I think we all agree that Dempsey should have an asterisk next to his name and that his "reign" was more a fabrication than a reality. He should be given a quaint emeritus status or such but not that of real champion. You guys have come far. Don't think I haven't noticed or that I do not commend you. Progress has been made here.
And sir, I contend that you and other haters of Jack Dempsey should also have an "asterisk" on your posts....For your info Dempsey had 7 title bouts during his "reign", not much difference than other heavyweight champions who preceded him... Par for the course of those times...
Shamust, you are totally embarrassing yourself here. Psst, don't tell anybody but there is no asterick on Dempsey's name or his reign, sorry. But I'll tell you what you can do write your own version, and put astericks everywhere, and post it, see if anyone gives a good dump. lol. You are like an old gossiping lady, stirring the pot more for reaction then substance. :silly
While l think that's a slightly different topic you're 100% correct. In terms of his impact to the sport he's no worse then top 3. He put boxing on the map.
To be honest with you, I'm not a fan of taking someone worst performance to use for a hypothetical match-up nor do l think it appropriate to use a win to devalue any particular fighter. I think there's huge fallacy when it comes to h2h ****ysis which is that there's an assumption that fighters are static, ie they don't have off nights, especially in their primes, which simply isn't the case.
I agree. I personally place no blame whatsoever on Dempsey not fighting Wills cause l have no reason to believe he's lied about anything he's said regarding his willingness to fight him. But you certainly can't judge Dempsey by today's standards with respect to race, that's just utter nonsense. And if people want to degrade his accomplishments because of this then the are welcome to it.
This is one interpretation. Here's another. Boxing is and always has been a business and most of the decision making especially in that time period rested with the promoters, not the fighters. And if my understanding is accurate Rickard was absolutely dead set against an inter-racial fight for the heavyweight title, nor were the boxing commissions particularly enamored with the prospect. And l highly doubt Dempsey was thinking l wonder what those people on a boxing Internet website are going to think of me 90 years later if the Wills fight doesn't happen. And even then, it's my understanding that he signed a contract to fight him so l'm confused about why there's so much hostility directed at him regarding this.
I have this bio of Johnston by Burns and this is definately the point. I'm not sure how many people died after that fight but l'm sure it was in the hundreds, virtually all of them black and the whole country not just a town or two were affected by this fight.
Substitute the words "threat to win" with "threat of a cross country riot" if he won and you're bang on.
If you wanted to defend Dempsey in this from a moral standpoint, you actually have a fair amount to work with. He didnt only sign two contracts to fight Wills, he also announced his retirement after one of them fell through. He basically stepped aside for Wills, and left commissions free to match Wills with another fighter, for the vacant title. In order to hold Dempsey responsible, you have to assume a degree of collusion, between himself and the commissions.
I agree. Sure, Dempsey was rocked early(it happens!) and more pushed than punched out of the ring, but other than that he beat the tar out of Firpo! On the whole I find Dempsey very hard to rate. He impresses me on film and I think he is one of the real natural talents in heavyweight history, but I think some of the criticism of his title reign is fair.
I think that even if you take the best possible view of Dempsey’s motives, you would have to acknowledge that he asked for a career high payday to fight Wills, and only got serious about it when he was looking to get out of the game.
Rickard and Kearns motives come from the aftermath of Johnsons victory over Jeffries and that "color line" that was drawn and WAS EXPECTED TO BE DRAWN of all early hwt champions. There was no color line (in terms of a white man fighting for the hwt championship) when Johnson was hwt champion because Johnson would not fight the leading black contenders! Either he fought the leading white contenders or he would fight no one. Again years later Wills cast no blame on Dempsey. Why go against the man himself when he states he laid no blame on Dempsey? Regarding the purse Dempsey wanted to fight the top leading contender of course it would be high! Did Ali get peanuts for fighting Frazier in Manilla? No he got mega bucks and it should be expected he would get mega bucks. Top bouts demand top pay days. Dempsey was the first white hwt champion to withdraw the color line and he stated he would meet any fighter regardless of race. The reason he did not face Wills was due to outside forces which included not only the most powerful people in the sport at that time but also the American culture of that time.
