Sam Langford Gives His Thoughts On Jack Johnson

Blah blah blah. the fact of the matter is its all in my book, all cited, all in public with my name on it and until you can actually give real examples as to why im supposedly wrong or cherry picking and put your name on them you are nothing but a sad dempsey fanboy hiding behind your heros name on an internet forum. lol. if you or perry care to take up the challenge then by all means do so, my work stands on its own two feet and i stand behind it. until you can actually add anything beyond the same tired bleating like a broken record you two and your comical trolling threads arent worth responding to. the only purpose it serves is to distract from the fact that once again mendoza is being made to look like a fool.

 

prof you still running you still cant answer anything that doesnt require a citatation, now that is funny and sad, cos you actually think it's in my book is an answer. FYI, it isnt, from your repeating posts you have admitted that you cant answer and so you run, and run and r.......

 

BTW prof, what thread have you made that has 1449 replies and 211,147 views?

 

Blah blah blah. the fact of the matter is its all in my book, all cited, all in public with my name on it and until you can actually give real examples as to why im supposedly wrong or cherry picking and put your name on them you are nothing but a sad dempsey fanboy hiding behind your heros name on an internet forum. lol. if you or perry care to take up the challenge then by all means do so, my work stands on its own two feet and i stand behind it. until you can actually add anything beyond the same tired bleating like a broken record you two and your comical trolling threads arent worth responding to. the only purpose it serves is to distract from the fact that once again mendoza is being made to look like a fool.

 

I am going to share your laffable views on the Shelby Dempsey - Gibbon fight, further illustrating your lack of knowledge of the game. I lovee it that you are giving me this opportunity. Hope it helps you sell your book, subtitled: My unique spins and exaggeration of the life and times of Harry Greb

 

While searching for the silly Shelby posts you made, I came across this fine example of your spinning to fit your storyline, further exposing what little you know about boxing and how it works.



klompton2 said: "Another thing is the timeline above stating Dempsey signed to fight Wills in 1922.That simply isnt true. Go back and read the articles that Dempsey signed."
Dempsey signed a contract stating that he WOULD agree to fight Wills for an undetermined amount, at an undetermined location, on an undetermined date IF a promoter could come up with a REASONABLE offer.
This left the window open for Dempsey and company to simply refuse all offers as unreasonable which is what happened.


-Now that’s a load, he was the champion, since YDKSAB. Dempsey had every right to do that. Boxing is a sport but it’s also a business.

Breakdown the deal
-Dempsey agrees to fight with stipulations
-For a reasonable purse: Of course, this is reasonable he wants to get paid, and of course he decides what’s reasonable, what’s wrong with that?
Location tba
Promoter tba
Since you always read into things that make sense only to you

klompton2 said: This is why the NYSAC barred a Dempsey-Wills bout later in principle because William Muldoon had an ongoing battle against commercialism in boxing which he reasoned was ruining the sport (the effects of which we see today) he was trying to institute caps on ticket prices, purses, in order to keep the sport more pure.

Rickard seized on this and simply pretended the fight would be held in New York and would cost a fortune and the commission stepped in to stop it.

-Duh, Rickard didn’t have to pretend, it would have cost a fortune, just by paying Dempsey and Wills what each wanted, then everything else that goes into promoting a big fight. Muldoon, instituting caps would limit the gate substantially, nevermind about caps on purses. And you make a point of this that you reached your delusion about Rickard “pretending:lol


klompton2 said: Those "articles" Dempsey signed were seen by most as the ruse they actually were in order to kick the can a little further down the road.

-Again, this is pure speculation on your part, what factual evidence do you have. Oh I know, the fact is that they didn’t fight so that lets you read into what each side done and come up with words like pretend, and ruse.


klompton2 said: Can you imagine if Floyd Mayweather had signed an "agreement" to "to sign" to fight Pac at "some place" at "some time" for "some money" as long as he got a "reasonable" offer?? People would have seen it for what it was: bull****.

-Not necessarily, he is giving Pac the chance to fill in the blanks, like where, date tba, for a purse he will accept. Dang, that is exactly what happened when Mayweather got what he wanted, they fought and he made many more millions for his end, that's business many alts. The same could have been said of the Dempsey - Wills fight. You see how uninformed you are. Mayweather and Dempsey kicked the can to get what they each wanted and that was to be paid very well. You see the Mayweather strategy worked cos he got paid. Again you show you have a lack of knowledge of how boxing works.

klompton2 said: ↑
You have nothing better to do than rehash the same argument over and over again? I guess being a bedridden shutin that makes sense.

-Many alts why do you skirt the issue, the issue is not that I am bedridden or a shut in. FYI, I am not, I lead a pretty active life in boxing. The real issue is that you dksab. You told me to use the search button I did, and responded, to your post. re-hashing cos you still cant explain that deal. I responded to what you wrote, your own words.

 

Blah blah blah. the fact of the matter is its all in my book, all cited, all in public with my name on it and until you can actually give real examples as to why im supposedly wrong or cherry picking and put your name on them you are nothing but a sad dempsey fanboy hiding behind your heros name on an internet forum. lol. if you or perry care to take up the challenge then by all means do so, my work stands on its own two feet and i stand behind it. until you can actually add anything beyond the same tired bleating like a broken record you two and your comical trolling threads arent worth responding to. the only purpose it serves is to distract from the fact that once again mendoza is being made to look like a fool.

 

Oh wow the prof speaketh, leaving the door open, dont forget how made posts you made that exposes your total lack knowledge of boxing, I will can keep finding gems, that you cant explain.

 

Blah blah blah. the fact of the matter is its all in my book, all cited, all in public with my name on it and until you can actually give real examples as to why im supposedly wrong or cherry picking and put your name on them you are nothing but a sad dempsey fanboy hiding behind your heros name on an internet forum. lol. if you or perry care to take up the challenge then by all means do so, my work stands on its own two feet and i stand behind it. until you can actually add anything beyond the same tired bleating like a broken record you two and your comical trolling threads arent worth responding to. the only purpose it serves is to distract from the fact that once again mendoza is being made to look like a fool.

 

Here 'tis another spin and taking things out context and


dempsey1234 said: ↑

You say this how? Can you post the link or the article to Dempsey admitting he was ducking Wills. The contract was pretty clear from what you posted.
I know you're(notice the difference between "your and you're) honest but you tend to interpret things to suit your agenda.

Prof said: Your memory must be short. Ive already posted his exact words and the page number from his own book where he wrote them. But come on, you knew that. Just like Mendoza youll make the same ridiculous claim over and over and over and conveniently forget when the words of the people you are talking about are quoted verbatim.


Dempsey 1234 said: Many alts I found that Dempsey quote and of course you quoted that quote by Dempsey out of context, why am I not surprised. I found it in "Dempsey" by Jack Dempsey, P 150-151. Your interpretation is a bit off. What Dempsey said was "On July 11, a contract was signed with a clause stating the date be set within 60 days after a reliable promoter undertook to stage the bout'' this phrasing which was Doc's doing enabled him to get me out of the contract. They had a 30 day bidding period. The Dempsey - Wills fight was doomed from the start. No one would touch it". "As no promoter could be found to stage the the bout, the 30 day bidding period elapsed"
many alts your spinning the "Dempsey contract", to fit your hateful agenda didn't work.

Here is the complete quote from Dempsey "On July 11, a contract was signed with a clause stating the date be set within 60 days after a reliable promoter undertook to stage the bout'' this phrasing which was Doc's doing enabled him to get me out of the contract.
Despite the fact that the date, place and terms of the contract were blank, Paddy Mullins, decided to accept the agreement, banking on our reputations and signatures. When the negotiations were completed, it was agreed that neither Wills nor I would engage in any fights for a 30 day bidding period. The Dempsey - Wills fight was doomed from the start. No one would touch it". "As no promoter could be found to stage the the bout, the 30 day bidding period elapsed" this is what happened.

This is standard even today with all the sanctioning bodies, you give a contender the chance to find somebody to promote the fight and you set a time limit all within the champions rights. Kearns was smart cos a breach of a signed contract they could be sued. So within their rights he set a time limit. Of course the prof doesnt seem to understand basic neegotiating practices, he just willy, nilly adds his spin which only makes sense to him.

 

Blah blah blah. the fact of the matter is its all in my book, all cited, all in public with my name on it and until you can actually give real examples as to why im supposedly wrong or cherry picking and put your name on them you are nothing but a sad dempsey fanboy hiding behind your heros name on an internet forum. lol. if you or perry care to take up the challenge then by all means do so, my work stands on its own two feet and i stand behind it. until you can actually add anything beyond the same tired bleating like a broken record you two and your comical trolling threads arent worth responding to. the only purpose it serves is to distract from the fact that once again mendoza is being made to look like a fool.