Jack Dempsey and The Color Line...

I dont see how there could be any argument? Dempsey didnt give black fighters a chance at the title, so he clearly drew the color line.

Sure, it might not have been his idea, and yes, society didnt want him to fight black fighters. He probably wasnt a bad man, and no more racist than most men at the time, but it still doesnt change the facts, does it?

He drew the color line, how can you possibly argue against it?

 

He was very inconsistent on the issue.

He first said that he would draw the colour line, then announced with a big fanfare that he was dissolving it, and from there his actions leave some room for interpretation.

 

That's not true. He lived and fought out of the US for quite a while. Burns simply was motivated by the purse and had the decency to give the man the shot.

 

hard to say Dempsey was in an era of America that still hated Johnson and it was the climate by a whiter nation to believe a black should not be Champion again but a prime Dempsey had few challengers Black or White that anyone would bet their house on.

Wills was the best of the blacks and the fight should have been made but Wills was easy to hit and possibly the wrong style to come out victorious over JD and Langford was too old by that time that Dempsey was prime

Dempsey employed blacks and respected them as men and boxing equals but it was more of a era thing than a fear thing...Dempsey was KO'd in 1 by Jim Flynn but a primer version returned the favor and by the way the fireman was white as ash

Dempsey feared no man IMO black nor white but he was a golden goose and Tex did what he could to keep it laying eggs

 

July 8, 1921 while in Omaha Nebraska on his way back home from facing George Carpentier: "Jack Dempsey, world's heavyweight champion pugilist, who passed through here today on his way to Salt Lake City, said he was unwilling to fight Jack Johnson "or any other negro fighter." "I will never fight a negro. There is nothing to this talk of me meeting Jack Johnson..." "I will meet anyone else that Kearns picks for me. Gibbons, I understand is a good man, although I have never seen him work. As I have drawn the color line, I am free to say that I think Harry Wills is a great fighter and who will whip the very best of them. As for Willard, I'll fight him any time -and lick him too."


So goes that theory apologists. Any others we want to explode? So Here Jack is drawing the color line a year after some of you seem to think he was pure as the driven snow in his intentions to face Wills. Then in the same sentence lauds Wills as being the best out there but offers to face a light heavyweight (Gibbons) after having just defended against another light heavyweight (Carpentier) and Willard who hadnt fought since getting destroyed by Dempsey two years previous. Yeah, he was really sincere about going out there taking on challenges...

 

All info I have indicates that Dempsey was driven by Rickard and Kearns on this entire subject. Neither wanted the bout and Dempsey was the mouthpiece to try to explain why. Once Dempsey broke with Kearns he pursued a bout with Wills only to find no promoter would touch it. Wills himself much later affirmed this as fact. If Wills who was there at the time understood this to be the case why are you arguing the point now?

 

Bull****. Once Dempsey broke with Kearns he immediately began negotiating with Rickard in secret for a Tunney bout. This admitted by Tunney. Both Tunney and Dempsey pretended to negotiate for a Wills match due to the fact that NYSAC had banned Dempsey from fighting in their state which carried a reciprocal ban in all states that were associated with New York. Rickard and Tunney wanted the bout in New York so they were trying to make the commission happy by saying "hey look we are trying to fight Wills but the fight cant be made." All the while, from the summer of 1925 (When Dempsey split with Kearns) to September 1926 they were actively working on a Tunney-Dempsey bout with no intention whatsoever of putting on a Wills match. Floyd Fitzsimmons, Dempsey's good friend who had promoted his bout with Miske and another with Homer Smith, was called in to make it look as if Dempsey was signing to face Wills and when they didnt pay Dempsey he backed out, allowing him to look like he was negotiating in good faith. Supposedly Wills was paid a $50,000 forfeit which Dempsey later stated was paid from his own money. However, I just recently found where Wills denied having ever received this money. Either way it was all just a smokescreen. The contract called for the fight to be held in September of 1926, coincidentally right when Rickard planning on holding the Tunney Dempsey bout. Anyone really think Dempsey, who had fought just twice in five years was planning on fighting twice in a month? The bottom line is that neither Kearns, nor Rickard, NOR DEMPSEY, wanted anything to do with Wills. Dempsey has hid behind Kearns and Rickard long enough but he wasnt led around by the nose by these guys. He had other options. People act like he was owned by Rickard and then completely ignore the fact that 2 of his five successful title defenses were promoted by men other than Rickard.

 

All you state is speculation. Wills himself never referred to any of what you just posted in later years. He never blamed Dempsey which you would think he would do if all you are speculating was true.

Tunney challenged Wills to a bout with the winner to fight Dempsey....a why did Wills turn this fight down?

 

In an article dated April 25 1928......Headline....How Rickard blocked a Dempsey Wills bout.

A bout between Dempsey and Wills Was blocked by Rickard testified by the promoter yesterday during a lawsuit Of jack Kearns. Rickard identified a telegram from him to Dempsey Warning him about setting up a bout with Wills. The telegram was in reply to a telegram by Dempsey asking what terms Rickard would give for the match noting that he had already received an attractive offer from a California promoter. "a wills fight will be hard to stage in the US, stated Rickard telegram dated Jan 14 1926, don't let those fellas bull you. I had one disastrous experience out there myself. Any man who stages a fight between you and wills will destroy boxing"

Me thinks you are selectively choosing info to try to back up your own speculation. Why hate Dempsey so much that you will make things up?

 

Wills did discuss the Fitzsimmons promotion and did deny having ever earned anything from it. I will post the articles if you wish.

By your own post we have an admission that promoters outside of Rickard were willing to promote a Dempsey Wills bout. Rickard simply advised Dempsey against it. The responsibility lies with Dempsey to accept or refuse and he did and therefore so goes the responsibility of accepting the negative press associated with that decision.

I havent seen where anyone denied that Rickard didnt want that bout. He was actively trying to promote a Dempsey Tunney bout. It was shown in the other thread that Rickard felt Dempsey was ripe for the plucking. As a money man it makes sense that he would think it would harm boxing. Dempsey was a cash cow, Wills was aging and wouldnt be expected to hold the title long and hadnt been an exciting fighter in years. A loss by Dempsey to Wills would have sent the heavyweight division into flux and created a vacuum. Thats something promoters today even try to avoid. They dont like turnover, its unpredictable, unless they can control it.

Dempsey at this point was basically self managed. It makes sense that he would be pitting offers against Rickards in order to drive up his price. It was a tactic that Kearns had used throughout their association.

Klompton does speculate some here but his speculation is well founded on the facts at the time and what we know of the events afterwards.

The facts as I see them are that Dempsey drew the color line in 1918. He drew it again in 1919. He drew it again in 1921. He periodically stated that he would be willing to face Wills but actions speak louder than words. This point was made by many of his more progressive contemporaries. What we know of the negotiations that took place whenever he was supposedly close to facing Wills shows that he was never really close, or serious about facing Wills. In the end he did not face Wills.

I understand the need to try to preserve ones heros but Dempsey was as guilty of avoiding Wills as Rickard and Kearns were. One can speculate as to why: Was he racist? Was he trying to appease white America? Was he afraid of Wills? It doesnt really matter. In the end none of his motivations are very honorable or serve as a legitimate excuse in light of the fact that Wills was universally recognized as his best challenger and had the support of a large swath of the public, if not an outright majority.

 

Years later why did Wills cast no blame on Dempsey?

The telegram presented in court in 1928 shows conclusively that Dempsey was pursuing a bout with Wills. So the idea he was afraid or did not want to fight Wills does not hold water. Dempsey was taking steps to make the bout occur and this is why Rickard was warning him against it. Why did the bout never take place? It would be pure speculation to try to say why. There is no doubt Dempsey was trying to make the bout happen.

 

The telegram stated that Dempsey asked for a counter offer to the offer from LA. Rickard declined to counter. Did Dempsey pursue the offer from LA? No.

Intead he went the route that Rickard told him would be an easier title defense, the route Rickard had been working on all along, Gene Tunney.

How serious was Dempsey about facing Wills? We know that within days of this telegram Tunney's manager Billy Gibson signed a letter of intent to face Dempsey.

We also know that as this telegram was sent Rickard was in purse negotiations with both Dempsey and Tunney for their fight to be held in September.

And we know that as all of this was going on both Dempsey and Tunney denied to the press that they had any knowledge of any of this (which we know was not true).

Tunney was also "actively" seeking a match with Wills during this period but we know now that this was also not genuine and was being done to build Tunney up.

Its clear to me that Wills was being used as a pawn by Dempsey, Rickard, Kearns (earlier), and Tunney.

 

He hates him so much he is slagging him under two different usernames!

 

Whether or not Dempsey "officially" "drew the color line" is immaterial.
He fought who he fought, and he didn't fight any black challengers, notable among them the deserving Harry Wills.
It was discrimination one way or another.

I do think people are a little naïve when they quote what Dempsey said (according to newspaper scribes) as somehow 100% factual.
He may or may not have said what the newspapers printed.
That goes for much of what you'll ever read in newspapers, especially from the days before modern day multi media.

 

Please this getting ridiculous, ask yourself this, why did ATG's draw the color lines themselves and they were black. Why does everyone focus on Dempsey? Most everybody of that era said Dempsey would beat Wills the reason my friends is the color green in most every case. SRR, Johnson, and Louis drew the colorline. Louis fought more black fighters at the end of his career then during his hay days. Robinson, fought mostly white guys, yeah I know Gavilan and Turpin, were they the only black guys out there. The promoters wanted to make money, the fighters want to make money, and sad to say as it is even now, the high risk, small gain rule applies. Why fight a dangerous foe for little money when you could fight a white guy and make more money. Look no further then Rigondeaux that might give you a little insight into why the color line is drawn, blame the green.