny a contender's credentials retrospectively, because somebody beat them later!
I have a great deal of respect for Matt, but he would be the first to admit, that his rankings are his best guesses!

He lost a couple of key fights before Wills beat him in any sort of convincing way.

Still an absolutely murderous fighter, but obviously on the decline.

Fulton only needed one attempt, which made him look somewhat better than Wills.