Edgren's take on big purses, big fights, Carp- Dempsey, Wills and a $3k Greb "gift" to reporters

San Bernardino Sun, Volume 51, Number 95, 24 March 1923 — Page 7

SAN BERNARDINO DAILY SUN, FRIDAY, MARCH 23, 1923

Dempsey Made Offer of $100,000 to Mix With Gibbons in Ohio Arena

By ROBERT EDGREN
Dempsey is offered $100,000 with a percentage privilege to box Tommy Gibbons in Ohio July 4th or Labor Day. This ought to be plenty of money to pay Dempsey for all the work he'd have to do in a ring against Gibbons. Tom has enough speed and cleverness to give Dempsey a busy five or six rounds unless Dempsey hits him before that amount of time had elapsed. One only has to go back four years to recall the first time In ring history that any champion was offered $100,000 for a fight. That was when Willard met Dempsey, and Willard fighting Dempsey for $100,000 was quite different from Dempsey fighting Gibbons for $100,000. In proportion to the risk and the beating, Willard should have been paid a couple of million. Purses have been climbing during the past twenty-five years. When Jim Jeffries fought Tom Sharkey a terrific 25-round battle for the heavyweight championship Jeff and Sharkey together drew down $36,465. The purses paid both fighters when Jeffries knocked out Corbett in 23 rounds, back in 1903, was $43,638. and that stood as a record for a big purse paid a couple of fighters until 1910, when Jeffries fought Johnson at Reno. This was when Tex Rickard appeared as a promoter of heavy weight championships. He offered a purse of $101,000, and gave each fighter a bonus of $10,000, "for signing articles, making a total of $121,000. When the fight was proposed It was to be winner take all, but In the end the purse was split 50-50. so each man drew down $60,500 and about an equal amount in moving picture money. Again a world record for purses This stood until Rickard ran the Willard-Dempsey fight at Toledo, with a new record purse. Willard received a flat $100,000, which at that time was considered likely to be the biggest purse ever paid any boxer. Dempsey received $27,500, making the total purse $127,500. Later Dempsey received $100,000 for fighting Bill Brennan In Madison Square Garden the only big fight, Rickard ever lost money on.

Nobody Could Draw, That Money Now

Then In 1921 came the Dempsey – Carpentier fight at Boyle's Thirty Acres In Jersey City, with the amazing purse of half a million dollars, or which as stakeholder I paid Dempsey $300,000 and Carpentier $200,000. They both got the exact amount advertised, to a dollnr. It was a real $500,000 purse. For that matter 1 believe Rickard never has "padded" his purse announcements for advertising purposes as some other promoters have done at times. There were surrounding circumstances that made It possible to offer a great purse to Dempsey and Carpentier, and it Is unlikely that the half million dollar purse ever will be exceeded or that conditions will ever Justify offering such money to boxers again.

Dempsey was a great champion, but he had made a poor showing in the early rounds of his fight with Brennan, suggesting the possibility that he might be losing his speed, which would give the Frenchman a chance. Carpentier had knocked out English champions Wells and Beckett In a couple or punches each, and had easily outclassed Levinsky, the light heavyweight In his one American appearance. Georges was the most picturesque figure In the ring, noted not only for a brilliant ring career, but as a thrice decorated war hero who as a French flier has performed feats of rare valor In low battle flights over the German lines, locating hidden batteries.

The fight had an international thrill that won't be seen again unless some really great heavyweight Is developed abroad, and comes here with a real chance to beat. our champion for world honors. In that case Rickard may go over the half million mark, for a new record. But such a happening Is unlikely. There's nobody in sight who could draw anything like the Carpentier-Dempsey crowd when matched with Dempsey, so Dempsey isn't likely to draw any more $300,000 purses this year. The $100,000 offered for Dempsey-Gibbons is big money today. A Wills fight would draw a crowd of curious people, but would entirely lack the sentimental interest that made Dempsey-Carpentier such a card. Wills doesn't class with Langford or Johnson at their best. As for the rest of the bunch, all that could be hoped for would be a hard fought bout for a few rounds, with a slim possibility that the challenger might put over a winning punch. That wouldn't bring any $1,626,550 gate! , One thing that has to be figured with these big purses is that the old time champions really got their money. There was no crushing Income tax in their day. Jeffries and Johnson, having no managers to split with and no Income tax to pay, did fairly well. But when Dempsey got his $300,000 he had-a manager to divide with, and an Income tax to pay that made his $300,000 look more like the traditional "thirty cents. Carpentier was no better off, for besides splitting 50-60 with Deschamps he had an Income tax to pay here and a second tax on his purse in France, which must have left him about enough to buy a rattle for the baby.

Pittsburgh paper prints a sensational story quoting Harry Greb to the effect that Harry gave $3,000 to New York sporting writers to "boom a fight between Greb and Dempsey”. Effect Is spoiled a little by adding that Greb distributed the graft "under protest." Anyone who tosses off $3000 these days without offering anything more violent than a "protest" In defiance ought to have his head examined. Greb a man with a family to support, too. And Imagine paying $3,000 for a chance to have in the bean walloped by J. Dempsey! If It's true Harry ought to consult a specialist. P. S. Greb denies everything. (Copyrighted 1923 by the bell Syndicate, inc.)

 

P, you are right that hearing things that make sense from that time makes more sense then getting an agenda riddled myopic view of what was happening 90+yrs ago from a guy that read 40 different reports. Apply commonsense to what you are reading, why is it easier to say someone was ducking, implying they were somehow afraid. Not true, there were reasons and issues that were valid at that time which prevented the fights from happening, not excuses. I believe this article explains the feelings about these fighters and fights at the time. These things were all well known the real reason Dempsey never fought Wills or Greb. If these revisionists can honestly say that that there were no issues surrounding both fights they are lying and the bad thing they know it or in some cases should know it.

 

Ah, the prof returns:
No these details aren't missing in the thought process today. All of this is covered in my book (you know, the book you two dumbasses editorialize on on a daily basis but havent read)
I have caught you in many spins of the facts as you state them so why should I buy your book? I dont need to buy your book to see that, your posts. Here is another one, how can I editorialize your book on a daily basis, since I havent even seen your book. I am going solely on what you post and that tells me everything I need to know.

including the argument that Dempsey-Carpentier was simply too big not to make.

Ah, there is your answer, why should Carp even think about fighting Greb, when there was the most loot to make fighting a much easier fight vs Dempsey, then Greb lol

And yes, even the shake down of Greb for $3,000 is covered (which by the way he denied even giving that interview).
Duh, really I must've missed that, in my own post you say, o please. So you are saying a bunch of scribes got together to shake down Greb for a story on the Dempsey fight, sounds about right lol.

But you guys go on thinking you've reinvented the wheel. LOL. You guys are such clowns. Chasing after your own tales. I love how you guys ***** about anyone who disagrees with you, call them revisionists etc, then ONLY print articles that favor your case.
Wait this is exactly what you do, I am playing by your rules. Maybe you might have missed it I post what I find interesting and most of my responses are of the commonsense variety, like about the contract, about ducking, about most everything you spin.
Wait a minute whats with you"guys"? I am the one posting not anybody else o and my good friends like Edgren and any others I find that make sense.

Who is cherry picking? For every Edgren article sucking Dempsey's tiny **** I can find 3 calling him a dirty fighter, talking about him ducking Wills (and Greb), etc.

And here is an "esteemed'' pysstorian knowing and saying something about Dempsey's tiny "johnson", pray tell us how you know this? Please post them all so I can break them down to the bare essentials. You went all through the trouble of putting together a vid of Dempsey being dirty, and the reaction was, "so what" lol. Since you are so learned why not post the just as many reports and articles that say Greb was a too small, and that Wills had other issues. Let's discuss them.
I AM WILLING.

But you guys go on reading YOUR story. Because that's all it is. I don't limit what I read to only the news I WANT to hear and I don't filter it out. The difference is that the dissent against your hero was deafening and the games that he played to hold his title hostage were obvious except to the most starry eyed lovestruck puppies: YOU.

It was so deafening that 90+yr later it's Dempsey the icon, and Greb is, "Greb who" by the average boxing fan of today. That really grinds your nuts doesnt it? Dempsey outsold both Wills and Greb together, thats how deafening the dissent was. AGAIN WHY DO YOU IGNORE THE FEELING AT THE TIME THAT GREB WAS TOOOOOOO SMALL, and THAT WILLS HAD ISSUES. Why not discuss that instead of your tired old saw that Dempsey, Carp, Firpo were ducking Greb and god knows who else. Those issues that prevented the fights were valid at the time but of course the hero of the stupid knows better. Pysstorian please.