Rare

Dempsey is showing better technique in his losing efforts than Wills is showing here by a large margin. if you watch the first three rounds of Dempseys first bout with Tunney his technique, combination punching far outshines anything Wills is doing here. I am sure Wills was better than what is being shown in these clips however.

 

This content is protected

 

And so does Dempsey if you have the ability to factor out the poor film quality. I have seen all of Tunneys, Gans, Wilde, Leonard bouts that are available and they all exhibit the same herkyjerky poor fluidity of motion as Any silent movie pre 1920 exhibits.

 

I do agree that the two Wills clips are not bad when it comes to the time period in question. Still the fluidity of motion is lost. I am sure Wills was better in person than what we are seeing here.

 

You asume that Wills had more gears,reports of those fights state not that he was coasting , but that he tried to get rid of those opponents and failed .

ps If you want to continue this charade of posting under two user-names , you might try to vary your points a bit.

 

mcvey you have been accusing me of being someone else for months now. You seem incapable of accepting the belief that more than one person can share the same opinion on Harry wills.

Truth be told much of what Steve has posted on Wills he got from me while my connection was down.

But I suppose you also think Im HeGrant, who doesnt agree with you either. Or any of the other posters who disagree with you.

Irregardless you can believe what you wish. Its no skin off my nose what gets your blood pressure up.

The facts are, and will remain regardless of how much you argue, that Dempsey ducked his most threatening challenger for the majority of his career and did so because he knew he was a threat. Thats not going to change because someone with an obvious case of biased hero worship tries to pick and choose his information to suit his argument.

Dempsey's actions reflect poorly on him, hurt his legacy, and leave big gaping questions as to his career. If you think he was the bee's knees thats fine but your arguments have become increasingly silly: A Dempsey who had his face battered into hamburger by Tunney looked better than Wills? Hilarious. See how much mileage you get out of that one.

 

Every one knows who you are . H. E .Grant and I pm'd each other the other day.
I've never suggested that Wills did not deserve the title shot he never got. I've stated he did many times. Dempsey being afraid of Wills I don't see, he was fighting men in saloons when he was 15 years old.


What has that to do with picking who wins?. I say Dempsey beats Wills if you think otherwise fine.I also say Wills best scalp is that of a man who was not even a true heavyweight a man over whom he enjoyed considerable weight and height advantages,[ 8",] and who was between 34 and 40 for the majority of those fights and, for a lot of them ,[9 ,] half blind. Langford last beat Wills in 1916 , at the end of that year Sam drew with Bill Tate ,and lost to him in Jan of 1917. Wills gets a lot of kudos for beating up an old fat man imo.

 

The clips of wills we have in no way shows he could do anything with Dempsey. I don't think the fight would last any more than a round or two. Big target, no movement but instead a rather stationary fighter.

Wills himself did not believe Dempsey had any fault in the matter....he stated as such years later. You are second guessing the man himself?

 

What are you talking about. Wills blamed Dempsey. Here is an example. The page is in bad shape but in the original article Wills discusses how Dempsey was afraid to risk his prestigue by fighting Wills:

http://news.google.com/newspapers?i...harry wills dempsey ducked me&pg=4172,4607422

Wills softened his stance toward Dempsey somewhat in later years just as Dempsey softened his stance to Tunney and Tyson softened his feelings about Holyfield but dont doubt for a second that Wills didnt hold Dempsey as responsible as Rickard and Kearns.

The films of Dempsey against Tunney illustrate that he would have been easy picking for Wills who probably would have stopped him.

 

This is total nonsense . The films demonstrate that Wills was smart to give Tunney a thumbs down because he would have been out manouvered, out speeded ,and out jabbed
Nine months after Sharkey beat the **** out of Wills , so badly that he quit . Dempsey kod Sharkey

below an extract by Kevin Smith


Smith pointed out, “Wills was past his prime when he fought Sharkey and pretty much there against Firpo.” His loss to Sharkey and Basque contender Paolina Uzcudun in 1927 ended his chances for a title shot. In particular, his loss to Sharkey gave white promoters an excuse to end Wills’ quest for the title. His narrow victory over Firpo merely confirmed in the minds of white writers and boxing analysts that Wills did not really deserve a chance at either Tunney or Dempsey. Grantland Rice summed up most reporters’ attitudes when he wrote about Wills after the Firpo fight, “Wills is not a fighter in Dempsey’s class, not even close.”


In part of a 1924 Time article Dempsey tells how he thinks the fight would go.

Jack Dempsey, who writes "feature stories" for the Hearst press, expressed himself last week as follows: "All this talk around New York that I am afraid to fight Harry Wills is beginning to get on my nerves. . . . Just let me get in the ring with Harry Wills and I'll win in a round or two. They tell me that Wills has a habit of grabbing an opponent around the neck with his left hand and then, as he pulls him in, Harry hooks his right to the body. Well, let me tell...







http://www.britishpathe.com/video/whirlwind-wills-wins/query/Harry

 

If we have to judge fighters just by film footage no objective knowledgeable person would pick Wills over Dempsey. He appears as an immobile open target.....Dempsey would end the fight very early.

 

In that article Wills contradicts himself...if one breath Dempsey ducked him in another the older men running the NY boxing commission would not allow a mixed race bout. In another breath had he, Wills, changed managers the fight would have been made. Obviously a complex issue as to why the bout never happened. Wills is just hypothesizing concerning Dempsey of course and he further muddies the waters by stating Dempsey had nothing to do with it a decade later.

 

Nope. Nobody would pick the Dempsey of the Tunney fights who was getting beaten in every single round over the Wills of the Madden and Firpo fights. Why would they? Dempsey looked no better than Madden when he fought Tunney. He was clueless whereas Wills was the one controlling the fight and winning rounds.

This is another example of a wet tissue paper weak argument to prop up your hero. Its sad and impotent.

If you want to compare Dempsey of 1924 against Wills of 1924 Im all for it but only of those guys fought that year. If you want to compare Dempsey of 1925 against Wills of 1925 Im all for it but only one of those guys fought that year.

You can compare what Wills did against Sharkey against what Dempsey did against Sharkey but the fact remains that Sharkey dominated Dempsey as easily as he dominated Wills until a cheap shot finish saved Dempsey. Had Dempsey been disqualified against Sharkey as Wills was we wouldnt be having this conversation, we would be saying Dempsey took the easy way out rather than suffer the beating that he was getting.

Your attempts to paint that situation as something more are pure fantasy.

Im supposed to care what Dempsey thought about the fight? Show me an interview where Wills didnt think he would beat Dempsey.

Im not sure where Mr. Smith got his information but there were plenty of white reporters (and lets not forget the multitude of black ones as well) who thought Wills was in Dempsey's class or we wouldnt even be having this discussion.

So lets catalogue these arguments and let objective readers check them for facts:

Wills was slow, couldnt punch, and a stationary target made to order for Dempsey so it doesnt matter if they fought or not Dempsey would have won.

Wills as an old man said in an unquoted source that it wasnt Dempsey's fault that they didnt fight after years of claiming otherwise so its ok that Dempsey avoided him.

Dempey drew the color line on numerous occasions but then told the press he was willing to fight black men, he didnt, but this proves he wasnt avoiding Wills.

Dempsey used black fighters as paid employees while refusing to fight them but this proves that he saw them as equals and was willing to face Wills on equal standing.

Wills' best wins were against smaller fighters than Dempsey so he didnt deserve a title shot and shouldnt have been considered a serious contender, even though Dempsey made a championship career out of defending against smaller fighters.

Wills fought and won numerous elimination bouts that were promoted as such by promoters and the press but he didnt always knock guys out in 2 or 3 rounds and wasnt in life and death battles so he really didnt deserve a shot at the title over exciting fighters like Bill Brennan, Gene Tunney, and Tommy Gibbons, and Billy Miske who were like the Mike Tyson's of their day.

A minority of white boxing writers felt that Wills wasnt in Dempsey's class (whether it was because of his skin color or his supposed lack of ability) so despite Wills standing Dempsey was justified in avoiding him.

Dempsey signed an agreement which stated he would face Wills. The contract was drawn up by Rickard who is universally considered a stumbling block in the match, which had no date, no site, and no other particulars. Essentially it was meaningless, but that proves Dempsey was sincere in facing Wills.

Dempsey signed another agreement drawn up by his friend Floyd Fitzsimmons at a time when he was facing a ban in New York if he didnt agree to fight Wills and at the same he was negotiating with Rickard for a bout with Tunney (to be held in the same month as the supposed Wills bout). When Dempsey was not paid his first inducement (nearly a year before the match was scheduled to be held) it opened the door for him to back out but this shows Dempsey was sincere in his efforts to face Wills.

Dempsey refused or ignored all offers to face Wills if they didnt originate from Rickard (who even apologists admit wasnt going to promote that bout) or Floyd Fitzsimmons but he was interested in making the fight

Dempsey was controlled on this matter by Rickard and Kearns even though he fought twice as champion under a different promoter and spent the last year and half of his championship parted from Kearns, even so he had no choice in the matter and so no responsibility should lay with him for avoiding Wills.

Is that it or are there any more ridiculous arguments you guys want to bring up? Because on paper I hope those who arent either biased or racist realize how stupid these look.

 

If you watch his bout with Sharkey there is no evidence that the last blows to the body were low. They seemed to be right on the belt line. Dempsey was killing Sharkey to the body most of that bout. Articles concerning that fight indicate Dempsey came on strong mid fight even though behind on the scorecards. Those that were at ringside were divided as to whether the blow or blows were low...there was no slow motion replay in those days of course. The film to me is very clear....the two blows preceding the last you can see are above the belt line. Then the fighters turn so you can't see the last punch but you don't see Dempsey lowering his shoulder or arm to land a low blow. The last blow lands it seems just like the two before it. If indeed the last blow was low it absolutely was not low by very much that's is for sure.