Prime Jack Dempsey vs Prime Razor Ruddock

I meant, discussions of Willard v Fulton had been underway, if that wasn't clear.

Yes, I am well-acquainted with WW1 history. It's been my pet hobby for the past decade or so... from Tuchman to Christopher Clark's Sleepwalkers.

 

Orlin Norris fought at cruiserweight frequently, he wasn't a heavyweight his entire career. Norris and Damiani weren't the best available either. All around that era was weak too. A lot weaker than I thought.

 

Tyson crammed in 4 fights between October 1987-June 1988. A fight with Spinks, the #1 heavyweight, was on the horizon in late 1987. Holmes and Tubbs were former champions who knew a potential fight with Tyson had been in the works for a while now. You think these fights materialize within minutes?

You can argue that they were filler opponents until Tyson-Spinks was made. And I'm not making that argument.

Don King might be the easy answer to your question. If you didn't fight under his banner, ala Witherspoon and Holyfield, you weren't getting a title shot.

 

Ah, I see.

 

I'm not arguing that. Everything I'm typing is flying over your head.

Tyson steamrolled through the division in a few years. If he never fought Ruddock you'd be saying he didn't fight the best at that time. If he never fought Bruno you'd be saying he ducked the most powerful heavyweight in that time period.

It's not a weak division. Not saying it's the best heavyweight era ever but it's a solid group of guys without big names.

 

I praise Tyson on his frequency but the opponents weren't that good. Old inactive Holmes, Fat flat footed Tubbs who wasn't very good to begin with, and inactive Spinks who never really proved much at heavyweight outside of the Holmes wins.

 

Literally the only thing you said was about Orlin and Damiani apart from the rankings you posted. Which I responded to.

Tyson did steamroll through the division in a few years but this is relating to his title run. Which was unimpressive. Tyson didn't fight Ruddock in his original title run matter of fact he didn't have a title at all when he fought Ruddock. Don't forget that this argument isn't about Tyson's resume, it's about his title defenses not being against the very best he could face. At least in relation to Dempsey. Yes, if he never fought Bruno I would be saying he ducked a very worthy contender. If you didn't notice I corrected myself a while ago on the ranking. He was number 1 instead of my initial mistake of unranked.

It was a weak division when guys like Spinks are considered the best heavyweight around. The guys just weren't that good that were active compared to other eras. It wasn't the worst but it was in the lower half all around.

 

I take it all back, you're just a ******. It's not bias, it's ******ation.

 

You're quite the ignorant fellow. Perhaps it wasn't the right choice for you to come onto a public forum with so many opposing opinions? It seems you can't handle the diversity. Might still have some growing up to do.

 

I will say more. Dempsey would've beaten Tyson as well.

 

Based on his epic victory over heavyweight great Tommy Gibbons? Or dismantling the clever Firpo?

It's always special when people speak their mind.

 

Actually what?
A philanthropic donation doesn’t solve irrational public perception.

America had just started to get into the war around this time. Famine was the wrong word, it was not a famine. It was food shortages. And Americans were all doing some serious rationing.

America relied on the countries sense of compassion and patriotism to ration food and control their diets. News of a large prize fight with mega purses went directly against this. And the public tore it down, with a political cartoon depicting Willard and Fulton taking bags of money from US citizens being the primary catalyst.

 

Government rationing never went into effect in the US during WW1. The Lever Act went into effect after August 1917 which promoted self-rationing as you allude to. However, Willard and Fulton were first matched for February 22, 1916 but Willard balked in January at his pay and went on to fight Moran and Fulton was left with Flynn as an opponent. They were again scheduled to fight Labor Day 1916 which fizzled because Willard found $500 a day roping cattle in a circus to be easier money.. and the discussions of this match continued afterward until Dempsey sparked out Fulton in what Fulton claimed to be a double-cross.

More to the original point, Willard is on record twice during this period claiming retirement, openly stating his preference for circus work. He was not an active fighter in any regards and merely used the suggestion he would return to the ring as leverage to increase his circus income.