Name another hwt champion since Dempsey that was given such level of expert praise but was instead something less than an ATG?
We could argue all day about what constitutes "expert praise", why and if Dempsey received more about it than fighter X and what does or doesn't make that fighter an ATG. More, the dissemination of information is very different in different eras. Finally I don't see how or why it moves the argument on from my last post. I've acknowledged the existence of praise and explained the reasons why it might be quantified - what is the purpose of continuing to discuss it?
Someone needs to explain why only Dempsey gets 50 years rated in the top five ATG but somehow is less than that.
But people explain their reasoning to you for that all the time. This thread is riddled with it. If you don't accept that reasoning I think that's fine. But people have been explaining that on this forum for nearly fifteen years before you joined.
Ultimately we can watch Dempsey fight and make our own judgements on his ability. The only thing not clear on footage is his ability to slip and evade punches. Honestly can't tell if he's slipping or walking through them. He's definitely not one of the best ever p4p you can determine that by watching him fight and watching others fight.
I'll put my six figures and tri-level house up against anything your mommy and daddy earned off of wellfare this year while you sit in their basement and masturbate to Jack Dempsey photos. Go check my reviews and sales #s at Amazon then get back to me. Its not well known to you or you wouldnt be on here spouting factually incorrect bull**** and pretending Dempsey was exhonerrated when in fact weve gone through 33 pages of posts debating that point among dozens of other threads rehashing the same. The concensus is that it remains a black mark on Dempsey's reign regardless of what some fanboys want to believe. Its only easy because there are so many of them. They are legion. That should tell you something and thats the exact opposite of picking and choosing. Unlike some ignoramous who posts nothing but opinion quotes which have no bearing on the events as they played out. Universally. No. And its ridiculous for anyone to rate him the greatest when he failed to fight the two guys who were far and away better than any of his challengers. Thats just pathetic. Irregardless those are OPINIONS they are meaningless. Fights are fought in the ring and thats something Jack Dempsey himself avoided. Thats why he cant be called the greatest and thats why this thread was even started. The idea that its revisionism to question his place IS FANBOYISM. Period. Because I also dont give a **** about all of the idiots who think Roy Jones was the greatest because he looked so good beating up on hapless garbage men. Opinions are like assholes, everyone has one. Of course a fighter is going to look good beating on no-hopers. Thats matchmaking 101. And unfortunately a lot of people then and now who SHOULD know better swallow it hook line and sinker. I dont care what people THOUGHT of him as a fighter. I care about what actually transpired. Dempsey ducked Wills. Period. He was actively complicit in avoiding Wills. No question about that. That is a 100% fact. Now, if he thought he was so great and such a lock to beat Wills he would have done it and would have been considered the greatest HW and redeemer of the white race. The simple fact that he avoided Wills time and again proves that he had some cause for concern. Those are the facts Im interested in. Not what Ray Arcel, or Sam Langford, or anyone else THOUGHT about Dempsey's chances with Wills. And a biased first hand opinion is worthless. How is Ray Arcel's opinion first hand? He lived in New York, Dempsey lived in Los Angeles. He had nothing to do with Dempsey whatsoever besides POSSIBLY attending his fights or seeing film of him or reading the same newspapers we can read today. Sorry buddy but that opinion is worth no more than mine considering I have at least as much access to the same media and outlets that Ray Arcel did, more actually. Nevermind that Ray Arcel was an unabashed Dempsey nuthugger to the end of his days, and you want to call a guy whose favorite fighter used to be Dempsey but changed the more he educated himself biased? HA! You keep trumpeting this but its simply not true. Its true that later in his career as he watched Dempsey's popularity grow he was diplomatic about it. Wills was nothing if not a tactful gentleman. But when the actual events were happening and even after he often stated that Dempsey was afraid to face him. But again, you wouldnt know that because you either havent done the research or disregard the sources that refute you. If its been known for 90 years why are we still talking about it? Why has it been written about for decades during that time? Plenty of people have criticized Dempsey for this and continue to do so. The funny thing is I get called biased because I have a thesis formulated on years of research that actually changed my original opinion. Thats not bias. Go look it up. You think Im biased because I dont agree with you. Thats not bias. I know more about the subject. Im in a better position to discuss it and formulate an opinion on it and as such some faceless kid on the internet who doesnt know what hes talking about isnt going to change that. Thats not bias thats just standing behind my argument. My life is great. Thanks for your concern. Its only getting better. :hey
All jibberish ignoring the questions and providing no substance. The value of your home is approximately 6 times less than mine.
Will you two shut the **** up about who has the better house? It's incredibly childish and nobody here gives a sh/t.
Wow, the next day paper after he won the title confirmed he wouldnt fight Black fighters. Written in black and white.
It was expected of ALLhwt champions to draw the color line as soon as they won the title. This came as a directive from Rickard. Dempsey renounced the color line soon after Rickard however was still pulling the strings. Once release from Rickard in 1925 Dempsey actively pursued a fight with Wills. A reigning hwt champion actively pursuing any challenger was completely unheard of in those days. Ultimately Dempseys efforts were thwarted by commissions who did not want the bout to take place.
Tyson is not comparable. Dempsey was rated as a top 5 ATG if not No 1 for 50 years. Liston for a time was also looked at as an ATG but only for a short duration. Tyson once his career was finished was never looked upon as a top 5 ATG. Dempsey has really a 90 year stint within ATG status.
Well, apart from the bit about Wills thinking Dempsey was scared of him. On being poisoned: https://news.google.com/newspapers?...AIBAJ&sjid=QQ8EAAAAIBAJ&pg=5787,3827088&hl=en Langford's expert opinion was that Dempsey was scared of Wills and he called him out for not facing his top challenger.
Just on Dempsey implying he was poisoned before the first Tunney fight, I remember hearing him talk about that on the radio back sometime in the mid-sixties, Dempsey had said something about it to the press in one city and then left to fly to another city. It hit the wires so there were reporters waiting for his plane and asking him about it. I always listened to the CBS evening news and sports in those days while I was milking the cows, and I remember Dempsey saying on the radio that he always thought it odd that he became weak just before the fight and suspected he was poisoned (or drugged), but admitted he had no proof. The whole thing sort of blew over and I never heard much about it again.
