Harold Johnson vs Jack Dempsey

More drivel from Klompton. All the A raters sat at ringside or very close to it this would include Fleisher and all the experts from that time you disparage. Trains were the mode of travel and they went into every major city and this type travel was done on s regular basis. Add to this all these experts were able to see Dempsey not only fight but train for fights. How can anyone be so dishonest? Once again look through the hwt boxing history and read what experts at the time and the years after had to say about every hwt champion. Typically high all time great status is only bestowed upon fighters who are all time great. Ali, and before him Marciano, and before him Louis and before him Dempsey. However in your very warped mind they were only so wrong concerning Dempsey? They weren't but you are.

 

Teddy Hayes had some kind of portfolio as a trainer. Among the legends he handled were Mickey Walker, Jack Johnson, Battling Nelson, Ad Wolgast, Joe Gans, Stanley Ketchel, Billy Papke, Tiger Flowers, Jack Britton, Benny Leonard, Freddie Welsh, Johnny Dundee, Pete Herman and Lou Brouillard.

Who did Hayes consider to be the greatest of them all? Jack Dempsey. As early as 1915, Hayes saw the enormous potential that was steadily taking shape. “Dempsey had meanness. He had heart. Anyone who knocked down Dempsey soon discovered they made a mistake. When Jack got up, that always meant his opponent’s doom. Whether he slipped or was hit, he would be up at the count of two with murder on his mind. He was the perfect fighting machine. There were times when he didn’t seem at all human.”

Dempsey, of course was moulded and fired in an astonishingly tough era that bred exceptionally tough men. The good old days? No, we wouldn’t want to see their like again. There were too many injustices, too many illnesses and most people didn’t live to a great age. It is simply a fact of life that hard times represent a fertile soil for producing fighting men. What greater motivation is there than to simply eat? Dempsey and many others knew what it was like to go without a meal.

In his later years, Jack could only guess at how many official and semi-official fights he had between 1911 and 1916. “The record books don’t contain them,” he said, “and I couldn’t name the number or identify all the faces today if my life depended on doing it. I’d guess a hundred. But that’s still a guess.”

Boxing historian Mike Hunnicut, who had many conversations with Teddy Hayes, points out: “Teddy wasn’t a ‘good old days’ guy. He was always looking to tomorrow and the betterment of boxing. But he quite rightly observed that the excellent athletes forged from hunger and poverty began to disappear when life got easier and television helped to kill off the thousands of fight clubs. There were suddenly fewer fights and fewer fighters. As a consequence, there weren’t nearly as many fighters who had that inherent anger and ferocity. Other sports became popular and young men didn’t have to box for a living.

“Going through my notes from my various chats with Teddy, he said that Dempsey was the most perfect puncher with the most perfect hands ever. He was a very fast, instinctive athlete, a great natural fighter with perfect co-ordination and timing.

“He could take a punch – a real punch – and not ever be aware he was hit. He was able to take fighters apart when he was out on his feet – as he was in the first Gunboat Smith fight – like no other fighter ever. His hands were not just huge, they were incredibly strong and the hardest fists Hayes had ever seen. Every fighter has trouble with his hands at some time or another. Dempsey didn’t. They were the perfect weapons.

“Jack Kearns knew Dempsey was a hell of a fighter. He was absolutely certain that nothing could stop Jack after seeing him rally from that big shot from the Gunboat. Kearns saw that there was no quit in Dempsey.

“Teddy Hayes saw these qualities in Dempsey before Kearns did after watching Jack knock out miners and the bully boys of the bar rooms.

 

That is not what I asked though.

I asked you whether you thought that they were better fighters, and if they were, then that shifts the explanation for Brennan's better than expected performance against Dempsey somewhat.

 

Also rans:

Weinert: In his last fight before Miske he had been knocked down hard and beaten brutally by Greb. Stopped in his next fight in 3. Lost every single one of his important fights.

Roper: Had lost to Greb, Eddie O'Hare, Al Roberts, Chuck Wiggins, Pat McCarthy, Dan O'Dowd, Martin Burke, Mickey Shannon, a totally shot Gunboat Smith, among others. You didnt need to be a legend to beat Roper.

Burke: Lol. Burke was a 6'3" HW who had been knocked out by an aging George Chip, beaten by 155 lb Young Denny, by human punching bag Bartley Madden, by Eddie O'Hare, stopped by Bob Martin and an ancient Carl Morris, outpointed by Harry Foley, Chuck Wiggins numerous times and two bouts previous to Miske he was outpointed by Billy Shade who had lost his last three.

Meehan: Prior to facing Miske Meehan had lost his last nine fights. He was stopped in his previous fight. In fact he had won just 4 of his last 21 fights.

Fulton: Fulton's last fight had been against Bob Roper. Roper had dropped him twice en route to a loss. Fulton's last fight of any note was against Bartley Madden who gave Fulton a beating but was given a controversial draw. Prior to that Fulton hadnt fought anyone of note since getting stopped by Wills two years previous to his bout with Miske.

Gibbons: Go back and read about this fight before you post this as a "win" for Miske. Miske lost every round of that bout before he was given a controversial DQ over Gibbons. It as the only time in their five fights that Miske "beat" Gibbons.

As for Gibbons you can spin it anyway you want but Gibbons fought an elimination bout with Greb at MSG to decide the best white challenger for Dempsey. Greb won that fight handily, winning almost every round. Since that time Gibbons had done nothing to deserve a title shot. Nobody he beat, including Miske, was a logical contender for Dempsey in any sense of the word. Only some deluded fanboy would think Gibbons somehow earned his title shot in any other way than being a less threating proposition than Greb or Wills.

 

How does it shift it? I dont think Brennan was a better fighter than Gibbons. I think he was arguably a better HW than both of them. I dont even consider Miske at that point. That fight was a joke. Brennan had the size, strength, limited skills, and power to be able to put up the difficult fight he did with Dempsey. Gibbons didnt have that. He may have been a better boxer but at HW I think Gibbons is a lot of fluff and even his brother thought so as well. He fought a lot of setups to get where he was at HW. Gibbons was a very good fighter. Not a great one. He falls short of his brother Mike who was special. Gibbons was not special. Brennan wasnt special. Miske wasnt special. Miske might have been marginally better than Brennan as well (And thats debateable, their two fights anywhere near their primes on neutral territory were razor close) but when he was a sick man, and his illness is discussed even in reports from his training camp, he was nothing more than cannon fodder. Thats why its important to take into account their performances on THE DAY when they fought the champion. Thats the only thing that matters. Brennan came trained better than any fight in his life and came to win. Miske showed up to lose. Gibbons gave up when the going got tough and he realized he wasnt making a nickle for the fight. A guy can be the best fighter in the world 364 days out of the year but if he shows up on the 365th day for a title shot and does nothing then its that day thats going to define him.

 

Shouldnt you credit that ****ty historian Mike Casey with this, since you cut and pasted it from his article? LOL.

Funny you put so much faith into Teddy Hayes since he said over and over again that Dempsey ducked Greb.

Of course Kearns admitted it too in later years but Im sure youd say thats just because he was feuding with Dempsey...

 

When Ring Magazine published its first end of year rankings in 1924, Gibbons was rated as the third best heavyweight in the world, behind only Dempsey himself and Harry

Wills. This was after he had lost to Dempsey.

This makes it pretty hard to argue that he was not a logical contender for Dempsey.

Would you have any particular objection to Wladamir Klitschko selecting Deontay Wilder as his next opponent?

 

I ask this question because one of your lines of argument has been to build up people who beat Dempsey, or gave him a competitive fight, while pulling down people he dominated.

My point is that while Dempsey did indeed have a poor showing against Brennan, he also dominated people who were unequivocally better than Brennan.

Indeed the highlight of Brennan's career, seems to be his loosing effort against Dempsey.

 

Does not matter if it's Haynes, Arcel, Bimstein, Stillman, Fleischer, Morgan, Langford, Tunney etc. they all said Dempsey was one of if not the greatest hwt who ever lived. But let's ignore these great boxing minds who all watched him fight and train in person and instead listen to an unknown poster on an obscure boxing web site who is 90 years removed from the era in question. I would strongly doubt the mindset of anyone who would do so.....wouldnt you? .

 

The question of how great Dempsey was, leaves some room for interpretation.

His status as one of the greatest finishers of all time, does not.

 

But it does. He never finished Harry Wills, Harry Greb, Gene Tunney the 3 best of his era.

So what if he finished. big clumsy oafs like rusty Out of shape Willard Fulton and firpo?

Many 185lb champions would have knocked out all three of those men


I would be far more impressed with dempseys finishing ability if he proved he could knock out master boxers and all time great fighters

 

Really?

What other 185lb champion has knocked out guys this size, at world level?

 

Teddy Hayes fell out big time with Dempsey too
it's not beyond the realms of possibility that this coloured his later comments on the Mauler.

 

But thats the point, its a loaded question? Was Gibbons better than Brennan P4P yes. Was Robinson better than Maxim P4P? Yes. But was Robinson better at LHW? No. Was Brennan better at HW? I think you can make a case he was. Or at the very least he was better suited to a fight against Dempsey than Gibbons and thats all that matters. Again, Miske well, that fight was meaningless. Make whatever you will of Dempsey dominating a Miske who was there for a payday. I dont give that win any weight at all and most others thankfully dont either. The only people who credit that win as anything other than a charity case are the ones who want to believe it means something and want to believe Miske was healthy for it. But lets say Miske was healthy. What does that even mean? Miske was never a world beater to begin with. He was another guy who consistently lost to the best fighters he faced. So even if you think he was healthy big deal? The guy had one meaningless fight in over year before facing Dempsey and prior to that had lost convincingly to Battling Levinsky. Are we supposed to forget all of that, pretend he was healthy, and pretend that he was a great fighter? That sounds like an awful lot of B.S. to try to build up that win as meaningful.


As for what Gibbons rated in 1924, big deal. He fought Dempsey in 1923, not 1924. Furthermore those ratings were literally devised by Tex Rickard, you know, Dempsey's very good friend and favorite promoter. What Gibbons was rated in 1924 by Dempsey's pet promoter doesnt matter. What matters is exactly what Gibbons had in 1923 to deserve a shot and thats very very little beyond looking like a less threatening proposition than Greb and Wills. Hell, Rickard was the one who devised the two eliminations between Greb and Gibbson and Wills and Norfolk in 1922. Do you think in 1922/23 Gibbons would have been rated as #3 behind Dempsey and Wills? I dont and if he was it would have only been because Greb was considered a MW/LHW and would have been ranked down there. When your own brother is criticizing you saying your march to the title was littered with tomatoe cans and setups its pretty damning.