BoxRec

I hereby claim the LHW title...


There, is that any different than the promoter stating a bout between total unknown Dempsey and human heavybag Keller was for the LHW title to sell tickets?

Do you think guys like Jack Dillon (who Dempsey would go on to refuse a fight with) or Battling Levinsky (who had defeated Keller previously) were losing sleep about what some promoter was billing as LHW championship in Utah of all places against a total unknown named Dempsey and Terry Keller who had won one fight in the previous 2 years and would go on to win only 2 fights in the next five years (yet he still managed to drop Dempsey)? Meanwhile Dillon and Levinsky (the two top claiments for the title) were fighting some of the biggest names in the sport at some of the biggest venues. So if Dempsey-Keller means something to you, more power to you, it doesnt mean squat to me other than the fact that it was a blip on Dempsey's developmental trajectory.

Someone claimed this was a title fight: big deal. The LHW title was almost meaningless in 1916 and the list of fighters talented or otherwise that claimed that title during this period was as long as the Empire State building was tall with MOST of those claiments have a better claim than either Dempsey or Keller, neither of whom had done ANYTHING even remotely worth noting as championship or contender status. The amount of newspaper advertisements for fights claiming to be championships from this period are inumerable. If we include every one of these claims in the record book we would have a far more laughable and watered down situation than we do now in this era of proliferated sanctioning bodies, diamond champions, champions in recess, interem champions, silver champions, etc etc. I doubt that anyone outside of a few hayseeds in that era gave much credence to the thought of Dempsey-Keller as a championship bout and Im sure the promoter of that bout is laughing his ass off where ever he may be at the idea that some "historian" "discovered" this advertisement and took it completely out of context, blowing it up into something it most certainly was not.

The idea that you or any one else would take this claim seriously shows a serious lack of knowledge about the era. Anyone who thinks Dempsey was ever in talks to fight Darcy has his head up his ass. In fact its likely Darcy had never heard of Dempsey and a certainty that Dempsey had never laid eyes on Darcy much less seen him fight, even on film. But if you want to believe Dempsey was some kind of authority on Darcy more power to you.

Well I can't decide if this thread is a humdinger, or a Jim Dandy.

Anyone care to show bias to either of my conclusions?

GianCarlo......once again you stir the pot and create a truly Hell's Kitchen taste sensation for the refined, discriminating and of course educated, pallate. lol


Tell you what...I'm going to go back and double the security on your "personal" granberry banning. Just in case the boy attempts to sneak in the back door or an errantly open window.


And just who is Barack Osama? Sounds Presidential...yet.... terrorizing.

BoxBuzz wrote: Tell you what...I'm going to go back and double the security on your "personal" granberry banning.

Have a word with Shep; he'll put you right.

Remember, you were one of the first to drink the granberry kool aid. Even after Bazza tried to open your eyes too.

That story about the orange juice. Pure comedic gold.

And Buzz, even now you still think he was kosher.

klompton wrote:I hereby claim the LHW title...


There, is that any different than the promoter stating a bout between total unknown Dempsey and human heavybag Keller was for the LHW title to sell tickets?

Do you think guys like Jack Dillon (who Dempsey would go on to refuse a fight with) or Battling Levinsky (who had defeated Keller previously) were losing sleep about what some promoter was billing as LHW championship in Utah of all places against a total unknown named Dempsey and Terry Keller who had won one fight in the previous 2 years and would go on to win only 2 fights in the next five years (yet he still managed to drop Dempsey)? Meanwhile Dillon and Levinsky (the two top claiments for the title) were fighting some of the biggest names in the sport at some of the biggest venues. So if Dempsey-Keller means something to you, more power to you, it doesnt mean squat to me other than the fact that it was a blip on Dempsey's developmental trajectory.

Someone claimed this was a title fight: big deal. The LHW title was almost meaningless in 1916 and the list of fighters talented or otherwise that claimed that title during this period was as long as the Empire State building was tall with MOST of those claiments have a better claim than either Dempsey or Keller, neither of whom had done ANYTHING even remotely worth noting as championship or contender status. The amount of newspaper advertisements for fights claiming to be championships from this period are inumerable. If we include every one of these claims in the record book we would have a far more laughable and watered down situation than we do now in this era of proliferated sanctioning bodies, diamond champions, champions in recess, interem champions, silver champions, etc etc. I doubt that anyone outside of a few hayseeds in that era gave much credence to the thought of Dempsey-Keller as a championship bout and Im sure the promoter of that bout is laughing his ass off where ever he may be at the idea that some "historian" "discovered" this advertisement and took it completely out of context, blowing it up into something it most certainly was not.

The idea that you or any one else would take this claim seriously shows a serious lack of knowledge about the era. Anyone who thinks Dempsey was ever in talks to fight Darcy has his head up his ass. In fact its likely Darcy had never heard of Dempsey and a certainty that Dempsey had never laid eyes on Darcy much less seen him fight, even on film. But if you want to believe Dempsey was some kind of authority on Darcy more power to you.

This is the correct view, I think.

Giancarlo wrote:

BoxBuzz wrote: Tell you what...I'm going to go back and double the security on your "personal" granberry banning.

Have a word with Shep; he'll put you right.

Remember, you were one of the first to drink the granberry kool aid. Even after Bazza tried to open your eyes too.

That story about the orange juice. Pure comedic gold.

And Buzz, even now you still think he was kosher.

I must tell you indeed I've been "put right" as you put it....so much so I require minimum maintanence in order to stay steady, stable and steadfast.

I have opine'd than I never thought bazza was exactly kosher, but I did imagine him as fairly harmless....an attitude I take with many of the "scarey" sort that roam these halls. I think you and I did agree that he had an active imagination, but when one is talking as wholesomely as "orange juice" who wants to burst that FDA approved bubble? I mean Bullchips are rarely hauled about in those attractive OJ containers...and yet....there it was.

I've notice in life, that some products will on occasion go to the trouble of changing their labels, as if by changing the name of a Twinkie, you somehow make it more "organic" lol.

As for this specific thread and it's evolution.......I'm inclined to sign on with Klompton and Ray on this one.

klompton wrote:I hereby claim the LHW title...


There, is that any different than the promoter stating a bout between total unknown Dempsey and human heavybag Keller was for the LHW title to sell tickets?

Do you think guys like Jack Dillon (who Dempsey would go on to refuse a fight with) or Battling Levinsky (who had defeated Keller previously) were losing sleep about what some promoter was billing as LHW championship in Utah of all places against a total unknown named Dempsey and Terry Keller who had won one fight in the previous 2 years and would go on to win only 2 fights in the next five years (yet he still managed to drop Dempsey)? Meanwhile Dillon and Levinsky (the two top claiments for the title) were fighting some of the biggest names in the sport at some of the biggest venues. So if Dempsey-Keller means something to you, more power to you, it doesnt mean squat to me other than the fact that it was a blip on Dempsey's developmental trajectory.

Someone claimed this was a title fight: big deal. The LHW title was almost meaningless in 1916 and the list of fighters talented or otherwise that claimed that title during this period was as long as the Empire State building was tall with MOST of those claiments have a better claim than either Dempsey or Keller, neither of whom had done ANYTHING even remotely worth noting as championship or contender status. The amount of newspaper advertisements for fights claiming to be championships from this period are inumerable. If we include every one of these claims in the record book we would have a far more laughable and watered down situation than we do now in this era of proliferated sanctioning bodies, diamond champions, champions in recess, interem champions, silver champions, etc etc. I doubt that anyone outside of a few hayseeds in that era gave much credence to the thought of Dempsey-Keller as a championship bout and Im sure the promoter of that bout is laughing his ass off where ever he may be at the idea that some "historian" "discovered" this advertisement and took it completely out of context, blowing it up into something it most certainly was not.

The idea that you or any one else would take this claim seriously shows a serious lack of knowledge about the era. Anyone who thinks Dempsey was ever in talks to fight Darcy has his head up his ass. In fact its likely Darcy had never heard of Dempsey and a certainty that Dempsey had never laid eyes on Darcy much less seen him fight, even on film. But if you want to believe Dempsey was some kind of authority on Darcy more power to you.

I agree with you and Ray's summation of the situation to a large extent. Nowhere have i said that the light heavy title was anything but worthless and i certainly dont think that Dempsey was very well known either. You are also correct that Dempsey had never laid eyes on Darcy, he said so himself, didnt he?

The whole point of this last issue though is that Dempsey, himself claimed his handlers were trying to make a match with Darcy and that is why they were at the spar/fight. YOu countered by saying this has to be lies because Dempsey was unknown at the time, had no reason to fight Darcy and was a heavyweight two divisions above Dempseys best weight. We both know that Darcy was one of the biggest names/draws in the area. We know that there was obviously plenty of people who would ahve loved to take that fight. Eventually Rowlands got the fight, you yourself suggested that he was not close to the best available. Darcy, in australia at least was reasonably active and would take quite a few fights so it was unlikely he would sit on his title and only fight the Gibbons level fighters.

You say that Dempsey makes zero sense, but he had claimed a light heavyweight title. If Darcy was looking for a warm up fight, then it makes sense to fight a lightly regarded light heavyweight claimant, doesnt it? Now I am not saying this fight should be made or anything, just that it is not totally senseless. And when you couple it with the fact that Jack Dempsey said that his handlers were trying to make a match, then that tends to suggest old Jack might not have been lying, doesnt it? The issue here is not even whether Darcy considered the fight realistic, but simply whether Dempsey's handlers thought it might be worth a shot. Maybe not to different to Pete McNeeleys handlers who thought it might be worth a shot to negotiate with Mike Tyson. If Dempsey hadnt said that this occurred i would say that there was virtually zero chance of it happening but since he said it did happen, it does support his version, and certainly in the absence of any other proof or even reason to lie. It is another small thing which adds up (without being proven wrong) which adds up to suggest that it probably happened.

By the way, you know this era better than anyone, so i ask you this question (which you probably dont know, but might), how close were Jim Flynn's management to Dempseys management at the time. And do you know the actually names of any of their handlers?

BoxBuzz wrote:

Giancarlo wrote:

BoxBuzz wrote: Tell you what...I'm going to go back and double the security on your "personal" granberry banning.

Have a word with Shep; he'll put you right.

Remember, you were one of the first to drink the granberry kool aid. Even after Bazza tried to open your eyes too.

That story about the orange juice. Pure comedic gold.

And Buzz, even now you still think he was kosher.

I must tell you indeed I've been "put right" as you put it....so much so I require minimum maintanence in order to stay steady, stable and steadfast.

I have opine'd than I never thought bazza was exactly kosher, but I did imagine him as fairly harmless....an attitude I take with many of the "scarey" sort that roam these halls. I think you and I did agree that he had an active imagination, but when one is talking as wholesomely as "orange juice" who wants to burst that FDA approved bubble? I mean Bullchips are rarely hauled about in those attractive OJ containers...and yet....there it was.

I've notice in life, that some products will on occasion go to the trouble of changing their labels, as if by changing the name of a Twinkie, you somehow make it more "organic" lol.

As for this specific thread and it's evolution.......I'm inclined to sign on with Klompton and Ray on this one.

That should read granberry right?

Bazza D was your mentor when you wanted to become a boxing historian, remember?

Anyway, I have no idea what the others are arguing about in this thread. I can't be arsed reading thru all that detritus. However, it is good to see Klompton is still alive and well; we'll see that Greb book one day, you mark my words!

Giancarlo wrote:

BoxBuzz wrote:

Giancarlo wrote: Have a word with Shep; he'll put you right.

Remember, you were one of the first to drink the granberry kool aid. Even after Bazza tried to open your eyes too.

That story about the orange juice. Pure comedic gold.

And Buzz, even now you still think he was kosher.

I must tell you indeed I've been "put right" as you put it....so much so I require minimum maintanence in order to stay steady, stable and steadfast.

I have opine'd than I never thought bazza was exactly kosher, but I did imagine him as fairly harmless....an attitude I take with many of the "scarey" sort that roam these halls. I think you and I did agree that he had an active imagination, but when one is talking as wholesomely as "orange juice" who wants to burst that FDA approved bubble? I mean Bullchips are rarely hauled about in those attractive OJ containers...and yet....there it was.

I've notice in life, that some products will on occasion go to the trouble of changing their labels, as if by changing the name of a Twinkie, you somehow make it more "organic" lol.

As for this specific thread and it's evolution.......I'm inclined to sign on with Klompton and Ray on this one.

That should read granberry right?

Bazza D was your mentor when you wanted to become a boxing historian, remember?

Anyway, I have no idea what the others are arguing about in this thread. I can't be arsed reading thru all that detritus. However, it is good to see Klompton is still alive and well; we'll see that Greb book one day, you mark my words!

Roger that granberry/bazza type-0. ....

I know we are both looking forward to the Greb book, and I assume you are patiently waiting for my Historical Boxing related masterpiece "The Complete Complex History of Internet Forum, Pugilistic Experts" Which should be in the book stores shortly after the Mayan Calendar goes blank.

Boilermaker wrote:And do you know the actually names of any of their handlers?

From next-day Deseret Evening News:
"Fred Winsor was the chief promoter. Billy Roche represented Flynn and A. J. Auerbach represented Dempsey. "

Jack Dempsey was known to lie or give wrong recollections about things to make his career sound more impressive. This is not limited to only his autobios, but several versions of the story of his life, that were published in newspapers, based on interviews with him, in late 1910s and early 1920s. He'd say, he fought the fight with a broken rib, next time he is telling the same story, he has three broken ribs. Three NY bouts. First bout, he gets $16 for a fight, next time he says he only got $9. Another fight, at first he got $43, another interview - he only got $14. Third fight, he gets $100 out of $500 promised him, another interview - he only got $35. Etc etc.

Senya13 wrote:

Boilermaker wrote:And do you know the actually names of any of their handlers?

From next-day Deseret Evening News:
"Fred Winsor was the chief promoter. Billy Roche represented Flynn and A. J. Auerbach represented Dempsey. "

Jack Dempsey was known to lie or give wrong recollections about things to make his career sound more impressive. This is not limited to only his autobios, but several versions of the story of his life, that were published in newspapers, based on interviews with him, in late 1910s and early 1920s. He'd say, he fought the fight with a broken rib, next time he is telling the same story, he has three broken ribs. Three NY bouts. First bout, he gets $16 for a fight, next time he says he only got $9. Another fight, at first he got $43, another interview - he only got $14. Third fight, he gets $100 out of $500 promised him, another interview - he only got $35. Etc etc.

http://fultonhistory.com/Newspaper%2016 ... tCount=9&h

It seems like Auerbach may be one of the people we are looking for. Apparently he had a 5 year contract with Dempsey around this time and Dempsey actually paid him out when he won in Toledo.

for anyone interested, the above page also has some other pretty good articles, but well worth reading. The take on Gibbons vs Greb is interesting in hindsight. More attention paid to Gibbons slipping or tanking the fight than a great Greb Performance.

That just shows how highly Gibbons was rated at the time and how good Greb's win was over Gibbons. Gibbons sure didnt tank the fight as the reports by people who were actually there attest.

In the meantime I will be waiting for proof that Auerbach was trying to match Dempsey with Darcy (which doesnt mean anything, I can get a part time manager to try to match me with Pac, doesnt mean its anything more than a pipe dream) that Auerbach witnessed Darcy KO Fulton (in a meaningless sparring bout...) or that Darcy had ever even heard of a promoter stationed nearly three thousand miles from where Darcy was training... Until then it remains a myth started by Darcy hangers on and retold years later by people who werent there, with nothing to back it up.

This article is interesting. It isnt the greatest source or anything, and i am not sure how it lines up with other chronologies (maybe some big Dempsey fans could enlighten us), but it seems that after the Jim Flynn fight, Dempsey went to New York to link up with John the Barber for a few months before he headed west. Now, unless i am mistaken, that places Dempsey and his handlers in New York right about the time that he says his handlers were talking of matching him with Les Darcy, when the Darcy Fulton spar took place.

http://fultonhistory.com/Process%20Smal ... ehtml&.pdf

That article isnt saying that Dempsey RETURNED to New York, it just gets the timeline wrong of when Dempsey travelled to New York. Dempsey had nothing to do with John Reisler after his disasterous trip to New York in 1916 other than to fight numerous court battles with him.

klompton wrote:That just shows how highly Gibbons was rated at the time and how good Greb's win was over Gibbons. Gibbons sure didnt tank the fight as the reports by people who were actually there attest.

In the meantime I will be waiting for proof that Auerbach was trying to match Dempsey with Darcy (which doesnt mean anything, I can get a part time manager to try to match me with Pac, doesnt mean its anything more than a pipe dream) that Auerbach witnessed Darcy KO Fulton (in a meaningless sparring bout...) or that Darcy had ever even heard of a promoter stationed nearly three thousand miles from where Darcy was training... Until then it remains a myth started by Darcy hangers on and retold years later by people who werent there, with nothing to back it up.

I should indicate that I actually agree with you about this. I think that as much as gibbons being highly rated, Greb was probably underated as well.

I also do think that Auerbach seems to be a bit of a stretch, to think he was in Goshan, though i do wonder if AJ Auerbach was any relation to the Auerbach Casino in New York at the time, because if so he could have got a good cheap place to stay while he was in New York to witness the Darcy Fulton private fight

What do you say about the John the Barber story i just posted, with Dempsey going to New York straight after the Flynn fight, you know Dempsey's career a lot better than most. Does this check out? My previous recollection was that John the Barber was from a different time frame and Dempsey was in California or somewhere around this time, but that article places doubt on that.

klompton wrote:That article isnt saying that Dempsey RETURNED to New York, it just gets the timeline wrong of when Dempsey travelled to New York. Dempsey had nothing to do with John Reisler after his disasterous trip to New York in 1916 other than to fight numerous court battles with him.

Fair enough, that is how I recalled it also, but some times where there is smoke there is fire.

At this point in time: late Feb, early March Dempsey was being managed by Fred Windsor, not Auerbach. It was Windsor who signed Dempsey to fight Al Norton in Feb of 1917. The bout was postponed when Dempsey became ill and finally came off in late/mid March. The bout was called a draw after Dempsey faded badly late in the fight. A week later Dempsey fought Willie Meehan. To illustrate how lightly regarded Dempsey was Meehan was picked to win the fight, which he did.