Is it weird that I don't see anything special in Jack Dempsey?

Just on the Darcy fight,

good points by Klompton2

I think it ridiculous that the Dempsey-Darcy fight and the Louis-Davis fight are suddenly viewed generations later as legitimate title defenses when folks like Nat Fleischer did not view them that way at the time.

Sure there might have been obscure fights in the boondocks that went under the radar, but not fights with Dempsey and Louis when they were champions.

I guess it shows that common sense is no longer in use as a standard.

 

...

 

You got banned for making this thread?

 

Complete biased baloney!

 

I made a thread asking Klompton to tell me who would win vs. Marciano, Tyson, Saad, Louis, Ali, Liston, Moore, Charles, etc. vs Greb, came back 3 days later due to work schedule {not everyone spends all their time or every day or week doing these forums} and the thread was gone. Klompton said he didn't ask for it gone, yet he will not answer me on this thread. i think the forum protects certain posters in a subjective way just like Klompton"s book. Answer the question Klompton, maybe AGAIN?, so when I come back on I can read it. Others could read it and comment on what they feel about Greb vs. this group also. And yeah, I have been in journalism for 30. Anyone can color a book to show their point of view, if they pick and choose from articles on a snbject. like I said, you whole view of everyone through the last 100 yrs being in kahoots to slander and vilify Greb and raise up Dempsey and Tunney is ludicrous at best. PLEASE ANSWER MY QUESTION and leave it on here so EVERYONE can read what you think vs. other great fighters. You paint Dempsey and Tunney as cowards and anyone against yr boy as biased New York writers or the same as per the 1950 poll. :|Now I have to travel for work, so I probably won"t have time to read your answer until Tues, or Wed.. Lets see if you answer the question in full vs. each fighter listed, or if you fishtail and either come up w/ an excuse not to answer or get the thread or my question here deleted. Maybe I'll be banned. Whichever, I will give you credit when I read your answer. credi

 

Me too. I just want to read what Klompton thinks vs. the guys I mentioned in detail. And not have either my question or his answer disappear. I think MANY would be interested in a detailed answer. And add Joe Frazier to the list. And also Klompton, why didn"t Greb take on Langford? Evereyone else seemed to. You discredit Dempsey for not, why not Greb?

 

dempsey was far from ordinary. ive spoken to guys who actually seen him workout ,ex fighters and trainers, as well as an ex sparring partner and they all said he was dynomite and they werent kidding around . nearly all who got in the ring with himthought the same thing . some of these posters who just sit by a computer all day, need a hobby

 

I don't think Klompton is protected, he has been banned himself.

 

I'd say posting on here is their hobby.

 

At first, there are people who says that Sugar Ray Robinson ducked Charley Burley. Then there is someone who implies that Harry Greb ducked Sam Langford, which is a new one to me.

- Chuck Johnston

 

Let me repeat since you cant be asked to pay attention and seem to disappear every time I answer you:

If youve worked in journalism for 30 years it should be easy for you to go find the facts and sources to illustrate that Im not objective when I criticise Dempsey and Tunney. Do it. You say you have my book then you also have a comprehensive list of my sources, go through it and point by point illustrate where I was too hard on these guys? No? I didnt think so. You cant. Its as simple as that. I didnt look at these guys through rose colored glasses or the veil of hero worship. In fact objectivity is exactly how I approached. As you will notice, if you indeed read my book, my interest in Greb grew out of my love for Dempsey. It was only through researching these time that I realized Dempsey wasnt all he was cracked up to be and neither was Tunney. I never started the book with the idea that I would write a love letter to Greb (and I dont think I did) and that I would bash Tunney and Dempsey. Indeed I dont think I did that either. I could have been much harder on them than I was but instead I chose to state the facts, cite my sources, and let the reader draw their own conclusions. Thats what an objective observer does. Did they not tell you that in your journalism courses? Its not my fault if certain readers read those facts and conclude that Im being hard on these guys for actually stating. I guess I should have just done like so many others and NOT WRITTEN about what was actually going on. Would that have suited your preconceived notion of these guys? Maybe I should have just continued the myth that Greb was a wild drunk who ****ed his way through boxing, never trained, and couldnt be bothered with the rules. I chose to write about the truth and small minority of people who pathetically cling to the party line cant be bothered to accept it, never mind to actually go through the citations and read what was being written on the ground at the time. God forbid you actually learn something... but Im biased.

As for your post I answered it. I didnt have them get rid of it or edit you out. Its not my fault it got deleted for some reason and its not my fault that it took you half a week to get back here and see it before they did. Saying I was somehow behind it getting deleted makes you sound like a ****ing conspiracy theory nutcase. You think Im scared to answer questions from SOME GUY on the internet who HAS BEEN IN JOURNALISM FOR OVER 30 YEARS. Please. Anytime anyone has questioned anything in my book or my research Ive always come back with a plethora of sources to support my argument. So far you have come back with "your biased". Ive already answered your question, Ill answer it again when you come back here and illustrate how my book was biased and do so with actual quotes and evidence that refutes it. Pardon me if I get comfortable for a long wait mr. journalist...

As per your last sentence: When did I ever say Greb would beat Dempsey? Show me. I never said it. The problem with fanboys like you is that you want to justify Dempsey's cowardice by saying "he would have beaten this guy so he why should he fight him" "he would have beaten that guy so why should he fight him" Bull****. Boxing is fought in the ring not in the heroworship clouded mind of some nobody 90 years later. It doesnt matter to me one iota if YOU think Dempsey would have knocked out Greb and Wills in the same night in the first round with his first punch. It doesnt matter to me if EVERYONE thought that. What matters is that those guys where his most qualified and most dangerous challengers and he always found a way to avoid them. You can blame that on Rickard. You can blame that on Kearns. You can blame it on everyone but Dempsey. There is blame to go around I admit. BUT whether Dempsey fanboys want to hear it or not Dempsey was ACTIVELY involved in and benefiting from avoiding those guys as well. Simple as that and it hurts his legacy. So I say again: When someone comes on this board and says they see nothing special about Dempsey in reference to the extent footage of him I can easily understand since he is seen fighting: A near 40 year old overweight, out of shape fighter who hadnt been in the ring in 3 years and wasnt terribly interested in fighting, A dying man who Dempsey had beaten twice already and who was coming off a year layoff (barring a meaningless quick KO return bout) and who was described by some as sickly looking and on occasion unable to train for the match, a guy that he had already knocked out once but who this time he struggled with mightily, was rocked, had his ear nearly knocked off his head by, and against who he looked decidedly ordinary, a smaller fighter who had lost (often by KO) to the best fighters he had faced who were much smaller than Dempsey yet he still managed to badly wobble Dempsey, a tepid safety first fighter who Dempsey could do little with whose only qualification for getting a Dempsey fight was to lose his title eliminator, a lumbering oaf of a fighter who was so bad that ancient Jack Johnson totally embarrassed him in a public sparring session yet still managed to drop Dempsey three times, knock him out of the ring and by Dempsey's own peoples admission came within a whisker of winning the title, two dominant one sided losses to Tunney, and a boxing lesson by Sharkey only pulled out of the fire by numerous fouls and a cheap shot (and Ive always said it was Sharkey's fault for not defending himself but anyone who tried to ignore that Dempsey played billiards with Sharkey's nuts is the one who isnt being objective).


So I'll be waiting for you to come back here and show how I twisted the facts. Like I said, itll be a long wait.

 

When was Greb supposed to fight Langford? What promoter ever offered to make that fight and Greb turned it down? You dont seem to understand how this sport works. If you can show me where Greb ever ducked Langford I'll happily accept it. Im waiting. Its awfully desperate to pick a name out of a hat that Greb didnt face and then pretend he ducked him based on absolutely NO EVIDENCE. Promoters make fights not boxers and there is usually some interest in those fights being made before a promoter sees dollar signs and makes the fight. I cant recall a single discussion ever being anywhere during his lifetime of seriously trying to match Greb and Langford. But maybe using your 30 years of journalistic super powers you can bring to light this new evidence of Greb ducking Langford...