Back to the original topic, If you look at Dempsey's reign, it realistically stopped in 1924 with the defeat of Firpo. So, i would be interested to see how every one sees the top 10 which top 10 opponents each of the top 10 challengers had beaten at that particular point in time. I havent too much time, so i will put some of the contenders in at this point in a rough order, and see whether or not the order can be changed or added to and a consensus achieved. 1. Harry Wills - Had just beaten Homer Smith and Thompson and Had triumphed earlier over Langford and Norfolk. Seems a clear no 1. 2 Gene Tunney - American Light heavy Champ - Just beat Weinert, Greb, and about to embark on a heavyweight tilt. 3. Harry Greb - Middleweight Champ - Coming off wins over Loughlin (lost 1), beat Gibbons, Had beaten homer smith (like Wills), ND with Norfolk, but lost to Tunney twice. 4. Mike McTigue - ND with Loughran and beat Battling Siki. No serious heavyweight scalps, but you would have to think some how the World light heavyweight champion deserves a ranking higher than the Middleweight champ and/or the American light heavyweight champion, wouldnt you? 5. Luis Firpo - Had beaten Brennan, Willard, Knocked down Dempsey and about to ND (losing) Wills, Weinert. 6. On a good KO streak but against lesser lights. Went an ND with Bartley Madden, Just went the distance with Dempsey, Had just lost on fouls to Miske. Had Lost to Greb, but did have a very close evenly split series. You wouldnt think he could rate too far from Greb. 7. Kid Norfolk - Had beaten Tate, and ND Greb. ABout to beat greb on fouls but also lost decisively to Wills and about to lose to Lawson and lose decisively to Gibbons before the end of the year. 8. Billy Miske - Had just retired but really did have some excellent wins on his record, following the Dempsey lost (I presume people raise fixed fights, but technically, Miske seems to have more than fought his way back to contention with wins over Brennan, gibbons, fulton, roper and Meehan. I will try to add to this and maybe switch the order when i get time.
Not really. They knew then just like we do today who the most worthy and credible opponents were in spite of what a particular title is supposed to signify. That not to take anything from McTigue, jmo.
Don't deny Miske was dying from a disease. Why do you think the odds changed so drastically when Dempsey defended his title against Miske? Miske was a walking dead man by the time he fought Dempsey for the title.
Sonny with all due respect, U are mistating the actual facts... After Dempsey kod Billy Miske in the 3rd rd ,Sept,1920, the "walking dead" Billy Miske, went on a tear, WINNING 20 out of his last 22 bouts. whipping Bill Brennan [ko],Tommy Gibbons D, Fred Fulton [1rd ko],Jack Renault, Charley Weinert,flattening the rotund toughie, Willie Meehan in the 1st round. Billy Miske was never in better form in this 3 year run, as his Bright Disease was in remission. So, S how would this "walking dead" fighter accumulate such a powerful run as Miske did for 3 years were he a dying figure as you described ? Facts are facts , and detractors of Jack Dempsey,try so darn hard to diminish whatever Dempsey did in his career, and this is why I continue to try to defend the Manassa Mauler in spite of his vocal critics... I have said this before that either Jack Dempsey was as great as historians of his time declared him ,or there was mass dementia rampant in those times. I prefer the former...Cheers...
With all due respect to you Burt, this is the type of cheer leading that leads many of Dempsey's detractors to ask questions and look into things for themselves. You describe Meehan as a "rotund toughie" but leave out that he was on a massive losing streak. Or that Brennen came into their fight 1923 in terrible shape. Possibly because he knew Miske was dying and underestimated him. While Miske did have a decent run, but there is no doubt the disease had been taking a toll on his body for awhile as he died just 2 months after the 2nd Brennan fight.
J,To state that a "walking dead" fighter billy Miske,won 20 out of 22 fights against whoever his opponents were is Cheer leading for Jack Dempsey is ABSURD. I POSTED Billy Miske's DARN record in his fights IMMEDIATELY after his ko at the hand of the ABSOLUTE prime Jack Dempsey in 1920,is stating a FACT that YOU DON'T want to accept. Ok so bill Brennan was fat ,what about Fred Fulton, what about Charley Weinert, what about Jack Renault, what about the great Tommy Gibbons, and YES Jab ,Willie Meehan was a rotund, toughie,and the "dead man" Billy Miske kod him in the very first round. And Miske beat FOURTEEN other,fighters in this 3 year streak he had. I was RESPONDING to a POSTER who STATED a FALSEHOOD, that after The Jack Dempsey of the Willard fight,who fought Miske 1 year later and kod Billy in 3 rounds,was because it wasn't Dempsey's prime lethal fists that kod Miske, but because Billy Miske was a "WALKING DEAD MAN",as SL so mistakenly put it. Well ,I will defend the TRUTH even if it does not fit your revisionist AGENDA. A WALKING DEAD MAN AS you imply does not win 20 of 22 bouts in a 3 year period as MISKE did....But U and others with your agenda laud Ali's ko of a shot Cleveland Williams[with a bullet still in his body],and way on the downside,as a great feat, but agree that a Billy Miske was a "WALKING DEAD MAN" when Dempsey kod him in 1920, though Miske beat TWENTY out of TWENTY TWO fighters after the ko by Dempsey... And yes J, if defending Jack Dempsey by revisionists as U,is called cheer leading, I will wear that badge proudly, for I'm with the vast majority of oldtime greats as Sam Langford, Nat Fleischer, Mickey Walker, Jack Sharkey, Ray Arcel, Archie Moore, Damon Runyon,Grantland Rice,Bill Gallo, and MAX SCHMELING, who said Dempsey was in a special category as a heavyweight. Can they all be wrong and U in your infinite boxing wisdom right.? I think not...Good day....
I've never said Dempsey wasn't in a special category at heavyweight as I rate him 11th all time. But you like a few other like to exaggerate and use colorful descriptions to describe certain things that would benefit Dempsey's legacy and they just aren't true. Im sorry if this bothers you as I am truly not trying to disrespect you. I am a little disappointed you would lower yourself to make things up about me (see the bold) that just aren't true though. For that you should be ashamed of yourself. :nono By the way....congrats on hitting 4000 posts.
Probably Miske could no longer take it in the body. Still, he must have been a good boxer to beat some of those men - they weren't exactly bums. Harry Wills wasn't fighting men much better, was he ?
Sonny, check out this website - this may actually teach you something more than that one little snippet you read in a magazine when you were 12 about the Bright's thing http://www.billymiske.com/ that goes for anyone else views Miske as a meaningless footnote aswell
OK guys, I defer to you all. Dempsey was a stiff, Billy Miske was somehoiw beating 20 out of his last 22 opponents, Billys opponents were all terminal cases. Whatever great things I have read about and HEARD about Jack Dempsey , was as Shakespeare wrote,"a tale spoken by an idiot",and I most now purge myself from the notion that Jack Dempsey was ever worthy of my admiration ! And oh yes, all the great writers and boxing experts who I had read,who spoke so highly of him, were somehow less knowledgeable than today's gurus, eighty years later...Sam Langford, Mickey Walker, Max Schmeling, Damon Runyon, Nat Fleischer, Ray Arcel, Jack Sharkey, Gene Tunney, Lou Stillman, Grantland Rice, Max Schmeling, SHAME on you for deceiving me,lo these many years....I will now repent!!
:hi: Thanks J...If as U say I use "colorful descriptions ",I speak from the heart and with passion J. I fervently believe that today on ESB there is an effort to discredit the legacy of Jack Dempsey,who is my boyhood hero alongst Harry Greb and Joe Louis. He might not have been the greatest heavyweight that ever lived, but he was the roughest and toughest of them all. Whatever his cotemporaries said about him ,is meaningless to some posters of today, and that get's my ire up. Cheers J...:hi:
