I think people overstate the Dempsey Firpo fight

Of course you would.

Was it 25 of his 28 KO victims had losing records? Something like that.

 

Perfect!!!

 

During the course of his career, Firpo beat top 10 Contenders as follows (and i am sure i missed a few through lack of knowledge):

Bill Brennan, Homer Smith, Charlie Weinert, Erminio Spalla, Al Reich, Farmer Lodge

Taht is not a bad start, as good or better than most modern fighters who are contenders but dont win the title (see for example Sam Peter, Calvin Brock, Marius Wach)

I dont think his South American Championship can be completely disregarded. I know it is doubtful there was much competition (though we dont know for sure). It has to be on par with a modern Australian/New Zealand heavyweight championship and he was more dominant than say Joseph Parker was in his local area. I think that being an undefeated, clear and dominant champion of any area deserves some credibility.

This leaves us with his three biggest fights. He knocked down Dempsey, Went the distance in a no decision fight with Wills and is the only person to knock out Willard. That is three fights against 3 all time great/hall of fame fighters of varying levels. Firpo performed well and got decent results in each of those fights. I dont know if there are many people you could confidently back to finish with the same or better results against those three. In more recent times it would be like someone in the early 90s who stepped in before Douglas and knocked down Tyson when he was challenging for teh world title, who later on went the distance with Holyfield in a close but losing fight and who later knocked out George Foreman from the Foreman Briggs fight.
Another Analogy might be today Having knocked down and lost to Wlad, he would go the distance with Joshua and kO a comebacking vitali. A 70s version would drop (and lose to foreman), Go the distance with Frazier and KO the Ali who drew with Berbick.

It isnt on par with Louis, Ali and co but it is still pretty good and he was as good as most top contenders.

 

Here again, the context is sorely missing. The main narrative of that fight, was that he got annihilated in short order, not the flash knockdown.

Then we have, he lost to an aging Wills who had already been through countless wars, a pro for 14 years at least, who started to lose more consistently and retire a little while later.

Lastly, Willard in no way comparable to Foreman or Vitali, in both skill, eye test, and accomplishments/Pedigree. He's more comparable some of the worst lineal champions in history. He had one great fight against an aging ATG, with the obvious aide of tremendous motivation to get those results.

Trying to act like Firpo is a world beater isn't going to advance the conversation far. He simply wasn't, and it showed very clearly against the best he fought and the eye test. Willard is a little better, but again, doesn't have the credentials outside one obscure moment. With all that size/chin/powrr he surely could've done more. Shoot, he didn't even consider himself a fighter at heart.

 

Bill Brennan in his next to last fight, and his next was to be KO'd by a deathly ill Miske, was not a top ten contender at this time. He hadn't beaten a decent fighter since his most recent loss to Dempsey, which had been preceded by 4 losses to Greb.

Homer Smith had been beaten 22 times, 7 by KO, by the time Firpo decisioned him over 10. Are you really claiming he was one of the ten best in the division at this time?

Weinert was a 180 pounder who had been stopped 6 times before in 17 losses when Firpo faced him. In the previous 18 months, he went 5-5-1. This is Top 10? And Charlie came back a year later and won every round against Firpo.

The Erminio Spanna contests were post-Dempsey. If it meant anything to beat Spanna perhaps Firpo would have received another title shot, but it didn't.

Farmer Lodge was 13-16 going into his fight with Firpo, and again another fight AFTER the Dempsey title match. How does this qualify as a Top Ten anything?

Again, 21 or Firpo's 26 KO's were against LOSING fighters or DEBUTING fighters. That is the sand upon which Rickard's castle is built.

 

Dempsey was a highly aggressive fighter and he possessed a great chin. Therefore he could often attack without abandon - he got clipped early but recovered pretty fast and pretty much slaughtered the lumbering big man like a lion does an elephant.

This is the last fight to me where Dempsey still has “fresh” legs. Posessing speed, spring and pop. He kind of slowly chugs along in the two Tunney fights and the Sharkey bout.

 

Consider this snipet from Lawrence Perry, Consolidated Press in 1923, regarding the Willard fight and Rickard's effect.

"Here in tiers extending out into the night so far that they were lost in a blur of light and shadows, sat a host numbering more than a hundred thousand, a tribute to the showman's genius of Tex Rickard, who built Luis Firpo up for this occasion from a little-known third-rater."

 

Okay, let us compare to a current top contender say, Joseph Parker.

Parker had good wins over Meehan, Haumono. This made him pretty much the best fighter in Australasia. I know he didnt fight Lucas Brown and a couple of others but i think you would have to consider that he was the best in the area after these two wins, and this about on par with The South American Championship. Meehan used to be somewhat close to a top 10 fighter but he was well past his best.

Parker then beat 4 guys (using boxrec ranks) in Dimitrenko 15, Ruiz Jr 5, Cojanu 118, Hughie Fury 21.

Firpo beat Bill Brennan, who since losing his world title shot to Dempsey won 17 out of 19 fights with one No Decision and one loss on points admitteldly his last fight. I think he would have sat comfortably above dimitrenkos 15 if Boxrec ratings existed back then.

He then beat Jack McAulliffe the second, who was unbeaten after 12 fights, including a win over the decent Floyd Johnson. He then beat the Jess Willard, who was at one stage considered the unbeatable World champion. This surely put him around 21 in the world and on par with the Hughie Fury win.

Willard was on the comeback trail, but he had already beaten a decent contender in Floyd Johnson. Realistically, you would have to consider him roughly on par with Ruiz Jr, at worst. It think a top 5 ranking would not be unrealistic for Jess, under the boxrec system.

That leaves Charlie Wienert who had just won 3 in a row against solid contenders, after losing to Gene Tunney. He has to be roughly on par with Hughie Furie and arguably in the top 20 for the time. So just in case you dont rank Mcauliffe II, you can substitute Weinart.

That leaves Homer Smith, who was big hitting and had his moments, but was certainly no world beater. Still, i dont see how he could be ranked realistically any worse than say the 118 that Cojanu ranks.

I think that Joseph Parker is a pretty good challenger for the Joshua. Certainly not the worst challenger in history. I am not disagreeing that Firpo was not a product of the text Rickard publicity machine. But his pre Dempsey record is probably better than Parker's! How then can he not be seen as a pretty decent challenger. His record against all time greats is not the worst either. He was beaten by Dempsey and Wills but he did have his moments. There are a lot of guys out there with worst records against all time great fighters.

 

I agree that it was an annhilation. Still, he did catch Dempsey clean with one shot and it was good enough to knock him out of the ring. If you are going to get Kod in the second, that was as good away as any to do it. Certainly it showed that he had top notch power if nothing else.

Come on this unfair.

2 years earlier Wills was having a massive year by beating the likes of Langford, Tate, Gunboat Smith, Clarke.

In this two year period, wills was freshening up in anticipation of a shot at Dempsey, but he still beat Thompson, Homer Smith, Jack Thompson and Bartley Madden.

Most would consider him the best fighter in the world and the man that Dempsey should have defended against.

Willard and Vitali are very similar on the eye test, although Jess keeps his front hand a lot higher and he doesnt go for the crutch grab after every shot. Foreman looks a lot to hit harder but slower than Willard on tape and does look a lot better to me. Still, there are no guarantees this is a case. Thankfully, Foreman has never caused anywhere near the damage Willard has caused in the ring. These three fighters were all the best fighter in the world for a short period (although in Foreman's case he sort of proved it twice). And i will concede that each had slightly longer periods as champion. Still they are not poles appart, like it seems.

I am not saying Firpo was a world beater. Just that he is nowhere near as bad as others are making out.

 

I don't mean to be pedantic, but lions most definitely do not prey on (adult) elephants. In fact one adult elephant will very easily see off upwards of half-a-dozen lions. So will Hippos.
Nothing f*cks with pachyderms, aside from humans.

 

But that is just the point, some people are questioning Firpo's legitimacy as a contender.

By doing so they are effectively discussing the matter in that vacuum that you speak of.

If Shannon Briggs somehow beat Joseph Parker, then he would become a legitimate contender, as would the person who then beat him.

 

That is a debatable point, but not wishing to get drawn into thread creep!

 

Let's look at some more of what contemporaries thought...

"To me... the all-important question, the reason that brought so many of us here tonight, was simply this: 'Has a worthy challenger for the Dempsey title come into being?' Personally I doubt if such is the case." - Harry B. Smith SF Chronicle

Or how about Firpo's own trainer...
"If Luis Angel Firpo, South American conqueror of Jess Willard, enters a ring with Jack Dempsey, world heavyweight champion, in less than four months he will be stepping into a 'slaugher-house', Jimmie de Forrest, trainer of the Argentine contender declared Saturday night... declared his protegee was not yet a polished enough fighter."

 

Well, to be thorough, that really doesn't sound to me like the kind of opinion a trainer is likely to publicly volunteer unless he's trying to bait a prospective opponent into a (false?) sense of security and secure a match.
Just my speculation...

 

That quote was made in De Forrest's attempt to delay the fight another year or two.