TRIBUTE TO BILLYGOAT HOLYFIELD

tolstoy · Post by **tolstoy** » 09 Oct 2003, 08:38

It's always nice to stress the positive aspects of a fighter over the negative.

Well done, Terap, for not even bothering to try. 8)

Tantum · Post by **Tantum** » 09 Oct 2003, 12:40

Terap you probably like Marciano because you share his passion for little boys.

tolstoy · Post by **tolstoy** » 10 Oct 2003, 06:09

Speaking of dirty fighters, there is one unsubstantiated theory held by many boxing enthusiasts that when Jack Dempsey beat Jess Willard to within an inch of his life in 1919 that his gloves were loaded.

Aside from the fact that the much smaller Dempsey floored 245 pound Willard in the first round with a left that also broke his jaw, Willard sustained broken ribs, lost some teeth, had his nose broken and due to the swelling of the tissue around his eyes, had to be led blind back to his dressing room.

Gloves in those days were nowhere near as well padded as they are now but today's guys hit much harder. Surprising then that even with serious mismatches, I have never seen anyone take a beating like Willard took that day in Toledo.

That, for me, leaves a big question mark hanging over Dempsey's integrity as a fighter. Particularly so when one realises that it was one of his own camp that backed up Wilard's allegation.

tolstoy · Post by **tolstoy** » 10 Oct 2003, 11:15

Contrary to the above poster's opinion, I am well aware of who Doc Kearns was and of his dubious incentives for making the allegation about the loaded gloves. His son stated in an interview that the tape on his gloves had been treated and were LIKE plaster of Paris. It wan't actually plaster of Paris that was alleged to have been used, if my memory serves me correctly.

I would be quite willing to dismiss this story as the twisted revenge of an old serial liar and fraudster. However, one thing bothers me and that is the severity of the injuries sustained by Willard in that fight.

Respected boxing physician, Dr. Ferdie Pacheco, has stated several times that he has never witnessed such severe injuries inflicted on a fighter as those sustained by Willard. Pacheco has been ringside for more years that even he would care to remember and is the author of over a dozen books on boxing. Today's top punching heavyweights probably hit almost twice as hard as Dempsey ever did but do not do that sort of damage.

I admire Dempsey as a fighter and he makes my all time top 10 comfortably but the extent of the damage he inflicted upon the massive Willard will always raise a question mark in my mind.

Tantum · Post by **Tantum** » 11 Oct 2003, 05:35

Stop molesting children, and shut the fornicate up.

wouter · Post by **wouter** » 11 Oct 2003, 05:45

Terap's pointing out that Doc Kearns made the claim of Dempsey having loaded his gloves, when he was fired by Jack. You wouldn't exactly expect Kearns to come out with this story when he was still acting on Jack's behalf, would you?
Also wasn't there a huge bet made by Dempsey's team that Jack would take out Willard in the 1st round?

By the way, I feel the same about Louis v. Schmeling II.

wouter · Post by **wouter** » 11 Oct 2003, 08:42

Whether I like posts, or dislike them, there's not much I can do about it. You'll have to ask the moderators and not the editors..... great little burocratic system we have here.

Is the ONLY reason you don't believe the Dempsey story that it didn't come out until so many years had past?

wouter · Post by **wouter** » 11 Oct 2003, 10:30

Tell that to Fat Willie Meehan

Tyson KTFO 3 Times · Post by **Tyson KTFO 3 Times** » 11 Oct 2003, 14:11

Tantum wrote:Stop molesting children, and shut the fornicate up.

Tantum · Post by **Tantum** » 11 Oct 2003, 14:23

Apparently as long as you post trash in the BOTP section, none.

silkov · Post by **silkov** » 12 Oct 2003, 10:59

Why the negativity Terap?.....I ve read a lot of you're posts and you seem to have a lot of knowledge and interest in boxing and have a lot of interesting tales and theroies but you ruin a lot of what you say with an overly negative and hostile attitude. You seem unable to accept anyone elses opinion on subjects if they clash with your own and become abusive and aggressive. This is a boxing forum where we as boxing fans should be able to swap stories, ideas, theories etc in a lively but freindly way, with no malice present. As I write this people are dying from bullets, bombs and starvation..... surely theres enough needless anger and hate in this world!.

Freedom · Post by **Freedom** » 12 Oct 2003, 23:14

tolstoy wrote:Contrary to the above poster's opinion, I am well aware of who Doc Kearns was and of his dubious incentives for making the allegation about the loaded gloves. His son stated in an interview that the tape on his gloves had been treated and were LIKE plaster of Paris. It wan't actually plaster of Paris that was alleged to have been used, if my memory serves me correctly.

I would be quite willing to dismiss this story as the twisted revenge of an old serial liar and fraudster. However, one thing bothers me and that is the severity of the injuries sustained by Willard in that fight.

Respected boxing physician, Dr. Ferdie Pacheco, has stated several times that he has never witnessed such severe injuries inflicted on a fighter as those sustained by Willard. Pacheco has been ringside for more years that even he would care to remember and is the author of over a dozen books on boxing. Today's top punching heavyweights probably hit almost twice as hard as Dempsey ever did but do not do that sort of damage.

I admire Dempsey as a fighter and he makes my all time top 10 comfortably but the extent of the damage he inflicted upon the massive Willard will always raise a question mark in my mind.

Ferdie Pacheco is and always will be a flippin' moron, if anyone has actually seen, heard and followed this persons commentary annotations, clueless on the fight at hand
and sensing a feel that he can't fathom which country he is in at the given moment will understand that he was alway's a fraud.
Ferdie did a post fight interview in Italy years ago, he interviewed the victor, an Italian fighter (think it was Gianfranco Rossi) and asked him questions in Spanish ! The fighter and trainer listened, smiled and ignored him, Ferdie just could not understand why he was being snubbed, the idiot !

wouter · Post by **wouter** » 13 Oct 2003, 05:36

The story told by Doc Kearns DID involve plaster of paris that was sprinkled on Dempsey's wrappings, then hardened by pouring water over them.
I'm not trying to trash Dempsey or any of the old-time fighters. Contrary to most people I guess, I think fighters generally have gotten worse as the years progressed. Like Terap I think Ali is overrated by most people but that doesn't mean that nothing good can be said about him or his people. Not does it mean that anything bad can be said about a fighter like Jack Dempsey.

Sweet Scientist · Post by **Sweet Scientist** » 16 Oct 2003, 21:51

I have trouble understanding how the media "sells" the modern fighters like Ali (modern?-he hasn't fought in over 20 years, for God's sake)---and "trashes" the old timers like Dempsey...Ali & Dempsey are BOTH old timers now! And this stuff about "the poisonous mantras of the modern media"...come on, man...you sound like some kind of consiracy theorist or something. This is supposed to be fun, this thinking & posting about old time boxers and how they would have done against each other. I'm a big fan of Ali because he was colorful & talented & (most of all) he generated TREMENDOUS INTEREST in what seemed to be a dying sport in the early 60's...when I first developed an interest in boxing as a boy. Over rated? maybe. Maybe YOU over rate Dempsey too. I don't know of anyone still alive that can give a first hand account of how good he really was. I've seen films---he looked good---but against someone who could box a little, (Tunney) he didn't look so good (albeit late in his career). Dempsey vs. Ali in there respective primes in a 3 fight series? The same guy wouldn't win all 3. If you disagree, maybe you can't see as clearly as I. I KNOW strange things can happen in the ring...and I KNOW Ali would have done well against anyone...Undefeated? No. But neither would Dempsey go undefeated against the all time greats...like a wise man once said, there's always somebody younger, stronger, faster right around the bend...and anyone who thinks their guy is the unquestionable best is probably just deluding themselves...Dempsey, Louis, Liston, Ali, Foremen, Frazier, Tunney, Jack Johnson, Marciano, Holmes...Hell...they were ALL good...I wouldn't bet against ANY of them at their peak! You would be wise to do the same. You can pick any number of reasons to belittle someone, say they cheated or fouled opponents...but it's all B.S. They were all champions in their time, and forever great. AND, the everytime you poor-mouth Ali, you just demonstrate your own bias. His speed would have been of great concern to your beloved Dempsey, I assure you!

Sweet Scientist · Post by **Sweet Scientist** » 16 Oct 2003, 22:04

Quick quiz, Pal:

Who won the Clay-Jones fight 3/13/63?

Who won the Ali-Young fight, passed his prime, over weight and out of shape at 230#?

And don't feed me any B.S. about a bad decision...

Sweet Scientist · Post by **Sweet Scientist** » 16 Oct 2003, 22:11

Ali wouldn't need luck against Dempsey, he'd just need his old leg speed of the 60's...Dempsey would tire and be catching left jabs (faster than he thought possible), AND combinations (faster than he thought possible)...and don't forget, Ali got hit by Foreman's best shots...and your beloved Dempsey COULD NOT HIT HARDER than Foreman...no matter how much you wish otherwise...SORRY...Dempsey was human too.

Sweet Scientist · Post by **Sweet Scientist** » 17 Oct 2003, 00:05

Oh, and one more thing...Muhammad Ali never ducked anyone after becoming champion in 1964...and don't feed me any B.S. about Ali never having fought anyone (in the 60's) like some like to say...a guy can only fight the guys who are available to him, who are active during his career...and again, Ali never ducked anyone after becoming champion...one can't neccessarily make the same statement about your beloved Jack Dempsey...who did duck (that's D-U-C-K) some of the better fighters of his era...I'd be happy to post you a list, but I'm sure you're already aware of those I speak of...being the boxing historian that you are...with that superb left hook of his, why not take on anybody? Maybe HE didn't think he was as good as YOU think he was?
Food for thought, served up fresh & hot, just for you!

Sweet Scientist · Post by **Sweet Scientist** » 17 Oct 2003, 00:36

Henry Cooper & Doug Jones beat Ali...ARE YOU ON THE SAME DAMN PLANET??? Better review your films again...Ali beat Jones...2 judges had it 5-4-1, referee had it 8-1-1...the ref was closer! As far as Cooper, for God's sake, man, did you notice Cooper's eye after the fight??? Are you that BLIND to the truth...I don't need any media to form MY opinions...I form them myself. I saw Ali LIVE in 2 fights...How many Dempsey fights did you see? Liston fights legitimate??? The first one for damn sure was...If Sonny decided to quit in the second one, blame it on HIM...as far as the first, Liston quit before he got his ass kicked...after taking his opponent far too lightly, under trained (believed he could knock him out in the first round, just like 43 out of 46 ringside so called experts believed, perhaps you were one of them--in other words, Liston believed his own B.S.) and wound up KNOWING by the 6th round he had no chance that night. I'll tell you one thing though, Dempsey might not have beaten Liston that night in Miami...Dempsey would have charged right at him and BOOM somebody would have gotten hurt...not neccessarily Liston...never know what's going to happen with 2 sluggers...neither one would had the brains to "run"...something you so obviously detest...then again, Dempsey avoided black fighters like the plague...so I guess he wouldn't have even been in the ring with the likes of a Sonny Liston...another guy he would have ducked.
***and one last thing, hot shot...offer some damn PROOF if you're going to say the Liston fights were fixed...you'll be a big hero if you PROVE it...just like the guy who proves Kennedy wasn't killed by Oswald...all these theories and NEVER ANY PROOF...your opinion has NO GREATER VALUE THAN ANYONE ELSE'S...sorry if that ruins your day!

tolstoy · Post by **tolstoy** » 17 Oct 2003, 09:13

terap wrote:Ali against Dempsey?

Ali could not defend himself against a left hook.

Ali was clobbered and knocked down with left hooks from Sonny Banks, 185-pound Henry Cooper (Cooper bloodied Ali's nose with his left hook 15 seconds into the fight), Joe Frazier (who was a one-armed fighter with ONLY A left hook).

Dempsey had the best left hook ever.

Good luck Ali.

For maybe the second time in my so-called life, I agree with Terap. Dempsey would have destroyed Muhammed Ali, in my opinion. He was too tough and more importantly, too smart. He wouldn't have allowed Ali's gamesmanship to get to him unlike some other fighters who were clearly intimidated by his confidence.

Sweet Scientist · Post by **Sweet Scientist** » 17 Oct 2003, 10:56

Most people that say "______ would have 'destroyed' Ali.", usually have other issues with Ali that have little to do with his skills in the ring. There are those who didn't approve of his politics, loud mouth, predictions, womanizing, religion (in the US, a country based on religious freedom), his demand for equality in the 60's, his basic boxing style ("running" as you guys like to refer to it)...maybe all this stuff just pisses you off...but it has no bearing on his ring skills. In a "who would beat who" question, one should consider that if the fighters were really great, they would have fought at least 3 times...If you say Jack Dempsey would have beat Ali 3 straight, I say you're nuts. Period. Pure and simple. Ali had the speed & skill to beat Dempsey to the punch & move away, he would be leading on points after 10, and it would be up to Dempsey to catch him late and KO him. No KO, no win for Jack...he NEVER would have outpointed him AND it would take more than just ONE left hook to get him. You have a short memory perhaps??? Remember when Liston was going to destroy him? Remember when Foreman was absolutely, positively going to destroy him? KEEP IN MIND: ANYTHING CAN HAPPEN IN A BOXING MATCH! Ali was no pushover, just because you guys don't like him...and when he was young, Dempsey, Louis, Marciano & all the rest would have been worried, I gaurantee it! Joe Frazier ducked him for years after the first fight, he KNEW that beating Ali involved P-A-I-N! (And this when when Ali was past his prime!) The same would be true for Dempsey...P-A-I-N...win or lose!

tolstoy · Post by **tolstoy** » 17 Oct 2003, 11:46

Sweet Scientist wrote: You have a short memory perhaps??? Remember when Liston was going to destroy him? Remember when Foreman was absolutely, positively going to destroy him? KEEP IN MIND: ANYTHING CAN HAPPEN IN A BOXING MATCH! Ali was no pushover, just because you guys don't like him...

Who says I don't like him? Terap doesn't like him but I quite like him. Just because I predicted his demise at the hands of Jack Dempsey has no bearing on whether I like him or not. Why can't you accept a boxing opinion for what it is?

You are right, however, in saying that anything can happen in a boxing ring. The Rumble in the Jungle was a prime example. Conversely, the Liston fights are not valid examples. Their conclusions were decided before the first bell.

Did you know that prior to the first fight Liston, in collaboration with a business colleague (to put it nicely) bought the rights to promote Clay's next five fights?

Why would he do that if he was confident of beating him? Why would he buy the rights to promote a fighter he is just about to knock out? The KO punch in the second fight wouldn't even have knocked ME off my feet never mind a beast of a man like Liston.

I like Ali but these fake fights do nothing to enhance his reputation and you should do your best to see them for what they are - boxing corruption at it's most blatant.

Sweet Scientist · Post by **Sweet Scientist** » 17 Oct 2003, 11:52

"Ali couldn't defend himself from the left hook"???

For your information: The VAST MAJORITY of left hooks thrown at Ali MISSED...of the ones that connected NONE OF THEM EVER KNOCKED HIM OUT!

Dempsey had the best left hook ever? O-P-I-N-I-O-N!!!
Joe Frazier's left hook could take your head off.
Henry Cooper had a devastaing left hook, if not much else...
You imply Cooper didn't weigh very much when taunting about the 1963 "lucky punch" while Ali was jerking around...
Cooper wieghed 188...How much do you think Dempsey weighed? 225?
WAKE THE HELL UP!

And, dear Terap, where DO you get your information on the late great Jack Dempsey??? From the media you so much despise??? Or, were you there at ringside to actually see Jack fight...or on old, grainy films, not quite at 'real time' speed.

Let me set the record STRAIGHT...Jack Dempsey was great...AND SO WAS ALI...even though you'll never admit it, I believe you KNOW (DEEP DOWN INSIDE) that I'm right!

tolstoy · Post by **tolstoy** » 17 Oct 2003, 11:56

Sweet Scientist wrote:And, dear Terap, where DO you get your information on the late great Jack Dempsey??? From the media you so much despise??? Or, were you there at ringside to actually see Jack fight...or on old, grainy films, not quite at 'real time' speed.

Let me set the record STRAIGHT...Jack Dempsey was great...AND SO WAS ALI...even though you'll never admit it, I believe you KNOW (DEEP DOWN INSIDE) that I'm right!

Valid points, Sweet Scientist.

Sweet Scientist · Post by **Sweet Scientist** » 17 Oct 2003, 18:00

Halfwits???

You have no class, Terap...

What do you do in real life when someone disagrees with you? Spit on them?

TRIBUTE TO BILLYGOAT HOLYFIELD

tribute to Holifield