Joe Louis Gets A Pass For J H Lewis. Jack Dempsey Gets Ripped For Miske

You dont get title shots based on what you do AFTERWARDS. If I get a title shot in my first fight, lose in one sided fashion, and then 3 years later turn around and accomplish something does that mean I deserved the title shot in my first fight? No. Thats ludicrous. Furthermore, look closely. What exactly did Miske accomplish after Dempsey except to beat a bunch of also-rans and have his biggest wins suffer the stink of controversy.

 

Not in St. Paul he was told not to return. It was called a "fiasco." It was said "Fulton did everything but fight." He was called a "bitter disappointment" whose showing "was a sad blow to boxing in Minnesota" and "the quick ending of the main event immediately brought calls for action" It was a joke. When the commission met the following week Fulton had fled down to New Orleans rather than face them and everyone was surprised to hear he intended to fight on as his retirement was called for. So, yeah, real feather in Miske's cap. Go read the Brennan writeups. Same thing.

 

I guess he faked dying of Kidney disease, a long and drawn out process. LOL. You can believe Miske was this killer if you want but for the record the only really threatening opponent he faced was Gibbons who didnt lose a round to Miske of their two fights during this period despite getting DQd in controversial fashion. Go read the writeups if you dont think Brennan and Fulton might have been giving Miske the same charity Dempsey did (Who by the way knew Miske a hell of a lot better than you and admitted himself he knew Miske was dying when they fought). If you dont believe he was ill with Kidney disease then consult his hometown newspaper. On July 11, 1919 they reported that his physicians had instructed him to retire due to an old "hip and spine" injury which had negatively effected his kidneys. But hey, so long as its Dempsey he can do no wrong right?

 

First of all, calm the f□k down or you'll get a fatal conniption . Second, and lastly, I did not say that Dempsey should get a free pass on or to anything. Read my posts before puking all over this thread.

 

It was interesting reading this thread.

The difference to me is that Louis was active defending his title against top contenders. He defended against Farr in 1937. Mann and Schmeling in 1938. And Galento and Pastor in 1939.

So down defenses against Harry Thomas and Jack Roper are forgivable.

John Henry Lewis? Well, two things stand out. One is that on paper he was not an unworthy challenger at all. He was the light-heavyweight champion, usually enough in itself to earn a shot, and was coming off a series of wins. He had beaten the tough Al Gainer less than three months before challenging Louis. The only issue on which to downgrade him is his eye problems. He had medical reasons to retire, but as has been mentioned, there have been quite a few fighters from Greb to Frazier who did well with impaired vision.

As for Dempsey and Miske. I am not that critical of Dempsey for taking on Miske, at least in theory. The two men had fought a draw in 1918, and a six round decision victory for Dempsey hardly cleared the air. Dempsey had unfinished business with Miske, so I can see this fight being made.

Bill Brennan actually seems a less defensible opponent, at least in being picked over Wills, Greb, or Gibbons, having already lost badly by KO to Dempsey.

So I have no criticisms of Louis defending against Lewis or Dempsey against Miske except for the medical issues raised,

but frankly, in both cases, their records confuse that issue for me. Lewis was on a winning streak going in and had beaten a tough man less than three months earlier. Miske would go on a winning streak after the Dempsey fight. Lewis might not have been bothered as much by the vision impairment as assumed. Miske's disease might have been in remission.

I don't profess to know the bottom line about either man and his physical condition.

 

So you just admitted you had a set agenda prior to making this thread. predictable, given your hero worshiping of Dempsey and Johnson

Klompton took you to school regarding Dempsey, per usual

 

Real mature of you to start a thread for childish reasons. I don’t think unforgiven agrees with your intentions.


“Dempsey haters”

Do you admit you are a marciano hater?

 

I do see certain parallels between these fights.

All three challengers had good credentials on paper, due to their previous body of work, but wore probably diminished as head to head threats.

The difference is that Louis and Ali could probably afford to take such a fight, at the respective stage of their title reigns, more so than Dempsey.