Jack Dempsey and Harry Wills

Dempsey at his best would have won by kayo. Sub-par Dempsey would have lost a decision.

http://www.amazon.com/Joe-Gans-Biog...=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1241836336&sr=1-1

 

Jeanette and McVey were respected fighters in their day, but they weren't considered "overwhelming challengers" at the time, they were rated right in the mix with other contenders for the title.

Langford was generally more revered than those two, but his absolute peak in terms of his standing in the division was prior to those years, in around 1910/1911.

But none of Wills' multiple wins were as impressive and decisive as Fulton's, and more importantly, they were interspersed among fights that Wills either lost to Langford (by KO) or only drew even with him. Wills was splitting fights and still struggling to prove his superiority to Langford at this time, whereas Fulton was far more decisive.

Regardless, I don't know that the one win over Langford (or any one win in particular) necessarily put Fulton above Wills, I believe it was the combination of the whole string of wins he had put together before and after that fight that collectively put him into the top spot.

Powell was a career journeyman. He was barely even a prospect coming into the fight (I would wager he was never even ranked before that), and never did anything particularly noteworthy afterward.

I don't know if the Powell fight on its own completely removed Valdez from the rankings, but he lost another fight to another unranked fighter after that before fighting Liston. By the time he got to Liston, he was no longer rated.

I don't know how much he "aged" or if at all. And it really has nothing to do with my point either. The fact remains he had lost to two unranked fighters coming into the Liston fight and was no longer a contender (and for good, as it turned out).

About six years earlier, he was the #1 rated contender (which he earned by whupping Ezzard Charles), held that ranking for about 2 or 3 years straight, and was denied a title shot by Al Weill during that entire stretch. He did not have the same ranking or reputation in the late '50s as he had earlier in the decade.

"Going into 1959" is not when Liston fought him. He fought him at the end of 1959, when he was getting whupped by fighters that weren't even in the top 10. How can you say a guy is one of the "top 5" fighters in the division when he's not even better than guys who aren't even among the top 10??

As for Cus D'Amato, he denied a lot of prospective title challengers a shot, and usually on the grounds that their promoters or managers were crooked.

So how can you say Langford was still a serious title challenger in 1918 if beating him "doesn't mean much"?

You don't always know how certain fighters would precisely compare with other fighters, but you can see who was considered muddled among the pack of contenders and who was considered standouts above it.

But by definition, historians are people who haven't seen or experienced these fighters and their circumstances first-hand. They can't know more on the matter than people who were actually at the scene and saw with their own eyes. No reason for their opinions to outweigh people who were actually there.

No he didn't, the top 3 heavyweights were Heeney, Risko, and Sharkey. That's only one HOFer in the top 3.

Either way, I don't see why that should change anyone's judgment of Tunney. No one was rated in any kind of HOF at the time, and no one knew who was going to be a HOFer afterward.

No, he became top contender for the whole string of wins he put together before fighting Dempsey. Langford was just one of those wins.

I doubt Norfolk would've, seeing as he had suffered a crushing KO loss to Langford (the one Fulton had already crushed) not long after beating Miske, which badly halted his rising career at that time. From accounts I've read, Norfolk didn't appear to distinguish himself as a standout contender until about a year or so after Dempsey won the title - and he appears to have been mostly rated as a LHW anyway.

As for Greb, by the time he beat Miske and had begun to break into the division, Dempsey already supplanted the #1 rated Fulton and was moving on to a fight with the champion. How many more rated fighters did Liston fight while waiting for his upcoming title shot after beating Folley/Machen?

I don't understand how you can make a top 5 that is supposed to cover an entire two years. If you did the same for Liston to cover the couple years before he won the title, you could make something that looks like this:

1. Johansson
2. Cooper
3. Lavorante
4. Machen
5. Folley

...and that would distort things to make it look like he didn't clean out his division in the same way either.

 

I dont allways agree with your posts ,and dont this time ,but they are invarialbly well argued and considered,just a question.have you a reliable source that Dempsey invited Flowers to be his sparring partner for his preparations for Tunney? I ask because he would seem to be a very strange choice to me ,given that 1 he was not fast aound a ring , 2 often slapped with his punches and most importantly 3 ,he was a SOUTH PAW,so what possible use would he have been to Dempsey in readying for Tunney?

 

I'll dig it up. Check back later.

 

Dempsey was not always so specifically strategic in who he used for sparring. He used Tate for power and would also often use MWs for speed. Flowers was a busy fighter and would be considerably good for honing reflexes as well as conditioning. I'll find the specific source later for you as well as McGrain.

 

Had it happened, Dempsey ko 6.

 

:good:good

 

The white heavyweight fighters were unwilling to engage with them

Why because fulton stopped wills he beat him easier? Wills beat Langford 5 times and most of those were shutout decisions against a younger better version of sam langford. If fulton had tangled with langford 5 times in 1914-1915 I doubt he would avoid getting knocked out.

What string? his string of wins certainly were nowhere near the string of wins Harry Wills had accumlated up to 1918

Rocky Marciano picked Charles Powell as the man most likely to take his crown away from him. Powell was considered huge potential. The Powell fight was an upset win. Valdez at the time was coming off FOUR huge back to back to back to back wins over top 10 rated Harold Carter, Mike Dejohn, and Pat Mcmutry and Wayne Bethea.

Valdez was #2 going into 1959. despite two losses to young prospects Powell and Johnson, it was not enough to remove him from the top 10 by the time he fought liston, especially given his very strong victories in late 1958. Valdez knockout of Title Challenger brian london AFTER he fought liston shows valdez was still a very capable puncher

Valdez was certainly a contender and a dangerous puncher.

This was actually your worst post of the thread right here. Let me break it down for you.

Earned? Valdez did not earn anything. the # 1 rating was a GIFT given to him based on a upset over an overconfident Ezzard Charles. Valdez has lost 4 out of his last 5 meetings in a row prior to the upset charles win, and those losses should have been held against him when accessing his jump up to # 1. Harold Johnson beat both Ezzard Charles and Nino Valdez during that time, why didnt he get the # 1 rating? Fishy....

This is 110% wrong. If you want to debate this, we will start a new thread. Valdez "Got" the # 1 ranking in December of 1953 held that until March of 1954 where he LOST his # 1 ranking to Ezzard Charles. Ezzard then held the # 1 ranking from Feb of 1954 all the way through September of 1954. Then Valdez resumed the # 1 ranking in October of 1954 all the way through May of 1955. So lets see Dec 53-March 54 plus Oct 54-May 55 is a total of only Fourteen months as # 1 contender and most importantly it was not fourteen months "straight". So your statement Valdez was # 1 contender for 2-3 years STRAIGHT is way off mark.

This content is protected

Once again, this is unquestionably wrong.

This content is protected

When it came down to it, Weill was going to make this match happen, but Valdez blew his shot.

Disagree. Valdez had arguebably the 2nd best year of his whole career in 1958 beating multiple top 10 fighters, and destroying the flock of europeans best heavyweights, usually by devastating early knockout. Valdez reputation was so high, that Damato turned him down immediately.

Bobby Gleason wasnt that crooked. Damato feared Valdez because he was 3" taller, 20lb heavier and could punch.

 

I never said that. I said fulton beating langford doesnt mean as much because Wills had already done so FIVE times, therefore Wills was more highly rated than langford when fulton beat langford.

Check the Ring Magazine 1929 Ratings. Schmeling Sharkey Godfrey were # 1 # 2 # 3.

What wins? he only drew with Miske, while miske lost to norfolk and greb

But norfolk twice whupped Billy Miske a top rated fighter who had drew with your consensus # 1 as well as recording other good wins.

Only Ingemar Johansson. Liston challenged him refutably, and johansson wanted no part of it. You can't fight a guy who wont get in the ring with you. Other than that the 2 other highest rated contenders 1961-1962 were machen and folley and liston had creamed them. While Dempsey beat fulton, that was the only top contender he defeated. The other top dogs Wills, Greb he did not fight.

Lavorante was not even in the Ring Magazine ratings in 1960 and would not crack the rankings until early 1962 at # 4. He lost that soon after by getting knocked out into a stretcher by 46 year old Archie Moore. I dont see how you could put Lavorante over Machen and Folley, when they both were in the top 5 in both 1960 and 1961. Considering Lavorante only broke the rankings(briefly) for one of these two years, I would leave him off the list all together and replace him.

Cooper and Johansson could be considered top 5 in 1960-1961, but Coopers manager REFUSED to send him in the ring with liston and johansson wanted nothing to do with Liston. this is alot different from Wills and Greb who were challenging dempsey to get in the ring, while dempsey wanted nothing to do with it. Johannson during this time also refused a fight with Cleveland Williams. Sonny Liston said in 1962 "no one wants to fight cleveland williams. he can hit as hard as me".

 

I wish Marciano had fought Valdes ,I think he would have given him a very good thumping!

 

Pittsburgh Post, 2 March 1926. Dempsey interview by Regis Welsh. See also Kaye's biography of Flowers, p. 124. The primary source may be New York Amsterdam News, 1 Sept 1926 -but I'm not certain.

 

That's good enough for me , still think The Georgia Deacon was a strange choice though.:good

 

Jeanette was 40 years old when Wills beat him.

 

Yep, but no stranger than his sparring with Big Bill Tate to prepare for Billy Miske.

 

No. Jeanette was born in August of 1879, and when Harry wills won a newspaper decision over him in June of 1914, Jeanette was 34 years old