Is Jack Dempsey the most overrated fighter of all time

Agreed they were going to keep getting Wills to fight until he lost an eliminator and he finally did as you said but he gave them an excuse when he stepped aside from Tunney. I also agree that Tunney had no intention of fighting Wills this is well documented, so it worked in their favour when Wills stepped aside. "Admitted under oath during a trial" god bless the American justice system free all the inmates on death row who testified under oath they didn't do it, cause sources don't mean Jack when you have an oath. Come on read that paragraph back again to yourself.

Yes Wills had his guarantee number 1 fight in New York, but the ####### wouldn't give the green light on the fight.
Wills was in constant battles and litigations trying to get the fight honoured, while Dempsey and co were living it up having million dollar gates and Greb was fluffing up pillows with his fists, (last part is a joke).

First part is arrogant and childish.

2nd part shows you are not objective with your posts. So none of these boxers stood a chance against Wills, none at all, not one?

Where did you get this as a racial issue from? I'll show a little arrogance, I think you should take out your dictionary and look up the word prejudice and look at the context I put it in.
I agree Greb was a more accomplished boxer and better than all of Dempsey's title defences but not for taking on Dempsey and the public didn't see it that way either.

Dempsey fought against a sick Miske knowingly not knowing he was dying and they were good friends and part of this defence was a favour, Miske was still a top contender and went on a good run after.
Carpentier was the light heavy champion, he was Europe's num 1 heavyweight and the IBU were threatening to strip Dempsey of recognition as heavyweight champion if he didn't fight Carpentier.
Gibbons was still a top contender.
Firpo was head hunted for a war and a hype job but had a few decent wins before the title shot.
Brennan was a top contender and one of the most respected boxers of that time.

You seem very knowledgeable but it is a pity that you have proven you are not objective in any of your research, no cross examinations and all your opinions everything is cherry picked to find Jack Dempsey in a negative view, look back on all your posts you are either a good Troll or just completely bias against Dempsey. When you view something that one sided it becomes no more than propaganda.

 

No, you said Greb was considered a potential opponent for Dempsey for a very short time. This isnt true, as pointed out.

Oh, I see who this is. Youve discovered that youve been ignored by me so youve decided to create an alt to engage with me. As has been done to death, its you who are looking at those results through a modern lense. Since newspaper decisions were the rule not the exception back then they were what the sport revolved around. As you well, know because youve been educated by me on this in the past but refuse to accept because you are a child of the 21st century, contenders were named based on the results newspaper decisions, title fights were made based on the results of newspaper decisions, fighters standing increased or decreased based on the results of newspaper decisions. So the idea that they were meaningless, ignored, and nothing more than glorified exhibitions because legally no official decision was rendered is completely asinine and shows an utter lack of understanding of the era. Your belief that only official decisions and knockouts moved the needle forward or back is completely at odds with the facts. But this has been done to death.

Im not sure which three of the 19 fighters you mentioned you think Greb lost to officially? You named: Bill Brennan, Tommy Gibbons, Jack Johnson, Fred Fulton, Frank Moran, Kid Norfolk, Jim Maloney, Harry Wills, Carl Morris, Young Stribling, Ed Smith, Jack Renault, Jack Delaney, Battling Levinsky, George Carpentier, Billy Miske, Jim Coffey, Bob Roper, Bartley Madden. Since you reject the results of ND bouts Greb only lost to Kid Norfolk officially of anyone on this list and that was a highly controversial DQ loss. As for ND results its true Greb lost to Gibbons in 1915 and 1920 but he also came back and defeated Gibbons and 1920 and won a lopsided dominant official decision in 1922 in an eliminator only to have Gibbons get a title shot the following year. Who else on your list did Greb lose to either officially or unofficially.

No, they were scheduled to fight in 1920 and Moran took a warmup against Bob Martin. Martin kicked the **** out of Moran which killed the Greb fight. When Martin was approached to fight Greb instead of Moran Martins manager publicly stated Martin wasnt ready for Greb. So draw your own conclusions about what that says about Moran and more importantly Greb's standing as contender.

This makes no sense. Firpo wanted nothing to do with Greb. Period. Thats a matter of record. He was offered the fight by Newark promoters and refused trying instead to see if they would accept as an opponent a bum who had lost a fight on one of Firpo's undercards. That shows how serious Firpo was about fighting Greb whereas Greb had handbills printed up calling out Firpo he was so confident of beating the slow clumsy ox. Interviewed just a couple of months prior to the Dempsey fight Firpo was very open that he felt he needed another year to be ready for Dempsey and that he wished Dempsey would go ahead and fight Wills first. Those two points arent mutually exclusive.

Dont put words in my mouth. I never ignored what the will of the people was. I said the polls you quoted didnt have **** to do with who got a title shot. They didnt. If they did Wills would have gotten a title shot because Wills dominated those polls. I explained to you exactly how Tommy Gibbons got his title shot and it had absolutely nothing to do with Polls.

Here, again, you have no idea what you are talking about. Wills was already considered the top contender for Dempsey before this non-contract was signed. He had been considered the top contender for a minimum of two priors to this. He was RECOGNIZED as the top contender by the NYSAC by virtue of their accepting his challenge which was sealed by a certified check. This was the official practice with the NYSAC at the time. Wills threat was exactly why that charade of a contract was signed. It was signed to give Dempsey breathing room. To make it look like he was serious about fighting Wills when indeed he wasnt. It was signed to push the NYSAC off his back. But dont listen to me, take the words of the man himself: "On July 11, a contract was signed with a clause stating the date be 'Set within 60 days after a reliable promoter undertook to stage the bout.' This phrasing, which was Doc's doing, enabled him to get me out of the contract." -Jack Dempsey Page 140 of Dempsey by Jack Dempsey with Barbara Piatelli Dempsey. Not enough? Here is what Fleischer, who covered the events for his newspaper at the time, had to say about it in his book the Jack Dempsey, The Idol of Fistiana: "On July 11, a contract was signed with the stipulation that the date for the fight be set within sixty days after a reliable promoter undertook to stage the bout and it was this shrewd wording of the contract, that left the loophole through which Dempsey wriggled out of the fight." Harry Burchell of the NYSAC put it bluntly the day the agreement was signed: "The agreement signed yesterday means practically nothing." So no, signing this didnt put pressure on Dempsey. It relieved the pressure that was already there and allowed him to kick the can down the road by giving the appearance that he was negotiating in good faith which he wasnt.

So its your contention that what happens in the ring is and was less important than opinion polls? Interesting perspective.

 

The agreement you allude to but leave vague was the agreement that Fulton stated he and Dempsey had whereby they would go easy on each other in their 1918 fight, have a competitive match, and then have a rematch only for Fulton to be double crossed and knocked out early. If you believe this agreement then you believe what he says about Dempsey which means their fight was essentially fixed. However, it matters not what Fulton said, what matters is the result of his fight with Wills. Wills knocked him out easily in a fight billed as an eliminator that Dempsey was present at and had agreed to meet the winner. Immediately following the match Dempsey signed to fight Billy Miske. It doesnt matter what Miske did AFTER Dempsey fought him. The fact was that when Dempsey chose to fight Miske Miske had won one of his previous five fights. That one fight he had won was against a complete nobody after he had spent a year in sick bed, retiring from the sport for a serious illness that the public was well aware of. His last serious fight was a one sided loss to Battling Levinsky for the LHW championship the day before Dempsey won the title. Miske didnt deserve to be anywhere near a title fight and nothing he did AFTER justifies the fact that he got that title shot. It was a gimme no doubt and Dempsey admitted numerous times after the fact that he knew Miske was dying. Miske had Brights disease which was an incurable Kidney disease. It was diagnosed in 1919. In 1919 a diagnosis of Brights disease was a death sentence. Period. Apologize all you want for Dempsey defending against a dying man after the title sat idle for a year but it set a pattern for Dempsey always taking the path of least resistance and giving Wills a wide berth.

Its not speculation and you can refer to Dempsey's own words posted above on that.

 

ABSOLUTE PERFECT ANALYSIS OF NINCOMPOOPTON 'S POSTS!!!!!! BRAVO!!!!!

 

This content is protected

 

You are arguing out of both sides of your mouth. You cant acknowledge that Wills was being thrown elimination after elimination in order to get him eliminated, not advance his status and then fault him for finally saying no, particularly in light of the fact that it was later admitted that Tunney had no intention of ever fighting Wills and only stated he did for publicity.

"I agree, but but but..." Listen to yourself.

This is nonsense thats been repeated ad naseum by Dempsey apologists without understanding the context or circumstances of one event that took place and extrapolating that to cover a period of years.

The first part demanded arrogance when you so confidently submit that Wills mysteriously stepped aside, maybe because he was threatened or paid off, when in fact he never stepped aside. This is a huge huge moment in Dempsey's career which literally altered the course of his championship and you seem oblivious to it.

Lets break it down and you can tell me where you think Im wrong:
Miske, A sick dying blown up light heavyweight who had won just one out of his last 5 fights. Struggled with Bill Brennan, couldnt beat Greb, lost one sided decisions to Kid Norfolk, lost one sided decision to Levinsky, went the distance with Weinert several times. Even after his loss to Dempsey this run you think was so impressive had only three notable results all of which were controversial: A win over Brennan thought to be a fix, a win over Gibbons by DQ which was highly controversial after losing every round, and KO over a shot Fulton which was thought to be a fix. No, I dont see Wills losing to any version of Miske, certainly not the version that Dempsey stopped.
Carpentier, please, a light heavyweight famous more for being famous than for his accomplishments in the ring. If Wills had been Euro trash I would give Carpentier a shot. Otherwise no. Knocked out by Papke, knocked out by Dixie Kid, knocked out by Klaus, knocked out by Siki, knocked out by Dempsey. You really want to argue hes beating Wills?
Brennan, Brennan's chief sparring partner for Dempsey in 1920 was Kid Norfolk. People who watched him struggle with Norfolk in sparring told him publicly to stay well away from Wills. Which he did. Look at Brennan's record from the time he lost to Dempsey in 1918 to the time he got his title shot. The best names on his record were Greb, Miske, Roper, and Madden. He had 9 fights against those guys and managed to win just one. If you want you can improve that a hair by adding a completely shot Willie Meehan to the list to give him two victories in 10.
Gibbons, Gibbons had one of the most padded records of any heavyweight and even his brother Mike admitted this. He avoided black fighters like the plague, namely Kid Norfolk who promoters had been interested in matching him with since 1917. This wasnt even a secret, it was openly discussed then and Tunney even mentions it in his book stating that Gibbons feared Norfolk, which was the prevailing wisdom at the time. If Gibbons feared Norfolk Im supposed to believe that hes going to beat Wills. Nevermind that Wills was all wrong for Gibbons. Wills could box as well as infight. Gibbons, fighting the St. Paul style that his brother pioneered needed to have just the right distance for his counters. How does he do that against a technically proficient, strong heavyweight with a ten inch reach advantage and two inches in height who can also break you in half on the inside? Gibbons was almost useless against Dempsey on the inside and hes suddenly going to either outbox Wills from the outside or beat him on the inside? No.
Firpo. Wills dominated Firpo when they met and that was after Wills had surgery to repair badly damaged bones in his hand. Had they met in 1922 or 1923 Firpo would have gotten a much worse beating.
Tunney. Tunney, as has been discussed, wouldnt go anywhere near Wills or any other black fighter for that matter. He was the best of the bunch but he wasnt a great puncher, wasnt as big or as strong as Wills. I dont think he boxed any better than Wills and given his conservative style and reliance on the jab he would have had problems with Wills reach. So, no, I dont see any of those guys beating Wills and I dont think illustrates a lack of objectivity.

The racial issue comes from the fact that it is constantly bandied about that Dempsey was only avoiding Wills on racial grounds because racism of the day, not Dempsey's, prevented such a match. But thats not true because invariably these eliminators that were set up for Dempsey were designed to eliminate his stiffest competition and when they werent he just ducked them. If the public didnt Greb as a legitimate challenger to Dempsey why was he being approached by promoters in 1918, 1919, 1920, 1922, 1923, and 1925 for matches with Dempsey. Promoters arent in the business of making matches they think the public wont buy. Your argument holds zero water because the proof is in the offers made by men that banked on them. Its the same asinine argument that says "no promoter would stage Dempsey-Wills" when in reality you can find men constantly wanting to put up money for a Dempsey-Wills fight only to be ignored by Kearns and Dempsey. Just because Dempsey self servingly says something doesnt make it gospel.

Again, Dempsey has stated numerous times that he knew Miske was dying. Miske approached him, told him he needed the money, and Dempsey agreed to the fight. That doesnt excuse the fact that he ducked Wills to help his dying friend out. Furthermore, as stated above, it doesnt matter what Miske did AFTER. What he did AFTER has no bearing on why he got a title shot. He didnt deserve to get a shot at the title. He hadnt done **** at HW to deserve a title shot and hadnt done anything recently worth even getting considered for one much less actually getting one.

The IBU had zero power and zero pull. The United States controlled boxing. Nobody gave two shits what the IBU did. Carpentier got his shot because it was big money. Not because he won a fixed fight against Levinsky to get a title that would legitimize his shot. Not because he had bowled over a litany of European stiffs. And definitely not because of anything the IBU proposed. Carpentier got that shot because of $$$. It doesnt change the fact that it was a mismatch. It was mismatch going in and it was a mismatch in point of fact. The only thing that allowed Carpentier to sell that fight on his celebrity was the lack of mass media at the time. Had the public been able to pop in a DVD and watch him get knocked out by Papke, brutalized by Klaus, bounced off the canvas like a yoyo by ancient glass jawed welterweight Willie Lewis, etc the fight would have never been allowed.

He was but he wasnt THE top contender. He was no closer than #3 at best and maybe not even that high.

In short he was a hype job created by Rickard specifically to be slaughtered by Dempsey. Which is exactly what he was.

Show me who Brennan beat between 1918 and 1920 to get his title shot. Every name anywhere near contender status he fought he lost or draw with i.e. he failed to beat them.

 

I, I, I, almost can't read this brutal beatdown by Mr slaps ...like a Volkswagen slammed by an 18 wheeler....As Goldman used to say of marciano, "devastatin"!

 

LOLOLOLOLOLOL!!!!!

 

Avoided Harry Greg. Enough to put grave doubts on his greatness.

 

No, no he isn't. Not by a long shot. To many to name who are overrated.

 

Of course it`s a bad point for Dempsey, that he had not fought against black fighters, cause of this color bar crap. It would be just interesting to know how competetive was his time, in spite of that. I heard that boxing was far more popular at that time. It was almost as popular or even as popular as Baseball in the USA. Maybe there were hanging many more boxing prospects around in the 20s, than in the 60s, 70s, 80s and so on. But I really don´t know it. I am just a bit critical about boxrec ratings fot the very old fighters. Even though it`s not just a question about the sheer number of boxers, it`s also import to know how organised was the sport back in those days.

 

Imo Jack Johnson is the most overrated fighter ever, but Dempsey is definitely way up there. I love Dempsey, reading about him and watching him is great, but I’d be a fool if I didn’t recognize that he is wildly overrated

 

That's exactly correct, a total cheap shot, Dempsey should have been disqualified.