I am not desirous of a general brawl on an internet message board. I am just trying to get some statements that have been made reconciled with the facts of record.
About you that's for sure It's all good, PI, I know it's none of my business, but when I see you attack Burt and others the way you do, well I feel someone has to say something. Burt is a true blue boxing fan, who comes on here with posts that have substance unlike your posts. Burt and others can have opinions that might not agree with yours, it's ok, it doesnt make them stupid, or ignorant. To learn you have to ask questions. I guarantee you would never say the things you in a room full boxing guys. Say what you will about fighters they are the most respectful people out there. After most fights what do the fighters do, they embrace in a true sportsmanship manner. Maybe we should do the same here, show good sportsmanship.
Which is this a rational post or a post with substance? The fact is you post to agitate, or sarcasm. You have posted mostly opinions not facts. You cant reconcile anything when you wont accept the facts that are on record as facts. Again, "If you want respect you give respect".
I have quoted articles most here have never seen and refered to actual records of fighters. That records are the substance of the game is an objective fact, not opinion. That contemporary columnists and fellow fighters expressed certain issues regarding Dempsey is a recorded fact not an opinion. I like Burt. I have privately wished him well in his dire times. I like his contributions. However, outside of his obsession with GGG, he is mostly stuck in the old days. History is constantly reexamined, especially as the perspective that time allows is gained. Events must always be reexamined.
Thank you, I guess it's a matter of interpretation. Please keep posting I love reading about boxing from all eras. I tell you this I have a new respect for Harry Greb, from my constant bickering with, you know who. If anybody truly deserved a shot at Dempsey it was he. But I can understand why he didn't get the shot. Was it fair, no it wasn't. I 'll tell you this Dempsey would've had more problems with Greb then he would've had with Wills.
"not to fight and thus eliminate any of his leading rivals including Tommy Gibbons, Billy Miske, Georges Carpentier, Jim Maloney, Harry Greb, Young Stribling, and Jack Delaney" I know this isn't your thought, but you are quoting it, and I think this is just poor. Wills signed with Rickard to fight ANYONE Rickard chose with the winner to get Dempsey. Rickard chose Firpo, so I assume that at that point, the summer of 1924, Rickard thought Firpo the top contender other than Wills. (remember, those yearly ratings were by Rickard). So Wills eliminated Firpo right there. Well, then what were the ratings for the end of 1924. Wills #1 contender. Gibbons #2 contender. Weinert #3 contender. Wills fights Weinert in 1925 and eliminates him. Gibbons has already gotten a shot at the title and lost decisively. I don't see any issue here. Wills should be getting a shot at the title. Wills didn't fight Renault, but Weinert was rated ahead of Renault, so why should Wills have been fighting Renault rather than Weinert? "What has Tunney to do with the thread." My point is that white fighters tended to avoid tough black fighters more often than not. Loughran just adds more proof to my case. I have to look up what top black fighter Stribling fought. I find it interesting if he did, as he was a Georgian, I believe.
Just on Young Stribling, a question open to anyone. Which black fighters did Stribling fight? It would be very interesting if he did, as he was a Southerner. searching his 291 fights, I didn't recognize any black fighters, but perhaps others can. *for non-Americans, at that point in history I think mixed matches between blacks and whites were illegal in the South. It was a time when there were actually separate drinking fountains for whites and blacks in Southern states.
Sam Langford, when asked how Harry Wills (whom he fought 18 times in his career) would do against Jack Dempsey, said in the June 5, 1922, Atlanta Constitution "Well if he ever fights Dempsey my money will be on the present champion. Dempsey is the greatest fighter I have ever seen. Understand Langford is considered perhaps the greatest pfp fighter in boxing history.
In Roger Khans bio of Dempsey, he observes that while the skills of Georges Carpentier have dimmed over the decades, the skills of Harry Wills have grown. He quotes Ray Arcel in describing Wills as a very good journeyman. Arcel, who had apprenticed with Wills trainer Dai Dollings, also told referee Arthur Mercante, Wills was big and none too fast. It was a terrible injustice that Wills never got a title shot, but those big, slower guys were made to order for Dempsey. James Dawson, who wrote for The New York Times, wrote after Wills loss to Sharkey, None who saw last nights battle can doubt that Dempsey would have annihilated Wills four years ago, three years ago, or a year ago.
Direct quotes from two individuals as close to the game as you could get in the 20's. Note the Arcel tie in with Wills via his trainer.
It sickens me that fanboys feel the need to degrade Wills in order to bolster the flimsy status of their champion, Dempsey. Here is George Underwood on Wills, 3/7/22... "The Wills that finished Norfolk in less than two rounds can take Tom Gibbons, Fred Fulton and Bill Brennan or any other three heavyweights that can be named, including Carpentier, in the same ring on the same night and stop the whole trio inside 10 rounds. The Wills who beat Norfolk is bigger, stronger, faster and a harder hitter than Dempsey... as far as the ring essentials go Wills undoubtedly has a decided edge on Jack."
More Seemus Trolling. Nobody knew Wills better than Langford. They fought 18 times. Here is what Sam said about a proposed Dempsey Wills bout: Sam Langford, when asked how Harry Wills (whom he fought 18 times in his career) would do against Jack Dempsey, said in the June 5, 1922, Atlanta Constitution "Well if he ever fights Dempsey my money will be on the present champion. Dempsey is the greatest fighter I have ever seen. So thats the greatest p4p fighter ever to live talking. The greatest boxing trainer ever, the greatest pure boxer to ever hold the hwt championship AND the greatest p4p fighter ever all hold Dempsey in very high esteem. The highest esteem. Do we believe them or a couple of hacks on ESB? Hmmmmm
Once again the clueless PI, relies on hearsay as facts, poor you. The many the few:!::!: I await your historical fiction next reply:happy:happy
