That's fine. I'm just sick and tired of posters blameing Dempsey for the fight not going through. Wasn't his fault. As we also all know most of Jacks sparring partners were good-big world class black fighters. I'm just so tired of readin this ****.
Even if it's not his fault, the fact remains he didn't prove himself the best. What was his excuse for ducking Greb anyway? Arcel was only 20 when Wills and Dempsey were prime, I'm not holding too much weight on his analysis as a 20yo, when he was unlikely to have seen much of either or have a wealth of knowledge at that time
Yeah, the "race"-based attacks on Jack Dempsey has been a bit of an embarrassment to this forum, in my opinion. People have even taken it to his post-career, recklessly claiming he never managed or promoted black fighters, or was habitually biased towards white fighters when refereeing 'mixed' bouts. The myth that he had a problem with blacks - despite no evidence, and tons to the contrary - has been born, unfortunately. It's not just on this forum either.
Demspey signed to fight Wills 7 times. He also signed for Joe Jeanette, Sam McVey, Peter Jackson and any future fighter who might be named Larry Holmes.
your avatar I think they are two seperate questions, really. I don't think whether or not Dempsey is to blame is related to the question as to whether or not he was clearly the best of his era. But I understand your fatigue.
In his fighting prime...Dempsey was a killer...met him just before his restaurant closed in...I think...1974...nice man...I was in awe...
He was training world champion fighters a couple of years later. I'm guessing he'd seen hundreds of fighters by the time Dempsey was champion. And he'd first seen Dempsey in 1916, or earlier. So he knew his subject. Better than we can ever know it.
IMO, Dempsey as a racist is ridiculous. Whether or not Dempsey ducked Wills is a legitimate question, all be it one that has sickened most of us.
Experts have, were and will continue to be wrong over and over again. I would bet there are pro gamblers right now better at picking winners than Freddie Roach. But none of that matters. If God himself picked Dempsey to beat Wills 9/10 it wouldn't heal that breach.
No different than the people that talk up Wills on here like he was the best ever. It goes both ways.
I agree. Fight results between world-class fighters cannot be predicted with much degree of certainty or even success ... (assuming the fights are on the level) .... whatever the credentials of the expert. But I disagree with powerpuncher's attempt to minimize the experience or credentials of a young Ray Arcel, or 20-year-olds in general.
Ahh guessing, that great source of facts. We don't know how much teenage Arcel had seen of either fighter or how much boxing knowledge or analytical knowledge he had at that time, simply put he was a kid at the time and who knows may have been a Dempsey fan himself The fact remains Wills was at least a class if not 2 classes above anyone Dempsey beat. Dempsey was made to look very impressive by beating weaker fighters other fighters also dominated. This can skew even an informed opinion
Sam Langford, when asked how Harry Wills (whom he fought 18 times in his career) would do against Jack Dempsey, said in the June 5, 1922, Atlanta Constitution "Well if he ever fights Dempsey my money will be on the present champion. Dempsey is the greatest fighter I have ever seen.
