BoxRec

granberry wrote:

pundit wrote:

dmt wrote:dempsey signed to fight wills. it was not either wills's or dempsey's fault

So who's fault was it - Tex Rickards. So why did Dempsey not fire Rickards, if he really wanted the fight.

I was not aware that Jack Dempsey was Tex Rickard's boss.

Why doesn't a reporter at a newspaper fire the newspaper's publisher?

As far as I am aware, boxers fire their promoters all the time if they are unhappy with the fights they get.

Decagon wrote:No, they work on contracts. It's a little different than that. Fighters have horrible problems - even to this day - getting out of promotional contracts. You're just wrong. Do a fucking Google search or something.

I responded to one of your claims that you wouldn't feel so alone out in the wildernis - what a mistake

" As far as I am aware "

Always good to become more "aware."

granberry wrote:" As far as I am aware "

Always good to become more "aware."

Undoubtedly. So maybe you can graciously contributed to this process and explain why Dempsey was supposedly a helpless victim of Rickard's for 7 long years who just couldn't fight Harry Wills as a result of his enslavement even though no wish was dearer to Dempsey's heart.

Just wanted to mention that Rickard didn't promote Dempsey's title defense against Billy Miske.

Tex Rickard controlled boxing at the top level at that time,

just as Mike Jacobs did during the Joe Louis time

and just as the IBC and Jim Norris did for the period just after Louis was champion.

I WISH the business world were as easy to handle as you seem to think it is.

The colorline that seemed to be silently implemented in Joe Louis' reign was just as bad, if not worse than that which always gets mentioned about Dempsey, or Tunney as they're were several more quality black heavyweights during Louis' era that were never given a glance fora title shot than there was in Tunney's and especially Dempsey's reigns.

>>>As far as I am aware, boxers fire their promoters all the time if they are unhappy with the fights they get.<<<

Well those promoters that you see getting fired are promoters of no consequence! Rarely do you ever see a Don King get fired and Rickard was even much more powerful than King, Arum, Kushner, Muhammad, Warren and Kohl combined.

If Dempsey would have broke connections with Rickard he would have been lucky to fight anywhere in the United States, but most likely he would have spent the 1920s in a court room and would have been forbid to fight!

The main reason that Wills did not get a shot was because of Rickard and politicians of the time! Plain and simple...no politician wanted to even think about another Jack Johnson regardless that Wills was nothing like Johnson and regardless that Dempsey would have probably defeated Wills...the chance was something that white politicians of the time just simple would not allow!!!

Dempsey feared no man and he had great confidence that he could beat any man alive, but even if a man is heavyweight champion and as popular as Dempsey the most powerful promoter in boxing history and especially the politicians were much more powerful and that is where the blame should be directed! If Dempsey would have had overall say in his fights then he would probably have fought Wills, but that just was not the case!

As for Godfrey, though he was a physically imposing figure, all I've read about him leads me to believe that like a lot of big men, he could be passive in the ring if the other guy wasn't trying to take his head off. Also, he grew up in a country where literally hundreds of negroes were hanged from trees and lamp-posts every year! I imagine that could be a bit intimidating. He knew he was often selected to lose to the promoter's fighter. In some cases, I can well imagine that as long as the white boy was still standing, there was a hand-shake agreement that Godfrey would lose. When the cuffs were off him, and he was in the mood, Big George Godfrey was an awesome fighter, but he wasn't Superman.

Cap

barry wrote:>>>As far as I am aware, boxers fire their promoters all the time if they are unhappy with the fights they get.<<<

Well those promoters that you see getting fired are promoters of no consequence! Rarely do you ever see a Don King get fired and Rickard was even much more powerful than King, Arum, Kushner, Muhammad, Warren and Kohl combined.

If Dempsey would have broke connections with Rickard he would have been lucky to fight anywhere in the United States, but most likely he would have spent the 1920s in a court room and would have been forbid to fight!

The main reason that Wills did not get a shot was because of Rickard and politicians of the time! Plain and simple...no politician wanted to even think about another Jack Johnson regardless that Wills was nothing like Johnson and regardless that Dempsey would have probably defeated Wills...the chance was something that white politicians of the time just simple would not allow!!!

Dempsey feared no man and he had great confidence that he could beat any man alive, but even if a man is heavyweight champion and as popular as Dempsey the most powerful promoter in boxing history and especially the politicians were much more powerful and that is where the blame should be directed! If Dempsey would have had overall say in his fights then he would probably have fought Wills, but that just was not the case!

I'm not sure about that. Sure Rickards was powerful, but other powerful forces pusehd for a Dempsey-Wills fight. The New York boxing commission even stripped Dempsey for not taking the fight in 1925, which is why Dempsey fought Tunney in Philadelphia. Dempsey could have had a sell-out titlefight with Wills in NYC had he wanted to, but he opted to stick with Rickards.

Besides - my point is not that Tunney was a nicer man than Dempsey. My point is that missing out on Dempsey-Wills is that far more significant loss than missing out on Tunney-Godfrey.

pundit wrote: quote]

I'm not sure about that. Sure Rickards was powerful, but other powerful forces pusehd for a Dempsey-Wills fight. The New York boxing commission even stripped Dempsey for not taking the fight in 1925, which is why Dempsey fought Tunney in Philadelphia. Dempsey could have had a sell-out titlefight with Wills in NYC had he wanted to, but he opted to stick with Rickards.

And who would PROMOTE the New York Dempsey-Wills fight?

What is the DIFFERENCE between a boxing commission

and a promoter?

Is there any?

Please enlighten us.

.

Decagon wrote:If there had been a purse-bid law back then, lots of promoters would.

Please tell us who these "promoters" were who could bid with Tex Richard.

You shouldn't have any trouble choosing a few names from your "lots of them."

Name some of them for us.

pundit wrote:

granberry wrote:JACK JOHNSON not giving JOE JEANNETTE a shot during the time Johnson held the title.

This is not in the same category as Dempsey-Wills. Most rate Wills higher than Jeanette.

On Langford I agree.

speak for urself. most historians rate jeanette on the level of harry wills.



btw harry wills avoided george godfrey

dempsey signed to fight wills for god sake so shut up

IF WILLS HIMSELF DID NOT BLAME DEMPSEY THEN THERE IS NO REASON FOR U PEOPLE TOO

THE PROMOTERS DID NOT ALLOW THE FIGHT

DEAL WITH IT

dmt wrote:dempsey signed to fight wills for god sake so shut up

... knowing that Rickards would make sure that the fight wouldn't happen.

IF WILLS HIMSELF DID NOT BLAME DEMPSEY THEN THERE IS NO REASON FOR U PEOPLE TOO

This is not the point. The point is that Dempsey-Wills was THE fight to be made from 1919-26, and it wasn't made for whatever reason.

As a consequence, boxing as a sport lost out badly. MUCH worse - incomparably worse, actually - than it lost out from Tunney not fighting Godfrey.

If find strange though that some guys are prepared to excuse anything if the offender is Dempsey, but become very upset when the offender is - allegedly - Tunney.

some people go too hard on tunney as well

but my point stands" dempsey signed to fight wills, wills did not blame dempsey. case closed

dmt wrote:some people go too hard on tunney as well

but my point stands" dempsey signed to fight wills, wills did not blame dempsey. case closed

It's not about blaming.

Wills said though: "my only regret is that I did not get a shot at Dempsey. I'm sure I could have beat him".

pundit wrote:

dmt wrote:some people go too hard on tunney as well

but my point stands" dempsey signed to fight wills, wills did not blame dempsey. case closed

It's not about blaming.

Wills said though: "my only regret is that I did not get a shot at Dempsey. I'm sure I could have beat him".

wills also said it was not dempsey's fault

dmt wrote:

pundit wrote:

dmt wrote:some people go too hard on tunney as well

but my point stands" dempsey signed to fight wills, wills did not blame dempsey. case closed

It's not about blaming.

Wills said though: "my only regret is that I did not get a shot at Dempsey. I'm sure I could have beat him".

wills also said it was not dempsey's fault

I didn't dispute that.

But he regretted that the fight didn't come about, so do I, and so should every boxing fan, I believe, who thinks that championships should be about titleholders fighting the best challengers. Wills was by far the best in the early 1920s.

for the record i rate wils in my top 20 heavyweighs\ts

true that wills was the best challenger but one has to understand the boxing politics a bit more.

>>>I can confidently say that the three of the four best black fighters of Louis's era fought for the title, and I'm sure that Bivins would've gotten a shot if things had worked out better for him.<<<

That’s just because you know little about the colored heavyweights of the era. Are you trying to count Ezzard Charles and Walcott in the Louis’ era? Sorry, but Louis’ era was 1937 thru 1948 and no colored heavyweight was given a shot, except Walcott in 1947 and 1948…for ten years colored heavyweights were totally ignored when it comes to a title fight and for the record…John Henry Louis was a light heavyweight.

No there were a slew of top colored heavyweights that you have no clue about that were never given a shot during Louis’ reign and who were ignored as much as any fighter of any era…except Langford…Johnson fought and beat McVey and Jeannette on several different occasions so there was nothing to prove there…Langford though is a different story, but as far as the most quality colored heavyweights being denied…none were equal to that of Louis’ prime years.

>>>As a consequence, boxing as a sport lost out badly.<<<

Not really...in fact...not at all as Dempsey had a few million dollar gates as well as possibly the most exciting fight in history with Firpo...certainly one of the top three best.

As for Jess McMahon...he was a powerful wrestling promoter and promoted some boxing, but Rickard would have squashed McMahon had he tried to interfere with Dempsey in any way...and you better believe it! Same would have happened to any other lesser promoter of the day...Rickard would have ended they're promoting days...that's why no one ever really tried to go against Rickard during those days...it would have been suicide!

As to Godfrey...personally I do not recall reading about Tunney dodging him. Godfrey was a very powerful heavyweight, but he was not a very skilled one. He had skills, but they were not comparable to the skills of a Tunney. Whenever Godfrey really stepped up against the top heavyweight he never seemed to be able to slip over that last step. Fighters like Sharkey, Risko, Jack Renault (If he was in shape) and others who really knew how to fight would almost always beat Godfrey unless he was able to simply overpower the fighter. Godfrey's asset was his strength, but as far as skill Larry Gains was probably the most skillful colored heavyweight of the time, though Godfrey overpowered him when they fought. Godfrey would always have a punchers chance against anyone, but other than landing a lucky shot I just don't see him ever beating someone with the skill of Tunney.

barry wrote:>>>As a consequence, boxing as a sport lost out badly.<<<

Not really...in fact...not at all as Dempsey had a few million dollar gates as well as possibly the most exciting fight in history with Firpo...certainly one of the top three best.

You don't wanna claim seriously that Firpo was anywhere close to Wills as a fighter? An already way-over-the-hill Wills had no trouble with Firpo whatsoever.

In my view Dempsey-Firpo shows primarily how vulnerable Dempsey was, at any time of his career.

I agree that the fans were the ones who lost out(of course Wills did as well). To think that it is somehow better that Dempsey Wills never happened flies in the face of what we demand as boxing fans--the best fighting the best. The almost universally recognized best challenger to Dempsey was Wills. For them not to fight was a disappointment to many then and to still more today.

Those who believe that Demspsey really wanted the Wills fight and was simply over-ruled by Rickard and the powers that were, are simply making excuses for Jack IMO. To absolve him completely of blame is just not accurate(nor is fair to blame him solely). Times were different then, yes, and the racial tones of the bout surely made it unsavory to some, but I firmly believe that if Jack really wanted the fight, really wanted to make it happen, if he really, really wanted to shut all his detractors up, and he really, really was afraid of no man(which I doubt is true--as no man is fearless), and if he really wanted to prove that he was the best in the world and THE true champion, well, then the bout could have been made. Would it have been difficult--I think it would have had its problems, would it have been impossible as many here claim--I doubt it.

I don't think Dempsey was scared of Wills--but let's face it--if he thought he could have beaten Wills off hand--that is to say, if Jack and Doc Kearns really thought that Harry was "made for Dempsey" as I see many today claim, then all the ballyhoo would have been quieted by the men fighting. Face facts, Harry Wills was viewed as a formidable opponent to the Manassa Mauler's crown, by the press, by other fighters, by rickard, by the fans and by Dempsey himself. Being black was only Harry's first sin--the second, really damning fact about him was that he also happened to be damn good. Those two things are what the crux of this whole thing is about.

Dempsey didn't take many big risks with his title during his reign--and he certainly wasn't going to be taking any big risks against a black man. He was comfortable, an international star, making gobs of money, was basically picking and choosing his opponents and riding it out for as long as he could. The fact that Rickard was an out and out racist, and himself riding Dempsey all the way to the bank only helped Jack and Doc along the way. I have to be honest, I can't say that I blame them. A fighter's career is only so long and your earning capacity lasts for only so long as well. So why not milk, milk, milk. I would have too I guess.

That being said, I always find it difficult to truly rate Demspey. he never had that defining fight--that big one against his nemesis that really defined him as a great champion. Sure that fight with Firpo was great, but Luis Firpo was not a great fighter--he was a great draw. Tunney, well he beat Jack twice--long count or not(by the way, Dempsey always maintained that Gene, had Dempsey gone to his neutral corner immediately, could have still beaten the count). Carpentier, had been knocked out before Dempsey and was knocked out after him----a light heavyweight who was more of a matinee idol that a worthy challenger. Tommy Gibbons, great fighter, but also not really a defining fight. Wills was the man to define Dempsey--and I guess in a way he still does. It is very difficult to read anything about Dempsey without the name of Harry Wills coming up. What if? What if? All the excuses and the blaming will not erase the fact that the fight never happened.

It is ironic but I think that Harry Wills, made out pretty damn well, for a guy who never got his shot at immortality--because, well, in the end, Dempsey, by not fighting him, made his name forever immortal, Wills' title, instead of heavyweight champion, being "the man who Demspey refused to fight."

RowanSmith wrote:That being said, I always find it difficult to truly rate Demspey. he never had that defining fight--that big one against his nemesis that really defined him as a great champion.

Sounds like you missed the Willard fight.

Sounds like you missed the Fred Fulton fight.