jack dempsey vs harry greb, 1921

Based on what ? Greb's extreme success at routinely outlasting the best big men ?

The fact that Dempsey's stamina was unproven in bouts over ten rounds when Greb fought them routinely ?

Dempsey's inactivity ?

Greb's success sparring with Jack and against mutual opposition ?

Greb called him out time and again. Once again, Dempsey's management refused to make the match

I love Dempsey's actual performances, his drama and his wasted potential as much as the next guy but the facts are he was the most protected, best promoted champion in heavyweight history...He was a commodity , not a fighter ... he simply rarely fought and when he did he fought handpicked opponenets and clearly did not fight the two best contenders of his ear ... all Dempsey apologists have are great excuses ...the "slow" Wills ( who was busy fighting Langford, Jeannette, Norfalk ) and the small Greb who cleaned out the opposition, setting up Jack to fight men he defeated ... it's a bit absurd ...

 

Our opinions might differ regarding the qualities of some of the men Dempsey fought, such as Gibbons, Firpo, Fred Fulton, Billy Miske, Bill Brennan etc..Aside from Harry Wills,I have read in old Ring Mags,no complaints from writers of the time admonishing Dempsey for avoiding some as Langford ,Jeannette, Norfolk...Except for Norfolk, Langford and Joe Jeannette were old and not considered a threat to the prime Dempsey.Norfolk was stopped by Tommy Gibbons, and was not a drawing card, thus no reason for Dempsey to fight him...I'll say this again, The peak Jack Dempsey, feared no man in the ring, and if he didnt fight often, it was because he was smitten with the good life,ala women and Hollywood...Who can blame him ?
After all Joe Louis, and Ray Robinson avoided fighters of their times for obvious reasons ,dangerous with no worthwhile monetary rewards to gain...We all due what we think is best for our careers, and so did Dempsey...He should not be singled out ,I believe....

 

Hey thanks a lot, Burt! I often wonder about that great night that Greb gave Tunney the only official loss of his legendary career. I think about it and visualize what it was like to witness that great event. When I think of it, it reminds me of you and your father since you have shared that story with many of us E.S.B. members. We may not agree on the outcome of a Dempsey-Greb match, but I think we can all agree that Harry Greb was one of, if not THE greatest pound for pound fighter in the history of boxing. Well, maybe that Greb hating Pachilles doesn't agree, but his opinion has lost all credibility if you ask me. Thanks again and keep on keepin' on, Burt.

 

I would cry tears of joy if ANY fight footage of Greb surfaced, but Tunney-Greb? Wow! That one is at the very top of my list. If I could see any fight of any fighter in the entire history of the sweet science, it would be Tunney vs. Greb, May 23, 1922.

 

Abdullah, If my miracle the Tunney / Greb fight film is found, you would have seen Harry Greb, but not Gene as his entire face was covered in blood....Today the fight would have been stopped in the early rounds...b.b.
Its always nice to communicate with you...

 

Haha. From what I have read, everybody was covered in Tunney's blood.

The feeling is mutual, Burt. :good

 

I've read several articles from insiders of that time that allude to Greb favouring a shorter distance, and being less sure about the longer distance.
I believe them.
Dempsey was the mauler. He finished strong against Gibbons over 15, and battered Brennan in the 12th.

No excuses.

But I dont think Dempsey was unique in the way he managed affairs during his title reign. I dont think he was the most protected champion in heavyweight history. Others followed similar paths and fought some weaker challengers.

 

he grant, You were not there 1921-1923, and I was not around then, but the facts are...I am not defending Dempsey for not fighting more often, but please take notice of these events of 1921-1923...And tell me if I'm wrong
Sam Langford was born in 1883m making Sam 38 years old 1921..He lost to Harry wills, Bill Tate twice, LKee Anderson twice ,Tut Jackson ko, Bearcat Wright Ko, Fred Fulton , who Dempsey flattened in one minute..
It is obvious that Sam Langford at ages 38-40 was long past his prime at
1921-1923...No real threat to the prime 26 year old Dempsey....
Joe Jeannette was born in 1879, and Jeannette retired in 1919 at the age of 40 years of age... Did Dempsey avoid Joe Jeannette when Jeannette retired two years before in 1919 ? Of course not ?
Kid Norfolk a great light heavyweight was born in 1893...In 1921 he was kod by Lee Anderson,Harry Wills 1922, Tommy Gibbons in 1924, and by mjiddleweight Frank Moody in 1925... Great light heavyweight , but no threat tothe much larger and powerful Dempsey...So who did Jack Dempsey fear to fight those above years, for fear of loising..None I saay as Ray Arcel who saw them all those years said attested to in interviews before he died...It is fashionable to kick Jack Dempsey around today ,obscuring the real facts of those days...Dempsey fought less than we would have liked, not because he feared opponents 1921-1925,but after all his hard days as a starving youth in the west, he finally had the money to satisfy his desires...Can we 90 years later say we would have done differently / I think not !1

 

To write Wills off as slow is clearly an attempt to say Jack would have beat him anyway. The facts are that both Kearns and Rickard were quite afraid of Dempsey risking his title against Wills. It's easy to forget the huge pressure they were receiving from the media for refusing to fight the number one contender for his entire reign. I am as studied on Dempsey as almost anyone out there and know all the stories but simply cannot excuse the facts. His reign as champion really was a joke. I have said time and again that Dempsey showed far more in the Sharkey and second Tunney fight about what might have been than in any of his actual bouts possibly excluding his massacre of a 37 year old, highly inactive Willard ..

 

Why the "agita' about Dempsey...As I have posted before the only threat to Dempsey that Jack didn't meet was Harry wills...I think I pointed out that Sam Langford was old 38-40, and Joe Jeannette retired in 1919 at age of 40...in 1921-1923 time frame...So we are talking about Harry Wills in that time period...
Dempsey and Harry wills were contracted to fight each other on the night of Sept.6,1924..The fight fell through in Jersey City, because of money guarantees, so we will never know the outcome, if the fight occured...
Soon after this cancellation Harry wills loist to Jack Sharkey, and was kod by the tough but crude Paolino Uzcudun...
How can you logically state that Jack Dempsey past his prime "showed you more against Jack Sharkey and 2nd Tunney fight ",than his massacre of Jesse Willard, in Toledo ,1919...Willard was old true but was NEVER dropped before...A bull of a man with an iron chin...Willard was bounced up and down like a yo yo, and today the fight would have been over in one round...What more did you want the 187 pound Dempsey to do ?
And how can youy state that you was not impressed with the young Dempsey prior to 1919 ,when he was flattening Carl Morris, Fred Fulton etc in a round, when those bouts are not on film ? Beats me...You and I never saw the young prime Dempsey, Willard and before, but In my long lifetime I have read 100s of accounts of Jack Dempsey's unique prowess in his unfilmed prime..Not for nothing, did those hardened sportswriters of Dempsey's time call Dempsey "a man killer "...
So to sum this up---
Demposey and Wills signed to fight for Sept.6, 1924..Fell through
The onkly film youcan judge prime Demposey is against Willard in 1919...A hand cranked out of sync film that makes fighters of that hand cranked times seem disjointed ala Charlie Chaplin...
Dempsey didnt fight often because he finally had money anbd enjoyed the life of wine and women...Who is to blame him for that 90 years later .? Not I..
Wills deserved a title bout because of his merits, no doubt about that...
But I believe that a prime Jack dempsey would have kod the Harry Wills, who lost to Jack Sharkey and Paoliuno Uzcudun, in that time frame...b.b.

 

Burt, I say this very respctfully as I truly like and appreciate your posts, my agita is with discounting Wills as "just another big man of the sort Dempsey traditionally feasted on so Jack would have destroyed him anyhow ." Anyone that studies Wills career knows he was a terriiic fighter, far and away better than anyone Dempsey ever fought at least till Tunney, and it is a crime that he was denied a shot. He was bigger than Dempsey, he was at least as strong if not stronger, he was a terrific puncher in his own right, he was quite fast and had a very good chin. The only man to stop him prior to Uzcuden at age 38 was Langford who could stop anyone.

I've always felt the same about Dempsey. I love his saga. He was a colorful, exciting figure, almost part of Ameican mythology. However, as a fighter he gets an incomplete as far as how high I can rate him because after winning the title he stopped being a fighter. Five fights in seven years , most with huge periods of inactivity between does not a fighter make. He was exceptionally well promoted, he was exceptionally well marketed by the press. How good he was , who knows.

He fought Carpentier who was a light heavy. Miske may or may not have been less than 100%. Brennan was a very good fighter but not the type to gage all time greatness. Without question, his win over Gibbons was a very good win, maybe his best since Gibbons was exceptional . However, Gibbons was 32 and a small heavyweight. Firpo was a wild bruiser .. this is not a list that proves much to me ..

I have always felt if Dempsey stayed active we may have saw true greatness. He didn't and we didn't ... I have no idea how good he was because he did not fight the best of his day. What I can say is that past his best he hung very tough with a terrific, prime Sharkey on one of the Sailor's best nights. Overlooked in the controversial ending is the fact that Dempsey was coming on very strong after a slow start and starting to weaken Sharkey with a brutal pace ... I can also say that he fought a great , prime Tunney tooth and nail on shot legs and slowed reflexes. Also forgotten is that while Tunney racked up the ronds many were very close with Dempsey missing by fractions of an inch with shots that could have ended their bouts ... again, his late career losses show me more than any victory as to what might have been with empsey ..

 

he grant , great to be sparring with a worthy opponent as you ...
Te begin with...I think i made my point that Harry Wills was the only worthy opponent circa 1921- 1923 that Dempsey did not fight... I established that both Sam Langford and Joe Jeannette were too old or retired as in the case of Jeannete by 1921-1923....
That leaves the worthy Harry Wills left that did not get a title shot...
I mentioned that Dempsey and Wills were CONTRACTED to fight Sept.6,1924 at Jersey City... but it was cancelled because of monetary reasons...This is all on thev record...
So----who else of worthy contenders of this time frame, did the great Manassa Mauler avoid, that truly deserved a title shot.? Who, beside Harry Wills ?Dempsey kod Carl Morris, Fred Fulton, Battling Levinsky {1st time ever], Bill Brennan, Billy Miske, ,Jess Willard,Destroyed the crude bullish Firpo, Carpentier, decisioned the great Tommy Gibbons etc...
Please he, aside from the Harry Wills contact debacle ,who of note did Dempsey avoid ?
In your eyes you bemoan the calibre of Dempsey's opponents for the most part...But truly a fighter is born ,fights whoever is available in his time...So with Dempsey, Louis, and Ali...THEY are not responsible for the quality of their foes born in the same period, methinks...
I have OLD boxing recoird books from the1920s and soon after, and the writers who saw young Dempsey raved about his PANTHERLIKE movements, tremendous punching power, strong chin, with an unmerciful desire to destroy all in front of him...He was described as having fast twich like muscle movements, that would remind me of a smaller Roberto Duran in his lightweight prime, 60 years later...
I have no axe to grind...I believe a fighters true ability is BETTER determined by all the great boxing experts ,who SAW them at their peaks,
than ninety years later, guessing the true calibre of legends they have never seen,even on old out of sync, film...So please give the prime Jack Dempsey his due...He EARNED it ! b.b....