Question to those who rank Dempsey high

Fine, I've always agreed that he was a great fighter, but rating him at #5 is not clearly justified in my opinion. That's all I'm saying.

 

Do you think that giving Barbados Joe Walcott a shot is stretching things a bit?

( relax dmt, I'm only joking ), breath.

 

Jack Dempsey gave Billy Miske a title shot, who was regarded as one of the better contenders at the time. Miske had only won 3 out of his last 7 outings, and maybe 7 out of his last 15. I know this argument always seems to bounce off of the old school defenders here, but if someone like Lennox Lewis or Wlad Klitschko had given a shot to a fighter with such numbers, everyone here would **** a Christmas tree.

 

As a favor. Miske needed money.

 

As a favor?

Is this how title shots were given back then, and this particular defense being one of only 6 for Dempsey?

 

You find something wrong with someone being generous to a sick person in need of money?

 

No Id on't , and frankly I don't think that you really believe that was my point. Nice try at attempting to draw attention away from the real issue. My point is that Miske was viewed as a top cotender during Dempsey's reign. The man fought a slew of opponents ranging from average to good, and wound up with a mixed bag of results prior to facing Dempsey. Only winning 3 out of your last 7 fights, and having your most recent win agianst a 3-13, tomato can, doesn't exactly warrant a title shot by the standards of most eras in the sport. Frankly, I think Chuck Wepner was about as deserving if not more so then Miske was, and the reputation of the champion who gave him that shot did not ride on Wepner so much as Dempsey's did on Miske. Dempsey defended his title very few times given the duration that he was champ, and infortunately Miske was one of them. Thus far, Dempsey defenders have been reduced from saying :

" he had one of the most dominant reigns"

to

" he had a quality body of works, although he was inactive,"

to

" he gave shots to fighters who were in need of money."

I'm waiting for people to say:

" he had excellent taste in clothes"

 

There is another angle on it.

Miske gave Dempsey two close fights before he won the title and was still higly regarded on paper. It made sense without the blinding light of hindsight.

Anway I am off out for a few pints and a bar fight with Young Griffo.

 

Have a good weekend.

 

So, he shouldn't have given Miske the fight?

 

Not soley on the basis of helping him out no. If he wanted to, he could have called for an exhibition, and given the proceeds to Miske, but a genuine title shot certainly not. Now if Miske was truley the only deserving contender around at the time, then perhaps I can see an argument being made. With Wills, Godfrey and a few others meandering about however, I'm not so sure that this was the case.

 

" he had excellent taste in clothes"

 

Look, it is okay to assert Dempsey would have knocked out Ali, Louis, and Marciano each in the first round without breaking a sweat, but "had excellent taste in clothes." He was a hick from the sticks who used Jack Kearns as he sartorial model. His sense of color coordination was emetic to every reputable haberdasher in the country. Get real. Some opinions are too outrageous to be ever be put forward.

 

Outside of training footage, and boxing, Dempsey was always wearing tex's.

Think of a boxer James Bound so to speak.