Why is Dempsey vs Firpo highly edited film?

I don't report trolls. I put them on my ignore permanently.

 

Big Ears is running out of posters ,he'll soon be making his little quips to himself!



Nothing worse than some one who thinks their comments are hilariously clever,when actually they are deadly dull and boring.

 

Wasn't aware of that since I am relatively new here. Hate to place people on ignore but what's the use of allowing the screen to be cluttered with irrelevancies and off-topic distractions?

BTW
If indeed I felt I were trolling I would apologize and even remove the information since I am not here to disrupt.
But I see nothing trollish about what I posted.

 

Rad
Can't you read? I'm beginning to think you are a bit ....slow.

 

I'm not a mind reader. Spit it out!

 

Rad you're lost.

 

I wonder how you can see my posts since you said you put me on ignore along with John Thomas ?
Are you picking them up on your aural radar?

 

You provided a video of a couple of kids doing a school project as proof that Dempsey wouldn't have gotten back into the ring on his own. Don't know if you were doing it to be funny or what. Thought you were serious.

 

Indeed.

 

"So who's word are you going to take, Dempsey's or someone else?"

Someone else when the someone else is all the ringside reporters.

This has been covered. Google--FLYNN KO'S DEMPSEY--RINGSIDE REPORTS and you will get an Eastside Boxing thread in which you participated from 2009. Three ringside reports are reprinted. Two from Old Fogey and one from Senya, from The Salt Lake City Tribune, The Ogden Standard, and the Deseret Evening News. The only real disagreement is whether the fight lasted 20 or 25 seconds. Dempsey was counted out and carried to his corner where when he came awake he started throwing punches.

this is from the report by the Deseret Evening News, 2-14-1917

"In violation of the state statutes the Jim Flynn-Jack Dempsey prize fight was staged last night in Murray, ending in a knockout when Flynn landed a terrific left to his opponent's jaw in the first round after 25 seconds of fierce fighting. Dempsey was insensible for several minutes and when brought back from the land of nod he evidently thought he was still the in the prize ring and attempted to slug his seconds."

This is from the Salt Lake Tribune, 2-14-1917

"Jack Dempsey of Salt Lake lasted twenty-five seconds in his match with Jim Flynn of Peublo last night in Murray. During those twenty-five seconds Flynn punched Dempsey twice on the right side of his head, twice on the left side, broke down Jack's guard with his right and put the finishing touches on with a steaming wallop with his left to the jaw.
Dempsey was out half a minute. When he began to regain consciousness in his corner he evidently thought he was in a pugilistic battle and put up a strenuous battle with those who were trying to bring him around."

Ogden Standard, 2-14-1917

"A one-two to the jaw was about all there was to the much advertised battle at Murray last night . . . The contest lasted twenty seconds and in that time Jack Dempsey never laid a glove on the 'Pueblo Trial Horse.' The men shook hands. Flynn put his head down and bored in. He got a left to Dempsey's face and had the local boy covering up and not knowing what to do. As Jack dropped his guard from his chin to peek out, Jim put a right swing to the local boy's jaw, followed quickly with a left to the same spot, and referee Ralph Armstrong counted ten."

 

Mendoza

Obviously Dempsey's version is not correct unless you're going to argue that all the ringside reporters coordinated a lie (which would have been obvious to all those who attended the fight).

But there really is nothing to discuss if your position, like Perry's, is that the original myth can not be challenged by new evidence, although I would point out there is no new evidence. These are just primary sources which were always there but which were ignored for decades while Dempsey was spinning his phony narrative.

If that sounds harsh, well, so be it.

 

If you listen to old fighters talk about their previous bouts many times their description does not jive with reality. That does not mean said fighter is lying nor does that mean said fighter is spinning a phony narrative. As an example Willard had stated he knocked out Johnson with a right uppercut.

After decades of fighting and taking blows to the head for a living I am sure thoughts become muddy.

 

Dempsey also, immediately after the fight, went around telling people that Flynn had punched him when Dempsey went to shake hands and knocked him out. This did not happen and is refuted by the newspapers which make mention that Dempsey tried to refuse the handshake but Flynn insisted, they shook, and the fight began.

 

a "phony narrative" is a narrative that is not true.

Dempsey's Flynn narrative was phony. Why he put it out is another question. Was he merely an old boxer who really thought this was the way things went? I wouldn't dismiss that.

My bottom line here is that Dempsey is far from the first nor the last to re-invent their past in an autobiography. I think all autobiographies should be evaluated with a healthy dose of skepticism. It seems to be human nature to see one's past selectively.

Perhaps it is even healthy to judge yourself in a good light.

 

I can't see there is any argument here ,he got clipped ,he went down ,and he stayed there,end of.