Who was the greater fighter out of Jack Johnson and Jack Dempsey?

Just like Ali suffered a KO loss to Maynard Jackson a few months before his Thrilla in Manila with Frazier.

I can't believe you actually believed that result. The Navy Instructor vs the Draft Dodger in a 4-rounder for the Navy Relief Fund. And the Navy instructor got droppped from a punch to the belly he wasn't expecting. But joked around. Got up and had his hand raised. And everyone howled.

That was, in your mind, real?

Freaking hilarious.

https://www.ajc.com/resizer/gjLSKkq...ishing.com/ajc/6SPCFK77XJMM27MQ2522USE72E.jpg

 

I'm going to say the four-round benefit bout for Navy Relief between the Navy instructor who got the decision against the Draft Dodger ... even though the Navy instructor got knocked down ... and the result had no bearing on Dempsey's situation ... had more to do with it being a benefit fight that was all tongue-in-cheek.

Because that's what it was. (LOL)

The four round "patriotic" description of the fight in the newspaper didn't flag anything in your mind?

Ogden Standard:
"Meehan Outpoints Jack Dempsey
Willie Meehan, local pugilist, now a seaman in the navy, outpointed Jack Dempsey, claimant to the world’s heavyweight championship, in three of the four rounds of their bout at a patriotic boxing exhibition here tonight. It was one of a series of events given to obtain funds to purchase gymnasium equipment for naval training stations. Approximately $18,000 was raised.

Here's a clue, Dempsey destroying everyone but the Hall of Famer in his 22 fights leading up to his total demolition of Williard for the title ... in which he broke major bones in his body ... were legit.

Everyone laughing at the benefit fight against Willie Meehan, in which Meehan is talking to Dempsey while on the floor and shouting get me the Kaiser after the bout, not a real fight.

See the difference? (LOL)

Apparently, sarcasm didn't translate back then like it rarely does now. You have to hit some people over the head with it.

 

There's just no suggestion in the next-day reports that this was anything but a serious fight. The San Francisco Chronicle describes it as a "spectacular four-round battle, with the fans standing on their chairs and yelling themselves hoarse."

https://pasteboard.co/JR6pLQC.jpg

 

But that's just it. Nobody did behave like it was real. Look at every Dempsey fight leading up to Williard ... and then look at that four-round "patriotic exhibition."

Look at how the result didn't impact Dempsey's standing. You think Willard "ostracizing" Dempsey for "losing" to Meehan wasn't just kidding around?

You want us to believe that it was legit, and Willard was really shocked, and there was some conspiracy to keep Dempsey's 65-fight "fast-tracked" slog alive to the title. (Rolls eyes).

Whatever man.

 

Everything about it suggests it wasn't serious.

You know what fight was serious? Dempsey-Firpo. And if there's one thing we learned in Dempsey-Firpo, once Dempsey knocked a guy down, he always let up and let him get his bearings. (LOL)

No, what we learned is once Dempsey had a guy hurt IN A REAL FIGHT, he tore into him. Like he did every time he had a guy hurt.

What we also know is even when Dempsey was fighting a reporter who just wanted to know what it was like to get in the ring with him, Dempsey would crack the guy once just to let him know not to get too "smart" with him. And Dempsey clearly did that with Meehan, wacking him in the stomach in the second and putting him down. Just to let him know this was a show.

But everything about was a joke. Meehan was a Navy instructor. Meehan was in the Navy. It was a benefit for the Navy. It was four rounds. Dempsey was the draft dodger and clearly not the guy people went there to root for. Dempsey was the top contender. Meehan was the FAT COACH. The FAT COACH wins. Everyone laughs. Money is raised. Everyone goes home.

And the next day, Dempsey is still the top contender.

BECAUSE IT WAS A BENEFIT. Not a vast conspiracy.

I can't believe I actually have to explain this. Seriously.

 

I never said people were standing on their chairs cheering. I said when he raised Meehan's had they were "howling."

"Boxing in the 20th Century" by Stanley Weston and Steve Farhood.

 

Primary sources? The articles you posted here are who, what, where, when, why and how articles.

Meehan decisions Dempsey in four round Partiotic exhibition. This much money was raised. This many people attended.

I can post the same descriptions of Ali getting knocked out by the Mayor of Atlanta. They actually say he was counted out. They didn't say, oh, by the way, this was just to raise money. And nobody thinks Don King weaved a conspiracy after Ali "lost" to the Mayor of Atlanta in order to keep the third Frazier fight on. It was a benefit.

And now you're weaving conspiracy theories that Dempsey was being protected by the establishment after his loss. C'mon. I know people here like to argue. But use your brain.

Look at Dempseys 22 fights from 1918 and 1919 and do a "which one of these things is not like the other?" It's the "four-round patriotic benefit" for Navy Relief where the result clearly didn't matter.

 

Not to intrude, but Adam Pollack in his book on Dempsey gives a ton or newspaper reactions and none have the crowd laughing. "Howling" does not necessarily mean laughing. It means making a lot of noise.

Only four round fights were allowed in California at the time. This fight was on the level and Meehan by consensus won 3 of 4 rounds. But a four round fight was not considered a fair standard for championship fighting by most and so Dempsey's rep survived.

McGrain is right that Kearns immediately tried to spin it to eastern newspapers as a bad decision. It doesn't seem to have been.

Willard did try to dismiss Dempsey on the basis of this bout, but that was quickly dropped, for the reason that Dempsey was the best draw among the contenders and Willard was interested mainly in money.

A book written decades later is only of the value of the research. Did Weston and Farhood do newspaper research? Adam did and prints the at the time perspectives.

 

There is a clear difference between the boxing establishment and the "political" establishment. Both Johnson and Dempsey ran afoul of the political establishment, a strong segment of which desired the total banning of boxing. In all fairness, the white Dempsey had a much better chance of fending off legal charges than Johnson did. That didn't mean that Dempsey was necessarily popular, but I think in this comparison a term like "white privilege" which I believe is often misused, is fair.

As for the boxing establishment, Dempsey didn't have to deal with the color line. Johnson was viewed by most as the top contender in 1903 and 1904, but that didn't get him a shot at the title. Jim Jeffries openly drew the color line and was crude about not giving Johnson a shot even if he defeated Hart in 1905.

Also, there is a distinction between the American boxing establishment and international ones. Johnson got a shot in Australia against a Canadian who held the world title. I can't believe he would ever have gotten a chance against an American champion in an American venue.

Rickard getting in trouble with the law has been raised in support of Dempsey, but I don't see the connection. If the owner of a football team gets in trouble over a sexual offense, why would that reflect on the quarterback of his team?