Thanks bro. I misunderstood then. I hate this type of **** though. There is a similair thing with Sugar and the Cocoa Kid...someone Robinson never did get in with.
this was in 1918 when Jack was supposed to fight someone else and found Jeannete there instead. I read the article before and it said "Dempsey appeared not the least disturbed" but Kearns got crazy and flatly refused and said under no circumstances would he allow this fight. If u r a sensible manager, u aren't putting ur fighter vs a good dangerous fighter on no notice. Dempsey stood there calmy whereas Kearns went crazy.
I'm not attacking Dempsey personally here, and I accept (generally) what it is that you are saying about Kearns. Let me ask you this - how cool would it have been if Jack had cleaned his clock for him?
everybody knows Willard was a weak champion, even Nat. Who on this forum claims he(Willard) was an all time great?
it would have been nice to see Jeannette getting slaughterd (most likely) or beaten. But u don't take fights like this on such notice.
I know he didn't clean out the divison. But Miske, Brennan, Fulton, Morriss, Gibbons and Levinsky were all considered among the top 10 or 15 contenders at the time when Dempsey handled them. And in case of Miske, Brennan and Morris they were beaten more then once.
Dempsey was whupping the guys Willard should have been fighting and perhaps later on the guys that Tunney should have been fighting.
I would give him some credit for it but not much. Sam Langford is perhaps my favourite fighter and I am personaly glad that Dempsey did not beat up on an old and half blind version of him. Incidentaly Langford was a fighter Dempsey thought verry highly of and emulated.
I thin it would have been the coolest thing since Johnson if Dempsey, presented with an ATG fighter, calmly stepped into the ring and beat him. Everything that has been said in this thread about "not taking a fight like that on no notice" would still be true, but now Demspey would have ice in his veins instead of a question mark concerning his courage. I accept most of what has been said here about Kearns, but this boils down to seeing a bigger dog than you were prepared for and putting your tail between your legs because of this.
Wrong comparison. Read the article, Dempsey had already beaten the likes of Levinsky and Fulton, who were highly regarded. Boytsov has not nearly fought anyone of that class let alone beat. On top of that, Calvin Brock is about 30 years old and near his prime, Jeannette was 39 years old and washed up. I was talking about the pre-title period, when they were old but not done yet. The story i referrered to earlier was also pre-title, in 1918 i believe. Hence the comparison with Frazier beating Machen: also a pre-title fight against an old but good contender. Sharkey better than Quarry? Quarry never lost to the likes of Risko, Levinsky, Loughran (lightheavy). I would say they are at least on the same level. Who did Gibbons to be ranked higher than Quarry? Miske may be off the same level. Bonavena is a bit below but not far. And then there's Ali who blows everyone on his record away easily. So clearly the edge goes to Frazier. Read it again, i said "... sloppy film doesn't stop Tunney from looking bad.". And Tunney did in fact use the jab against Carpentier. Just that he mostly used it to set up other shots rather than to keep his distance, because he knew too that Carpentier was a soft fight as Dempsey did when he made the million dollar gate with him. Tunney shows that he is light on his feet and capable of making good, fluid combinations without going immediatly into a clinch all the time, like most of the men around and before him. I think it consensus that Patterson is greater than Sharkey. Even if they are equal, i think it is clear who has the edge considering Liston didn't let him make it out of the first round, twice, whereas Dempsey struggled and beat him with a foul. He destroyed Patterson when he was just as old as when Dempsey retired. None of them beat anyone of note past age 32. It's not like Dempsey was on a busy schedule anyway - fighting 6 times in 7 years. After that, things changed big time though. Like i've said a million times already, Tunney looked excellent despite the bad film. Dempsey is nothing like Toney. Film is not the factor here. Bad opponents are. He did meet Fulton, Miske and Gibbons, but that's about it. Not exactly a great record that qualifies for a top5 ranking, especially considering he set a today still standing record for the worst case of ducking an opponent in history. I don't think he'd be afraid of a 39 year old Golota no. The point here is that Dempsey wanted no part at all of Jeanette and Langford. Not just on that night, he didn't want them at all. The article calls it a shame and a black eye for boxing. So much for the color line. The ducking line was more dominant, i think.
Well, i guess the "Dempsey had ice in his veins and wasn't afraid of anybody" is another myth blown out of the world. A lot of false truths can come to life when you fight in a world where mouth to mouth is the main form of information and you're popular.