http://www.boxingnewsonline.net/did-jack-johnson-fight-jack-dempsey/ This story just won't die! What do you guys think?
It made me laugh how his first thought was that Johnson was in desperate need of money, instead of considering Johnson almost certainly wouldn't have performed as well as this article describes, because I have no doubt Johnson would have gloated about dropping the current heavyweight champion. There's also Dempsey drawing the colour line and this exception of crossing that line for a wad of cash, something's he had plenty of, at the risk of his reputation and legacy seems very odd.
i think it was a journalist trying to be obviously telling a fantasy..but it was taken seriously by some. i think thats what the story was.
This fable is a bunch of malarkey. To think that a Jack Kearns would for no reason match his young tiger money machine with the 43 year old shot Jack Johnson is ludicrous. Dempsey had no reason to fight this old version of Lil Arthur with a few witnesses. And this fight would go unnoticed all these years smacks of insanity..
This has already been debunked several times. It was an article on a fantasy matchup that was eventually reprinted as true in a boxing magazine years later for April Fools.
this is it....i have a scan somewhere..but this is quicker and serves same purpose...at the end of the article it says its a fantasy fight report... https://news.google.com.au/newspapers?id=BONQAAAAIBAJ&sjid=9P8MAAAAIBAJ&pg=1844,3630691&hl=en
I am going to assume that it didn’t happen, unless some absolutely blinding new evidence emerges.
Too bad they didn't find the 2nd part of the series that had Joe Gans (who was dead for over 11 years at that point) beating Benny Leonard by narrow margin... I wonder what explanation they would come up with for that one.
you had a wonderful blog which i got some great reading out of....really appreciated you doing it...don't think i have said it to you before.