Oh, so he gave them a couple bucks to spar ... what a gem. So "the very different times" didn't care if he sparred with them. And "the different times" didn't care that every other man who held the heavyweight title fought the best black fighters of their eras. But "the different times" prevented Dempsey from fighting them? But he could give them a couple bucks to help him get ready to fight another white guy, and the "very different times" didn't mind? What a great guy. That's like saying, "You aren't invited to the party, BECAUSE I DON'T WANT TO INVITE YOU, but if you want to help me get dressed, I'll give you a couple bucks. Because I'm a swell guy." "The very different times" didn't prevent Wills from fighting Dempsey ... Dempsey prevented Wills from fighting Dempsey. There were no LAWS blocking it. By that point, there had been seven or eight heavyweight championship fights involving a black man and a white man. All but one went off without problems. "The very different times" would've loved to see Dempsey knock out Wills. Dempsey (and his camp) just weren't confident he could. So they threw up the color line ... and they focused on the one fight where people rioted and not on the six or seven others where people didn't .. because he thought he'd end up like Jeffries ... otherwise, there was no reason to bring it up. But if any of them wanted to help him get ready to fight some white guy who didn't deserve a shot, he'd give them a couple bucks and pat them on the head. This idol worship turns my stomach. Gotta go.
Yeah, I'm sure the guy who knocked out Schmeling and battered Carnera and beat every guy in camp in an actual fight was quaking in his boots when Dempsey told them "Don't fear, there will be no sparring today." The "awe" was coming from the sportswriters. "Willie at the Job" wasn't in awe. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-3U4-mv5_08
FYI, Juan Baby bull Diaz's manager, born in Louisiana, his legal first name was Dempsey, he is a great old black man, unlike you. Give all the tripe that you post a rest, cos the only racist is you.
Once again: "every other man who held the title did NOT fight the best black fighters or their eras" not when they were champion. Sullivan never even fought a black man, Fitz only a couple and only one of any note, Johnson when he himself was past it , he ignored Jackson.,Corbett one , Willard none,Tunney none, Burns was the lone exception, and after him only Johnson defended against a fellow black man,until Braddock went for his pension plan against Louis. From: Sullivan Corbett Fitzsimmons Jeffries Burns Johnson Willard Dempsey Tunney Schmeling Sharkey Carnera Baer Braddock Only the three underlined defended against black challengers. That is 3 champions ,[ only 2 of whom were white ,]out of 14 during a time scale of 45years! From; 1892 until 1948 a total of 56 years,only 4 black men challenged for the heavyweight title ,that's out of 74 contests for the title.. All Jack Dempsey's fault of course ,as was the Depression , the Wall Street Crash ,the Lindbergh kidnapping,and every suicide between 1919 and 1926.
Not only did Gains say that in his autobiography he said it to me at the Royal Albert Hall, during a boxing show. I guess he was lying. I wonder if you have any idea how absurd your phobic hatred makes you appear?:think
The three blows prior to the ko blow were not low. There is no evidence they were low. The ref who saw all three right hand body blows stated emphatically that those blows were legal.
The referee for Mares-Agbeko I also stated that the 20 or so low blows that Mares scored with were legal; the referee for Salido-Lomachenko declared that the 30 or so low blows (including one that appears to land just above the knee) from that contest were legal. What the referee declared about Sharkey-Dempsey is immaterial. The film shows absolutely clearly that a definitive statement one way or the other is impossible and those sat ringside seemed neatly divided and remained neatly divided after slow motion films were presented to them.
Did I? Based on how he did, I'd say John Lester Johnson deserved a re-match! Did you forget how Dempsey's manager said no Sam Langford because he was " too good " Surely Langford who owns a KO over Godfrey in the 1920's would have been a good choice too! And what about Kid Norfolk. He only holds a win over Greb, who Dempsey apparently avoided. Possibly Battling Siki too. From 1920, 1921, and 1922 he was a good fighter with a win over Georges Carpentier. You make a useless point about Dempsey sparring were sometimes black as if that matters. Okay, to flip you once again if they were that good, why not give them a title shot to? Dolt, I'm talking about when he was the champion in the late teen and early 20's. Sam was still dangerous than too. PS Dempsey wasn't a teenager in August 1915! Please show me the quote and date in context when his manager declined Langford. I suspect you won't offer it, and are wrong again. Langford, if there were rankings in the late teens and early 20's, would likely be top 5 in some years. Langford also owns two wins over Wills whom Dempsey ducked! Siki could hit. Dempsey vs Siki would be an action fight. He was better than Georges Carpentier. So why not this fight? In the context of skirting black challengers as Champion Dempsey isn't as bad as Jack Johnson, but he clearly avoided them, even the good enough ones for title shots.
The only thing that isn't in dispute except here is the short hook to the chin. The only thing different from then and now is multiple camera angles. You're right though we cant definitely say one way or the other. If you're a Dempsey fan of course it was legal. If you are in the middle it could be one way or the other. If you're a Dempsey hater, then without a doubt it was way low. ah boxing fan's
Listen to yourself. We're talking about all-time ratings here. Who cares if they fought the best black fighter of their era when they were young, when they were challenging for a title, when they were defending the title, after they lost the title ... basically every man who held the heavyweight title in the 20th Century fought the best black heavyweight of his era. Corbett fought Jackson; Burns, Jeffries and Willard fought Johnson; Johnson fought Langford, Jeannette, McVea (etc.) 170,000 times; Sharkey fought Wills and Louis; Schmeling fought Gains and Louis; Carnera fought Gains and Louis and everyone else; Baer fought Louis, Braddock fought Louis; and on and on and on. They ALL stepped up. They ALL actually weighed in, put on their gloves, got in the ring, and proved who was better that night. Dempsey didn't. Ever. Not before. Not during. Not after. There were no laws against it. Boxing was going on all over the world. But he didn't. Everyone around him managed to do it, but him. Everyone around him fought the top black heavyweight of their era in the U.S. or outside the U.S., In North America. In Central America. In Europe. In Australia. They all managed. All but Dempsey. Because he didn't think he'd win. And neither did his camp ... or they wouldn't point to Johnson-Jeffries, and riots breaking out when Jeffries lost, every time it came up. Riots didnt' break out when everyone else fought a black guy, for a title or not. Riots didn't break out when other white guys challenged Johnson. Riots didn't break out when white guys beat the black guys. All this bullcr2p about saving the blacks from rioters, and the blacks loved Dempsey because he paid them to spar for him, and he paid for their funerals ... Maybe they wouldn't have needed someone to pay for their goddamn funerals if the most money they got for taking on Dempsey wasn't just a couple bucks for sparring? It's so freaking condescending. Quit spitting out the freaking racist excuses. He didn't fight Wills because he thought he "might" lose and there "might" be riots. He didn't fight any top black fighters. None. And his wins over white opponents don't put him in any all-time top 10 heavyweight class. Fouling Sharkey and stopping Willard (one of the worst champs) are his best wins. That isn't good enough. If you're ranking him all-time, his list of opponents doesn't measure up. He in no way belongs in any top 10. Hell guys like Buster Douglas, who wouldn't be on most top 50 heavyweight lists, beat better heavyweights. Enough of the Dempsey JOCK SNIFFING. He wasn't expected to beat Willard. He fought a bunch of soft touches his team thought he could beat (or guys he had already beaten) as a defending champ because he was full of flaws. He ducked the best heavyweight (Wills) of his entire reign citing a riot that broke out a decade and a half earlier as his excuse, and his best win came in his last victory (over Sharkey), and even that is tainted. Dempsey wasn't one of the best heavyweights ever. Not after all the heavyweights we saw who stepped up and fought the best and were hands down better than Dempsey over the past 100 years since he won over Willard. He was a product of the Roaring Twenties. You could take all the guys Dempsey defeated in title defenses, throw them in the ring with George Foreman on a Saturday afternoon in Toronto, and Howard Cosell and Muhammad Ali would've sat ringside heckling George as Foreman bashed those scrawny light heavys and clumsy brawlers all over the ring. All time, Dempsey doesn't measure up. Trying to make him more than he was by saying his sparring partners "were in awe of him" - guys he wouldn't fight "for real" because of the color of their skin - is just blowing smoke. That's all.
