What was so bad with Dempsey vs Gibbons?

I think it is one of Dempsey's best results.
Considering the 2 year lay-off it was a very decent performance against an active fighter. Dempsey showed excellent stamina. His timing and accuracy might have been off, but his speed and fitness were remarkable. I think his boxing in this fight was pretty good.

 

One thing so bad about the fight is that Dempsey again chose to fight a guy that Harry Greb had beaten multiple times rather than fight Greb himself.

 

I dont know last time I checked Tunney won the last one pretty dominantly and it had been a while since the one victory Harry had so Tunney was the better choice and the bigger man. I think had JD picked Greb instead of Tunney he would have been criticized

 

We are talking about 1923 here, not 1926. Dempsey fought Gibbons in July 1923. Greb's last fight with Tunney prior to that was an out and out robbery that almost everyone considered a handy win for Greb and some even called it as one sided as their first fight. So no, Tunney was not the better choice over Greb in 1923, especially when you consider the fact that at this point he was still avoiding Gibbons as well. Getting back to the point Greb and Gibbons fought a title eliminator in 1922 which Greb won handily over 15 rounds and in more dominant fashion than Dempsey did against Gibbons a year and a half later. Just a week or two prior to Greb-Gibbons Harry Wills fought Kid Norfolk in another title eliminator and blew Kid Norfolk out of the water in two rounds. Dempsey took the politically correct easy out by picking a guy he was fairly safe in assuming he could beat, who wasnt black and who despite losing one of the two eliminators wasnt knocked out in 2 rounds. By that logic Gibbons could be expected to last a while for the audience and the cameras but not win. It was window dressing at the expense of Wills and Greb.

 

If it was a week or two prior, then the contract for Dempsey Gibbons would presumably have been signed at that point. Obviously Wills series with Tate would not have helped his case. Given the recent difficulties of Greb and Wills, Gibbons might have looked like the logical challenger to many.

 

Fail.

 

Agreed. He kicked the **** out of Shelby.

 

I think if Dempsey had defended against Greb and stopped him, as I believe he would have, the same posters who habitually disparage him, would be castigating him for fighting a middleweight.

 

The underlined would be 2 months after Wills was knocked down and drew with Bill Tate, Dempsey's sparring partner would it not?

 

No, it seems almost obligatory that a guy who beat 4 of your 6 title defenses, many multiple times, should have been toward the front of the line as a contender.

edit: I see someone just said it better.

 

It has everything to do with posters,namely you,Seamus,HE , Klompy,
the four biggest Dempsey trashers . You have a perfect right to your opinions , but lets not pretend it isnt personal because it definitely is.
Klompy says Wills stopped Norfolk in2 rds a couple of weeks before Dempsey beat Gibbons.
He neglects to mention that a couple of months prior to that Wills was knocked down and drew with Dempsey's sparring partner Bill Tate, he also omits that Wills was 6 inches taller than Norfolk and 36lbs heavier.Given such overwhelming physical advantages who should have won?
Wills did not dominate his black contemporaries until they aged ,his wins over Fulton and Firpo were reprises of more emphatic victories scored over them by Dempsey.
Name a writer of the time who thought Wills would beat Dempsey? What footage of him suggests he would?

Two years before a ring rusty Dempsey emphatically beat Gibbons ,Tommy gave Greb the "licking of his life".

"Newspaper win for Gibbons according to the Pittsburgh Post. Greb "took the licking of his life." Gibbons won 7 rounds, Greb only two (narrowly), and the third round was even. "Gibbons astonished the fans with the speed and accuracy of his punches, and his ability to make Harry miss and look bad. Gibbons has made a believer of this writer (Florent Gibson), who did not believe him of the same caliber as Greb. Ringsiders declared..that Harry looked awfully bad and didn't fight his usual fight." Gibbons "seemed to solve Greb's attack with ease." He marked up Greb badly but didn't hurt him too much. "Gibbons was the aggressor at all stages. He had Harry backing away from the start..and this is unusual." Greb even had to hold in the last three rounds. Greb occasionally switched around and surprised Gibbons, but not much. Gibbons made Greb's right hand almost useless. Greb did win the 5th and 6th rounds but he definitely took a licking."
Maybe , just maybe, it isn't as black and white ,[pun intended,] as some suppose?