Jack Dempsey openly stated he would not fight black challengers

You are creating your own distorted reality. You're one of those guys who thinks anyone who disagrees with him is either a liar or clueless. Your hate for Dempsey is well documented, here and in that Greb book of yours--which I own by the way.


Midwestern promoter Floyd Fitzsimmons, who had produced Dempsey-Miske fight in 1920, proposed a Dempsey-Wills fight to be held in Michigan City, Indiana. Dempsey was guaranteed $1,000,000 for the fight with $300,000 due upon signing. Dempsey accepted the offer. On September 28, 1925, Wills, Dempsey, the promoter and investors met for the contract ceremony. The event made headlines. Wills received a check for $50,000. Fitzsimmons told Dempsey he would get his check the following day. The next morning, Dempsey accompanied Fitzsimmons to the bank, ready to receive the down payment. Fitzsimmons handed Dempsey a check not for $300,000 but only $25,000. “It’s all I got right now, but there’s plenty more where that came from,” said Fitzsimmons. Still willing to proceed, Dempsey asked for cash instead: “I want to see this in green…and when you give me the other two-seven-five, I’ll give you the contract. Signed.” As the tellers counted out the cash, the issuing bank was called and reported back that the Fitzsimmons account was empty. The check bounced. Fitzsimmons couldn’t even deliver one dime of a down payment. Dempsey walked. Not only had the fight fallen through again, but now Dempsey was no longer licensed to fight in New York.

In early 1926, Wills was offered $250,000 to fight Gene Tunney in a title eliminator, with the winner to meet the champion. Wills turned it down. Wills believed that fighting Dempsey was now a matter of entitlement. It was fateful decision. A Wills-Tunney fight may have changed the course of events. In any case the Tunney-Dempsey match was then scheduled.

Still there seemed no end to the claims, even as the Dempsey-Tunney fight approached. On August 6, 1926, the Evening Independent reported that a Chicago matchmaker, Doc Krone, announced that a $300,000 check was waiting for Dempsey in a Chicago bank. On August 22, the Telegraph Herald reported that Wills’ manager Paddy Mullins tried to bluff Dempsey once more into a contract, and then reportedly “failed to come forward with $150,000” saying, “We’ll post the money immediately if Dempsey will sign to fight Wills before September 23.” It was all too late. The public wanted Dempsey back, and he was in the ring with Gene Tunney three weeks later.

Then everything changed. Dempsey lost in an upset to Tunney, who then became champion. In October, Wills himself returned to the ring. At Brooklyn National League Park, a young and hungry Dempsey-esque heavyweight named Jack Sharkey brought Wills’ winning streak to an end. According to Time magazine, “Sharkey chopped and hacked at Wills, closed his eye, made his mouth bleed; all through the fight.” Wills reportedly backhanded, butted, and hit Sharkey during the breaks in an effort to discourage his opponent. After numerous warnings by the referee, Wills was disqualified in the 13th round.

https://fightfilmcollector.blogspot.com/2014/01/the-trouble-with-harry-harry-wills-vs.html

Insisting Dempsey could make fights he wanted without the approval of his manager or promoter is ludicrous. Fighters give up a large percentage of their earnings for other people to make decisions for them and get them the most lucrative fights. It was that way then as it is now.

There are too many missing pieces to definitively say who is to blame, and quite honestly I don’t believe any one man is to blame. From Fitz, Kearns, Rickard, athletic commissions, politicians, promoters, venue owners, lawsuits, and more, there was a lot of blame to go around for the fight not being made. Not to mention, Dempsey turns down a fight with a shot Wills in '26 to take on a much better and more dangerous opponent in Tunney--your ducking logic doesn't add up. Who was Wills beating from '22 to '26? A blind in one eye much smaller Langford who was long past prime? A much smaller Norfolk? He struggled with Dempsey's sparring partner Tate in his first two fights in '22-- one loss and one draw. Firpo was the only other legit opponent he fought in '25....Dempsey's leftovers who Dempsey beat much quicker and easier a couple of years prior.

 

Keep his opinion of Dempsey in mind when he starts hawking his new Dempsey book in here. It won't be worth a bucket of warm spit. And I own and admire his Greb book.

His hatred of Dempsey is palpable in every post he makes.

 

I bought Adam Pollack's 1st vol Dempsey bio.it's objective , thoroughly researched , and a great read!
Highly recommended!
Haven't read Klompton's Greb book , reviews say it was also very well researched,a couple of reviews stated it's not a particularly enjoyable book to read being more a collection of facts ,but I don't know if that is so.
H E Grant ,a fine poster here gave it a good write up I believe.

 

Here is a timeline and what is odd about this,

1920---in the US census, Michigan City has a recorded population of 19,457

October 9, 1924---Soldier Field is officially opened.

July 9, 1925---the SF Examiner reports that "Illinois became the 22nd of 48 states to legalize boxing."

October 19, 1925---Time Magazine, "Jack Dempsey signed a contract to meet Harry Will's in a 10 round no decision contest in Michigan City, Indiana."

*reasonable questions are raised. Why in the world try to stage such a fight in a town of less than 20,000? What kind of venue could it have possibly have had. I assume they would have had to build a venue from scratch. Rickard had done that in 1910 at Reno and 1921 at Boyle's Thirty Acres, but why was it necessary in the mid-twenties? New York had the Yankee Stadium, opened in 1923, as well as the enlarged Polo Grounds. Chicago had the even larger Soldier's Field. Philadelphia was building an equally huge stadium which would be ready in the spring of 1926. And there was the Coliseum in Los Angeles.

**a no decision fight, so Dempsey keeps the title if he lasts 10 rounds. Wills can only "win" via a knockout. Tunney though could and did win the title via decision. Is this why the fight was to be staged in Indiana, if staged at all.

Boxing was legal in Illinois and Chicago had an appropriate venue.

New York wanted the fight and had Yankee Stadium.

But someone was actually thinking of holding the fight in Michigan City?

 

Are we any nearer to solving the puzzle?

 

Yes i have the Pollock Dempsey Part I and it's excellent and totally objective. I have several of his othe "In the Ring With..." books and they are all must books for boxing fans.

I also have S.L. Compton's Greb book and it is an incredibly well written and comprehensive book. I've authored or co-authored nearly two dozen scientific publications plus written book length applications to governments so I understand research and sourcing other works, and I can say his book is about the best I've read on any biography. His compliations of Greb's fights and exhibitions are the go to source for everything Greb. It's an admirable book.

And that's why it is so disappointing to find out that someone who you admire ia actually a mean, trollish, nasty bit of work.
Rather than simply reply in a professional manner on Dempsey topics, he always insults, tries to intimidate and belittle anyone with a different point of view. It's as if he gets out of bed on the wrong side every day of his life. My 97 yr ofd grandfather was the same way: mean, nasty and brutish.

The only way I'd buy anything he writes about Dempsey is to **** on it on the street.

 

Not to hold him to it of course (whatever that means, like what am I’m gonna do, lol) - but IIRC, Adam’s (Pollack) last update here on Dempsey II was that it might be released? in March of this year.

I also recall Adam saying that he had so much info for the book, it was going to be hard to cull some out in order to keep the book down to a reasonable, commercially viable size.

Can’t wait for it’s release. Of course the primary attraction is in the reading - but I’ve got to say that the pics Adam has included in several of his books have been quite rare and very generous in number - many I had not seen before - and the overall quality of the books, covers, binding, pages etc. is truly excellent.

 

I believe Dempsey was being modest. Allowing the benefit of the doubt.
Boxing GOAT

 

I have Adam's, Johnson ,Jeffries, Fitzsimmons ,and Dempsey bios ,they are all first class.
I agree about Klompton,he has a wealth of knowledge but it comes at a price,he sneeringly browbeats and insults everyone he debates with.
Everything is," the gospel according to Steve Compton" ,there is no room for any dissension,however mild and polite, he views it as a personal affront,it's a real shame his information comes with such a , " I'm the only one who knows anything about this, you are all gullible fools and fan boys ," attitude. Such people I've found, are generally rather insignificant and nondescript regarding the rest of their lives,perhaps their focus on one subject is some form of compensation for their inadequacy in other areas?

 

Comments:

Not being a nice guy or a polite debater does not in itself make anyone wrong and difficult as it may seem, is not a sufficient reason to dismiss such a person's point of view or evidence.

And on Dempsey:

1---It is a factual matter that Dempsey did not defend his title against Wills although Harry was by general consent the outstanding contender during most, or even all, of his title reign.

2---"insisting Dempsey could make fights he wanted without the approval of his manager or promoter is ludicrous."

Is it? Dempsey was a man of about 30 years of age. This position seems to be he has no agency at all. Why? Was this true of Tunney? The usual take is that Gene carefully plotted his fights and chose his opponents in his rise to the championship. Why was this beyond Dempsey? Why is it accepted that he is a hapless child in this matter. He certainly could have, and did, change managers.

3---"a much better and more dangerous opponent"

Whatever. But was the take in 1926 that Tunney was the more dangerous opponent? Tunney in his whole career never fought a man who was 6' tall and at least 195 lbs. Anyway, hindsight is always 20/20 and going into 1926 Wills was the #1 contender not Tunney. In the event Tunney winning was considered a shocker. And Wills was not only a contender in 1926. He had been a contender 7 years earlier when Tunney was unknown and on up to 1926.

4---Firpo, a Dempsey "leftover." Is this one twisted. Wills agrees to fight any heavyweight Rickard names in an elimination in order to get a shot at Dempsey. Rickard selects Firpo, who is now nothing but a leftover.

5---"a much smaller Norfolk"--who was about the same weight as Levinsky, Carpentier, and Gibbons, big names on the resumes of Dempsey and Tunney. Wills being a big heavyweight is nothing to criticize him for in the real world. p4p is an abstraction.

6--"Firpo was the only legit opponent Wills fought in '25"

Wills fought him in 1924. He KO'd Weinert, who was ranked #3 at heavyweight in 1925.

*I don't usually go this far, but my take on this Wills controversy. He was not given the shot he had earned. Kearns fault? Rickard's fault? Dempsey's fault? The politicians' fault? Everybody's fault? Nobody's fault?

Everyone will have his take. But for me the really nasty and ugly posts are not the ones trashing Dempsey, even when they slide into unfairness, but the ones trashing Wills and his qualities as a fighter. Especially the direct remarks by Dempsey. If a champion doesn't defend against a man he should have defended against, he should at least have the good taste to not attempt to put the man's abilities down. Dempsey and his supporters hang themselves whenever they trash Wills.

 

I agree 100 % .. In fact, there are posters commenting in this thread about it who have themselves at times been very attacking, name calling, belittling themselves .. Not fair to attack Compton on it when guilty themselves ..... Dempsey and management ducked Wills , and no matter what side of the coin you are on as a fan .. will never change that fact

 

Two things can be true:

Dempsey definitely ducked Wills.

Klompton is a complete ass to people here often and without provocation.

I’d never spend a dime of my money on something produced by someone I’ve seen repeatedly act like he does on this forum.

 

So am I supposed to respond to you??
can or is true ?
If Dempsey didn't duck Wills then the term as it is used in boxing should be stricken forever from the sport
and why are you quoting me? I didnt bring the 2nd part up !! Someone else did and I was agreeing with him ,, but I see you feel the need to PASS right over him and come straight for me .. All good , I got a thick skin
WE all know how he posts, maybe one day he will become more cordial
I need to do the same thing actually , and I'm working on it ... slowly improving I hope
BUT you and other posters here have a choice also ... and if you are going to accuse the man of attacking people while launching YOUR own personal attacks against him... well that doesn't Jive
We all have our own personalities here ,,,, let him have his
you got your ignore button to push also if you want ,, dont ya

 

1) I responded to the bottom post on the thread. I didn’t feel compelled to search through the entirety of it, page after page, to see if someone expressed a similar sentiment. It’s simple as that. Nobody was singling you out.

2) I disagree that we shouldn’t be able to criticize someone for posting frequently in a hostile manner. You did it. I agreed with you. Somehow you’ve decided that makes me the bad guy, lol.

3) Nobody is denying him his personality, anymore than you were in the post I agreed with (again, rather ironic). I was just commenting on his personality, not ‘denying him’ from it.

4) Again, ironic, but if me commenting on him is trying to ‘deny him his personality,’ how exactly is it different if you comment on me?

Again, lol.

 

Who has trashed Wills?
Who has suggested Wills didn't deserve his title shot?
Who has absolved Dempsey from all blame in this debate?
Firpo had sacked his trainer and trained very desultorily for Wills he had added surplus weight too.
Was this the reason Wills beat him? No ,but it sure didn't help Firpo any, which was entirely his fault .
Harry won and would have won anyway,but the point that Firpo was not at his best stands.