Why Jack Dempsey should be hightly rated

How dare you joke about Banana Sam :twisted:

 

Good research there by the way, is that from the SF Chronicle?

 

yes

 

it just seems like Dempsey was the more effective hitter despite being bruised and showed good defense and scored a knockdown, Jack probably deserved it but without the film it is not easy to say

 

dmt has responded to this

 

Whatever happened to Willie's title shot? Didn't his management table two separate offers? One for an 8-round fight, the other for a long one of 25 or something? Seems Jack was in no hurry to fight Meehan again (not that he seems to be in a hurry to fight anyone else, mind).


Another thing that makes me laugh is the dismissal of the 'four round schedule' of the Fat Willie fights, as if this hindered Dempsey. What's next, Tyson fans bemoaning that some of his earlier fights were 'unfairly' scheduled for just six rounds.

 

Why not? If they were saying it before the fight, how is it invalid?

 

My point was that you'll find stuff like this in loads of fights.

 

Good show. Thanks for printing it. But the consensus of the SF papers was that Meehan had a slight edge in a close fight. The injured left hand was mentioned by others. San Franciso had five papers in those days.

I should add that as I remember it after three years or so.

 

atsch If Dempsey had given Meehan a title shot, he'd be getting slagged even worse for it right now than he is for the title defenses he actually made. During Dempsey's title reign, Meehan was badly beaten by not one, not two, but three of Dempsey's title challengers! By mid-1920 he was losing to positively everyone. This would've been in league with Joe Louis' worst "bum-of-the-month" title fights. Think of it this way; there isn't some enormous call to give Ross Purrity a title shot at Wlad Klitschko, is there? You see, to people who were actually there, instead of being hypercritical revisionists digging through his record for dirt 85 years later, a close four-round decision loss in a semi-exhibition charity event a while back hardly seemed like cause for giving a guy not even close to being any kind of serious contender a shot at the championship- and say what you will about Dempsey's actual title opponents, they were all legitimate contenders.

As for the four-round limit, you think it didn't give Meehan a better chance? I think all kinds of mediocre fighters with awkward/clashing styles would be able to hold even with all-time greats in four-round fights. Gregorio Peralta might win half the time in four-rounders with George Foreman. Quick Tillis might steal some four-round decisions over Mike Tyson. Buster Mathis beat Joe Frazier repeatedly in three-round amateur fights, and I bet he could do it in a four-round pro fight. Meehan had a difficult style for Dempsey, clearly. In four-round fights, he was able to back-peddle and pitty-pat full-stop and win rounds over Jack. Even then, Dempsey had Meehan down and hurt and arguably won while fighting a charity match with an injured hand. Meehan did not have top stamina or long-term durability. What do you think would happen if they fought a longer fight? I don't think it's hard to see.

 

Maybe dmt doctored it?

 

Note: McVey's account also mentions that Dempsey was seen to have a badly swollen hand after the fight.

Second, what is, well, the point of your point? Dempsey had a legitimate injury going into this match, and to the hand he relied on for his money punch. It was, again, not a very serious match and only a four-rounder, one of over 20 fights he had that year. He still had Meehan down and nearly out and won the fight in the eyes of many observers. What is your beef here?

 

Legitimate, eh? Funny enough, when the fight was offered, Willie had won just one of his last five fights, so had Miske.

 

My 'beef' is it didn't seem to affect him in rounds 1 or 2 but was swollen some time in the 3rd.