Jack Dempsey vs Jersey Joe Walcott Prime for Prime

Still to do the worst damage a ring doctor has seen in 40 years in only 3 rounds is nothing short of amazing. I think his Eye socket was broken in 12 places his jaw and nose were broken in multiple places plus fractured ribs.

The doctor talks about it in this video.

http://www.youtube.com/v/ONFKgforsX0?version=3

 

Im not the one unable to tell the truth here. Unfortunately your classes at the quarry school of deception have not taught you how to go back and check the post in question. Does this look familiar?

7: Please don't call another post full of rubbish when your own post has a few holes in it.

That is what was said to you.

Enough of all this though, we should be done with the petty bickering and get back to the topic at hand.

You asked for evidence and I've provided it. I'll be happy to post more quotes and links if you desire, but I would like your opinions on these first.

 

It was done by the New York daily with a cartoon from the Pittsburgh post depicting sever fighters including Greb and Will. The poll went
1. Wills - 4835 votes
2. Bill Brennen - 1320 votes
3. Greb -725 votes
4. Jess Willard - 700 votes
5. Georges Carpentier - 360 vote
6. Jack Johnson - 305 votes
7. Gene Tunney - 298 votes
8. Luis Firpo - 112 votes
9. Tommy Gibbons - 98 votes
10. Billy Miske - 88 votes


This is from an article from Philadelphia Evening Ledger dated July 9 1919
With the line break titling it "Greb Contender"


Greb is after a meeting with Demp
sey. If Greb pulls a Dempsey and stops
Levinsky on Monday night his chances
will be bright.
Defi to Dempsey
The following letter was received'
yesterday from James M. (Reddy) Ma
son, manager of Greb :
Pittsburgh, July 7.
"We just got back from Tulsa, where
Greb beat Brennnn ; and, while it
was a great fight, Greb beat Brennan
all the way. Brennan was in great
shape and took a good beating ; much
worse, in fact, than Willard did with
Dempsey at Toledo.
"Harry is ready for Levinsky. I also
received another offer for Greb to box
Jamaica Kid, Dempsey's sparring part
ner, in your city. I wish to state that
Greb will meet that other dark-skinned
fellow that was trained by the Jamaica
Kid. I mean Jack Dempsey.
"We are open for engagements any
time with that wonderful puncher, who,
according to his own gang, hit Jess sev
enty-seven times, and then the circus
man had to toss in the towel as a token
of defeat. Any time Dempsey wants a
fight with Greb he can have it, and he
will find that it won't be with a jelly
fish like Willard.
,"Greb gave away thirty-five pounds
to Brennan. That's almost as much as
Dempsey gave away to Willard. But,
take it from me, we're ready for Dempsey."

Billy Evans syndicated column from April 1922:

QUERIES
OF ALL SORTS
ABOUT SPORT
BY BILLY EVANS.
What chance would Harry Greb have
against Jack Dempsey'' Was Greb's
defeat of Tommy Gibbons a decisive
one? Of Greb or Gibbons which would
make the best showing against Demp
I sey in your opinion? R D G
Greb would have an outside chanco
in a bout with Jack Dempsey. After
the Gibbons fight I talked such a
match with Greb, and he expressed the
belief that he would be able to out
point Dempsey in 12 to 15 rounds as
decisively as be did Gibbons.
"Unless Jack should rock me to
sleep before the finish," Is the way
Greb put it
Giving away from 20 to 30 pounds,
as Greb would be forced to In a match
with Dempsey, there would always be
the danger of the big fellow putting
over the knockout punch.


Billy Evans from June 1922:

HARRY GREB CONFIDENT HE HAS GOOD CHANCE TO OUTPOINT DEMPSEY

By BILLY EVANSj
harry Greb the Pittsburg "Giant
Killer." doesn't bar any fighter in the
business.
After his bout with Tommy Gibbons
last winter I asked Greb what he
thought about a match with Cham
pion Jack Dempsey.
"I know it is going to make some
people laugh." he replied, "but I am
positive I can defeat Dempsey in a 12
or 15-round decision bout.
"Of course I wouldn't expect to
knock Dempsey out. My biggest
thought would be to keep from get
ting knocked out.
That is all I would have to do in
order to win a decision bout with
Dempsey, who is no harder to hit than
Gibbons, and who I feel sure, would
have as much trouble reaching me as
Gibbons did.

Bob Edgren syndicated column June 1922:

Greb is a very Good American Champion.
He can make the middleweight limit, yet he fights the heavyweights.
He even longs for a fight with Dempsey, which puts him in a class by himself.
Anyone else might want to meet Dempsey fo the money there'd be in it, but Greb
would go into a cellar with Jack to see what might happen. Hes curious you know.
He may get a match with Dempsey later on.

Bob Edgren speaking to Greb's manager George Engel in May of 1922:

Greb has one Idea fixed
in his head. It's that he can whip
Dempsey over any route from 15
rounds up or a shorter route If
Jack Insists on It. He has helped
Dempsey train several times, and he
knows every move Dempsey makes.
Dempsey never has been able to
hold Greb off, and he couldn't do
it In a fight.
" 'The way to beat Dempsey,' Greb
says, 'Is to keep him on his heels.
Don't let him set for a punch. Stay
on top of him and never stop hit
ting, and he can't do a thing.'
"If Greb gets on with Dempsey
the world Is going to see the busiest
15 rounds, If it goes that far, ever
pulled off in a ring,'


Billy Evans March 1922:

BY BILLY EVANS.
NEW YORK, March 18. Prior
to the fight with Harry Greb. Tommy
Gibbons was considered the logical
contender for a bout with Champion
Jackk Dempsey for the heavyweight
title.
Harry Greb for the time being at
least, has definately removed Gibbons
from the picture. Tommy must start
all again
It was figured that Greb was al
most a setup for Gibbons. As a mat
ter of fact preliminary arrangements
had been made for a bout between
Gibbons and Dempsey.
In order lo strengthen his claim
for such a bout, it was believed that
a decisive victory over Grob would
greatly Increase Tommy's popularity
and create interest in a match with Dempsey
ONLY MIDDLEWEIGHT.
Gibbons staked everything on the
bout with Greb and lost. His defeat
at the hands of a fighter who is re
ally only a middleweight has com
pletely erased Tommy as a logical
contender.
Since Harry Greb decisively defeat
the man picked to meet Dempsey.
It would seem that such a victory
should give him tho right to a cham
pionship bout.
Greb is certainly entitled to a
chance with Jack Dempsey. If Gib
bons had decisively defeated Greb.
he would have been hailed as the
next opponent for Jack
Now that Greb has proved his com
plete mastery over Gibbons, the Pitts
burg whirlwind looms up as the logical
contender.
GREB HADE GREAT SHOWING.
Already some of the experts are
insisting that Greb should first meet
Tunney. the American light
heavyweight champion. Should he
be victorious he should then take on
Georges Carpenteer. champion light
heavyweight of the world.
Possibly Greb would prove no match
for Dempsey, However. I am posi
tive that he would make a much better
showing than did Carpentier.
There is no real reason that can be
offered why Greb. ln order to be en
titled to a fight with Dempsey. should
be forced to eliminate a number of others
who think they are of championship
caliber.
Greb. by his showing against Gib
bons, has established his right to a
Dempsey bout
The decisive manner in which he
defeated the much touted Tommy
Gibbons has won him that consideration.

 

I understand that. But it's a very dismal defense. Walcott didn't do much at all in the rematch, and when he went up a gear he got himself KO'd.

What ?
He was easily beaten by Charles in their first match in 1949, and fight he had "earned" by taking a year off after getting KO'd by Joe Louis. (That's how slow the division was moving at the time !)

He "earned" his second go at Charles by LOSING to a raw novice, Rex Layne.
He was considered a safe defense for Charles the third time too.

Sure, I give him props for winning that fight by impressive KO.

Name these "several defenses" ?

Marciano was a great fighter, yes.
I'm talking about the era between Louis (or from the tail end of Louis's reign, post-ww2) and the rise of Marciano.
It was noted as a weak period.

Walcott and Ray were OLD men who'd been fighting 13 - 20 years. They came to the fore largely because promoters saw no young talent in the stagnant heavyweight ranks. This was all duly noted at the time.

Bivins was on the decline by 1946. Unfortunately he peaked during the war years, when the titles were frozen.

Charles was the best of the lot, a light-heavyweight really.
I don't think Layne amounted to much, to be honest.

 

When was Walcott's prime ?
I would say we should consider 1945 - '51 his prime years for convenience, but bear in mind that many at the time didn't feel that way. They thought he was past his prime but in great shape for his age and just benefitting from the decline in the young talent of the division.

 

Jab,after reading those articles you posted above, can there really be any doubt that the 160 pound Harry Greb, was the best P4P fighter in history ?
I think not !!!

 

I have had either him or Langford in the top spot for some time now. I certainly don't think anyone has a better resume, and considering he wasn't a big puncher he is the most dominant fighter I've ever seen or read about. The guy was a marvel. Its to bad there none of his fights to be found on film.

 

You mean on his way to getting knocked out.
He received warnings from the referee for "not fighting".
The fact that he was ahead demonstrates how slow and washed-up Louis had become - trailing to a man who wasn't doing much.

Layne was a 22 year old with 18 month pro experience. He was considered green, inexperienced, a novice. You'll find that in the papers too, an opinion based on the facts. "The next Dempsey" is simply hype.

That's good PR for Bob Baker. And Clarence Henry. Of course there were decent young fighters around, but it was no great era of young talent or lots of meaningful HW action.
Lee Savold was another old washed-up guy who became a top-rated fighter in the era, and largely because of thinning ranks of heavyweights.
You can glorify the era all you like, but if you read the newspapers of the time (which you clearly do) you will know that the heavyweight division was considered weak around 1947 - '50, and many of the few young promising fighters turned out to be disappointing.

 

Quoting top 10 rankings isn't an argument against it being a weak era.
Obviously there's always a top 10, in whatever era.

Savold had seen better days. Maybe Woodcock wasn't much good - certainly didn't became the Wladimir Klitschko of his day, did he ?

I've covered most of this in earlier posts. We're going around in circles.

Some of those guys beat Walcott too, or held him to very close decisions.

 

It's comments like this that shows your unreasonable bias against an era. Everything I say about the late 1940s HWs is based on facts and commentary from the times, and I don't demean the fighters by implying they were "farmers" rather than elite professional fighters.
Of course the 1920s fighters knew how to box, more than you'll ever know by watching them.

 

Dempsey should be favoured to win, but, as everyone has already stated, things would not be easy.

Walcott wasn't just a pest, but dangerous. His knack for causing educated boxers to cross their legs in technical dismay was unique to him. He suggested boxing only to skirt away, to suddenly stop and retreat again. And then finally, when you thought the time to press was at hand he'd uncork a sinful right hand, such were his powers of observation.

Dempsey's elusiveness was first-class, but his basic defence was fairly loose, that head was there for right hands, and Walcott would find his mark, but Dempsey is too complete a cocktail of chaos to lose out in this one.

Walcott is not likely to knock Dempsey out and funnily enough, Ted Spoon believes there is in fact less chance of outpointing the Mauler. Dempsey had a habit of choosing his moments and then sticking to you. The idea of inside-fighting was very different with Dempsey and made for insufferable instances of rabbit punching and kidney-drumming.

He didn't just march in, but was actually an out-and-out expert in breaking you down; this is why Tommy Gibbons could do little against him - a man who would have made many a heavyweight look silly. Dempsey's rough stuff was of a Bernard Hopkins calibre and Walcott would find it hard to bare as Jack zigzagged into range.

None of this is to downplay 'Jersey Joe', but it is indeed styles. When Dempsey comes to the fray, trim at 188lbs, full of fury and ready to dig deep it equals a tall order for a wonderful, if outgunned phantom.