~Battle of the Jacks~ December 11, 1921~7th Rd KO

[BroughtonRulesRefuge]

[HomicideHenry]

POST OF THE MONTH, IF NOT THE YEAR!!!

[Goodnight, Irene]

Absolutely fascinating reading. Thank you, kindly.

[Collins2000]

Someone with plenty of time on their hands wrote that piece for the inaugural issue of that mag.

Still, it's not bad. Not quite as good as those Jim Trunzo fantasy fights but not a bad effort.

I see Rufus has swallowed it hook, line and sinker. Now why am I not surprised...

But for those who are not yet convinced, someone ought to create some photos of the 'bout' with photoshop. It wasn't easy to do in 1983 but nowadays someone should be able to knock something convincing up in no time.

There's a few lads out there that want to believe this is a real report; I can sense it. Can someone help them out with some fake photos?

[HomicideHenry]

Collins, why cant you at least acknowledge that is was even plausible?

It may be a fake, who knows, but, it was just an exhibition after all. They happen all the time.

[BroughtonRulesRefuge]

Collins, why cant you at least acknowledge that is was even plausible?

It may be a fake, who knows, but, it was just an exhibition after all. They happen all the time.

- The previous articles of Johnson's release and the proposed Mexico City fight prove it's much more than plausible. The fight was actively being self promoted by Johnson himself, just like he promoted the Louis fight to any writers who would listen.

The gambling angle practically seals the thing as the article is dead on about Kearns. Add on the distant location, I'd say the fight was a strong possibility, esp if there are archives of this Broklyn Eagle article.

It's certainly no worse than the boxing records that are always being added, purged, and edited by boxrec.

[Collins2000]

Collins, why cant you at least acknowledge that is was even plausible?

It may be a fake, who knows, but, it was just an exhibition after all. They happen all the time.

- The previous articles of Johnson's release and the proposed Mexico City fight prove it's much more than plausible. The fight was actively being self promoted by Johnson himself, just like he promoted the Louis fight to any writers who would listen.

The gambling angle practically seals the thing as the article is dead on about Kearns. Add on the distant location, I'd say the fight was a strong possibility, esp if there are archives of this Broklyn Eagle article.

It's certainly no worse than the boxing records that are always being added, purged, and edited by boxrec.

You pair of numpties ought to get a room together as you are both in a high state of arousal now!

[HomicideHenry]

It's certainly no worse than the boxing records that are always being added, purged, and edited by boxrec.[/

Remember Johnny Davis who fought Louis supposedly for the NYSAC title? Remember that bum Willie Davies who won a decision over Max Baer during the period of time where Max fought 24 times in 4 months? Remember Walter Edgerton who knocked out the worlds champ in an exhibition?

Hell, wasnt even a full two-three weeks ago I told BoxRec to take down the Morrison-Williams fight, because it was in fact more of a stand up MMA bout than boxing. As far as Dempsey is concerned...look on his record at BoxRec right now and a black man by the name of Emmanuel Cambel was said to have fought Dempsey in 1915, when before, all records shown that Dempsey never fought a black heavyweight, only a black light heavyweight in John Lester Johnson.

Hell, even at CBZ, they have 'reports' of Jim Jefferies taking on guys like Frank Childs, Denver Ed Martin and others who were black, but they are not confirmed. This article, however, does give more than circumstancial evidence, that Dempsey-Johnson could have taken place.

[Collins2000]

This article, however, does give more than circumstancial evidence, that Dempsey-Johnson could have taken place.

So, let's cut to the chase, Rufus.

You have seen a tongue-in-cheek 'report' in a boxing magazine of no repute ie it was issue #1.

That's all.

There is no other 'evidence' of this 'bout' after all this time.

Yet, based on this, you think it's kosher.

Also, there is no similarity between the examples you give and this. This is a supposed fight between two of the biggest, possible THE biggest names, alive in boxing at that time that no one knew about and................ ah, what the hell. If you and the other clowns want to believe it who am I to ruin your wet dream. Fill your boots boys! Next week rocky50_project is due back from South America with 'evidence' of Marciano's missing fight against The Wild Bull of The Pampas!

[HomicideHenry]

Its not like the bout wouldnt have garnered up interest. According to the New York Times:

http://query.nytimes.com/mem/archive-fr ... 838A639EDE

There was an offer of 200,000 dollars to go to Dempsey alone if the fight was to take off. Kearns shot the idea down, saying he wasnt drawing the color line, but didnt believe the public wanted to see a Dempsey-Johnson bout, that Johnson would have to defeat Harry Wills in order to get a shot at Dempsey.

I think Kearns was playing it smart. He knew if the title was up for grabs, he could lose his golden goose in Dempsey, had the ex-champion won the fight, so he side steps Johnson and tells him to fight Wills, whom Kearns was avoiding as well. It was to keep Johnson quiet.

As for the money...I'm sure in Canada it was matched, if not more so, and it would been all in secret, or so Kearns thought. Its not the first time Doc Kearns was ever implied in any wrong doing concerning Dempsey's career. Its been said, and eye witnessed by Ferdie Pacheco, that there was unedited film of Dempsey-Firpo, and that Dempsey was in fact down for more longer than any ten seconds. Ironically it would be a 'long count' that would make Dempsey a legend in his rematch with Tunney.

[HomicideHenry]

So, let's cut to the chase, Rufus.

You have seen a tongue-in-cheek 'report' in a boxing magazine of no repute ie it was issue #1.

That's all.

There is no other 'evidence' of this 'bout' after all this time.

Yet, based on this, you think it's kosher.

Also, there is no similarity between the examples you give and this. This is a supposed fight between two of the biggest, possible THE biggest names, alive in boxing at that time that no one knew about and................ ah, what the hell. If you and the other clowns want to believe it who am I to ruin your wet dream. Fill your boots boys! Next week rocky50_project is due back from South America with 'evidence' of Marciano's missing fight against The Wild Bull of The Pampas!

This article, however, does give more than circumstancial evidence, that Dempsey-Johnson could have taken place.

So, let's cut to the chase, Rufus.

You have seen a tongue-in-cheek 'report' in a boxing magazine of no repute ie it was issue #1.

That's all.

There is no other 'evidence' of this 'bout' after all this time.

Yet, based on this, you think it's kosher.

Also, there is no similarity between the examples you give and this. This is a supposed fight between two of the biggest, possible THE biggest names, alive in boxing at that time that no one knew about and................ ah, what the hell. If you and the other clowns want to believe it who am I to ruin your wet dream. Fill your boots boys! Next week rocky50_project is due back from South America with 'evidence' of Marciano's missing fight against The Wild Bull of The Pampas!

Jack Dempsey's illegitimate son, also claimed that the fight was real. Mind you, I would think a guy's son might have better in depth info on his dad than most. But thats just my opinion.

As for that guy rocky50_project, iono what to think of him. He tried like hell to find something on Marciano, but imo, the closest thing to a 50th fight Marciano would have had was when he tried to arrange a bout with Patterson in an exhibition, which never came off.

[Robinson]

Thank you for posting this !!!


I know what I am doing when my new printer is working ;)

[BroughtonRulesRefuge]

Its been said, and eye witnessed by Ferdie Pacheco, that there was unedited film of Dempsey-Firpo, and that Dempsey was in fact down for more longer than any ten seconds. Ironically it would be a 'long count' that would make Dempsey a legend in his rematch with Tunney.

- "It's been said" for tens of thousands of years before recorded time.

When "It's been said" by jailhouse snitches, the "It's been said" is generally ignored unless a prosecutor wants to run a big splashy trial win through the system to improve his profile.

Everything Ferdie says has to be taken in this context. Bill Cayton or Mike Jacobs are the source of most every question about fight tapes, and unfortunately, we have to rely on past quotes. Pecheco knows not what he looked at, and I wouldn't even want him giving me a physical.

Points in fact typically ignored:

1. Dempsey was not punched out of the ring, he was pushed by a pulled up trailing right hand by the frustrated Firpo who was having difficulty in his follow up after hurting and trapping Jack on the ropes, a clear foul.

2. Nobody has ever addressed the rules of the day. In the modern era, ring aprons are much larger and the rule is if knocked out of the ring a fighter has 20sec, not 10 sec, to make himself ready to fight within the ring.

2. Interference and assistance rule was meant to apply to ring officials and partisan corners.

If a spectator jumps on the ring apron, the fight is not declared double DQ for example, nor should a fighter DQed or counted out if interfered with by spectators in or out of the ring. Like much of boxing lore, claims are often more fuzzy, but the claim that Dempsey was assisted back to the ring by a single reporter pressing his 190lb frame up several feet up to the canvas, or several reporters sounds preposterous on the face of it. Beyond the capacity of a single reporter, and anyone working in construction knows that it takes more people on a p4p basis to move heavier weights than lighter weights because of uncoordinated pushing and pulling actions of the participants increase the force needed to move the object in a planned direction.

This was completely UNPLANNED, so there would've been much pulling and pushing before final result achieved since some would be trying to help him move to a standing position rather than push him upwards.

[dempseyfire]

It's certainly no worse than the boxing records that are always being added, purged, and edited by boxrec.[/

Remember Johnny Davis who fought Louis supposedly for the NYSAC title? Remember that bum Willie Davies who won a decision over Max Baer during the period of time where Max fought 24 times in 4 months? Remember Walter Edgerton who knocked out the worlds champ in an exhibition?

Hell, wasnt even a full two-three weeks ago I told BoxRec to take down the Morrison-Williams fight, because it was in fact more of a stand up MMA bout than boxing. As far as Dempsey is concerned...look on his record at BoxRec right now and a black man by the name of Emmanuel Cambel was said to have fought Dempsey in 1915, when before, all records shown that Dempsey never fought a black heavyweight, only a black light heavyweight in John Lester Johnson.

Hell, even at CBZ, they have 'reports' of Jim Jefferies taking on guys like Frank Childs, Denver Ed Martin and others who were black, but they are not confirmed. This article, however, does give more than circumstancial evidence, that Dempsey-Johnson could have taken place.

No, the article doesn't provide any hard evidence whatsoever. I'm shocked at how many people are quick to latch on to such a mythical piece.
Traveling champions fought exhibitions all the time vs the likes of your Johnny Davisses . . .they didn't happen "in secret" between the champ and the world-famous ex-champion for 'gamblers' . . .anyone ever wonder why this story remained stuck in a 1983 Fightbeat and never gained traction anywhere else. Guess they were all silenced by the 80 year old mobsters who were involved

And of course, Johnson, who by all acounts by that time could only engage in clinch-filled snoozefests and struggled vs journeyman, not only puts Dempsey down but is engaged in one of the 'greatest fights ever' . . . .this is more full of rubbish than a Mexico City landfill.

That one major reason that the fight could have taken place is that "dempsey's manager Tex Rickard was a 'con-man'" pretty much places this article into Bert Sugar/Pacheco fantasyland territory. Not that Rickard wasn't the Don King of his day, but that's such a poor reason to claim anything, it's laughable. But Broughton loves his conspiracy theories, including how the judges ripped off Mercer vs Holmes, so his belief of this story is not surprising.

[BroughtonRulesRefuge]

And of course, Johnson, who by all acounts by that time could only engage in clinch-filled snoozefests and struggled vs journeyman, not only puts Dempsey down but is engaged in one of the 'greatest fights ever' . . . .this is more full of rubbish than a Mexico City landfill.

-- My, my, yet another bad hair day for ya, eh?

Coming out of prison, Johnson was 5-0, 4 KOs, his most active period since before he won the title 13 yrs prior.

As far as evidence goes, the Eskin includes photos of newspaper clippings and testimony of his conversation with Dempsey. Everyone knows many convicted on flimsier evidence than that by judges and juries in courts of law.

Thus far the evidence reads: Eskin 2 - You Zipp00000000-d000000000-duhhhhhhhh

[Collins2000]

And of course, Johnson, who by all acounts by that time could only engage in clinch-filled snoozefests and struggled vs journeyman, not only puts Dempsey down but is engaged in one of the 'greatest fights ever' . . . .this is more full of rubbish than a Mexico City landfill.

-- My, my, yet another bad hair day for ya, eh?

Coming out of prison, Johnson was 5-0, 4 KOs, his most active period since before he won the title 13 yrs prior.

As far as evidence goes, the Eskin includes photos of newspaper clippings and testimony of his conversation with Dempsey. Everyone knows many convicted on flimsier evidence than that by judges and juries in courts of law.

Thus far the evidence reads: Eskin 2 - You Zipp00000000-d000000000-duhhhhhhhh

Those 'newspaper clippings' look more than a bit dodgy... And no one has ever managed to find the originals. Nor will they.

[The Great John L]

Those 'newspaper clippings' look more than a bit dodgy... And no one has ever managed to find the originals. Nor will they.

Sure they have. It says they're on file at Fight Beat magazine offices.

[Collins2000]

And of course, Johnson, who by all acounts by that time could only engage in clinch-filled snoozefests and struggled vs journeyman, not only puts Dempsey down but is engaged in one of the 'greatest fights ever' . . . .this is more full of rubbish than a Mexico City landfill.

-- My, my, yet another bad hair day for ya, eh?

Coming out of prison, Johnson was 5-0, 4 KOs, his most active period since before he won the title 13 yrs prior.

As far as evidence goes, the Eskin includes photos of newspaper clippings and testimony of his conversation with Dempsey. Everyone knows many convicted on flimsier evidence than that by judges and juries in courts of law.

Thus far the evidence reads: Eskin 2 - You Zipp00000000-d000000000-duhhhhhhhh

I notice They waited until Dempsey was dead before they posted it too.

Now conspiracy theorists will say "But Jack asked them to wait".

According to who? That's right Lew Eskin the 'author' of the fantasy piece.

[Collins2000]

Those 'newspaper clippings' look more than a bit dodgy... And no one has ever managed to find the originals. Nor will they.

Sure they have. It says they're on file at Fight Beat magazine offices.

That's good enough 'evidence' for Rufus and the other numpty.

[BoxBuzz]

What's the problem here? This is clearly a science fiction FACT!

[raylawpc]

Lew Eskin never says the fight took place. He only describes (a) a newpaper report that he found in a scrapbook and (b) a conversation he had with Jack Dempsey. He also reports that his investigation showed there is nothing in the timeline of either fighter than conclusively shows the fight couldn't have taken place. That's it.

I knew Lew Eskin. He was a friend of mine. We went on a fight trip together, and I sat next to him watching Ali-Norton II on closed circuit TV in Providence RI. He encouraged me to get involved in sports journalism when I was a young man. Lew reported something interesting that he found, and he leaves the reader to decide whether or not to believe it. I do not think Lew Eskin falsified anything. That would not be in the character of the man I knew and called my friend.

[Collins2000]

Lew Eskin never says the fight took place. He only describes (a) a newpaper report that he found in a scrapbook and (b) a conversation he had with Jack Dempsey. He also reports that his investigation showed there is nothing in the timeline of either fighter than conclusively shows the fight couldn't have taken place. That's it.

I knew Lew Eskin. He was a friend of mine. We went on a fight trip together, and I sat next to him watching Ali-Norton II on closed circuit TV in Providence RI. He encouraged me to get involved in sports journalism when I was a young man. Lew reported something interesting that he found, and he leaves the reader to decide whether or not to believe it. I do not think Lew Eskin falsified anything. That would not be in the character of the man I knew and called my friend.

It was written tongue-in-cheek in my opinion.

Perhaps Eskin had a sense of humour.

I know it is rare in here, pomposity is more the order of the day, but I think it was never meant to be taken seriously.

[dempseyfire]

And of course, Johnson, who by all acounts by that time could only engage in clinch-filled snoozefests and struggled vs journeyman, not only puts Dempsey down but is engaged in one of the 'greatest fights ever' . . . .this is more full of rubbish than a Mexico City landfill.

-- My, my, yet another bad hair day for ya, eh?

Coming out of prison, Johnson was 5-0, 4 KOs, his most active period since before he won the title 13 yrs prior.

As far as evidence goes, the Eskin includes photos of newspaper clippings and testimony of his conversation with Dempsey. Everyone knows many convicted on flimsier evidence than that by judges and juries in courts of law.

Thus far the evidence reads: Eskin 2 - You Zipp00000000-d000000000-duhhhhhhhh

First off, your ever-beloved stats are wrong. Johnson was INACTIVE for two years out of prison (as your article verifies) and when he began fighting professionally in 1923 scored only one knockout until his loss to Bob Lawson.

Dempsey never admitted to anything, and ONE dodgy newspaper article that was verified by NO-ONE and not reported in ANY OTHER PAPER means JACK SQUAT. I can show you newspaper articles with reports of little green men and bigfoot . . .I can see your brain has corresponded with the former many a time.

As for Mr. Eskine, I'm sure he was a good guy and I don't think he neccesarily falsified anything written here, but I will contend it is a sloppily written piece taken as serious journalism, but if taken as more or less of a fun 'what the hell' foray into a mythical event (as I think Lew intended it to be), it's fine. Boxing is full of crazy stories that never really happened.

[raylawpc]

And of course, Johnson, who by all acounts by that time could only engage in clinch-filled snoozefests and struggled vs journeyman, not only puts Dempsey down but is engaged in one of the 'greatest fights ever' . . . .this is more full of rubbish than a Mexico City landfill.

-- My, my, yet another bad hair day for ya, eh?

Coming out of prison, Johnson was 5-0, 4 KOs, his most active period since before he won the title 13 yrs prior.

As far as evidence goes, the Eskin includes photos of newspaper clippings and testimony of his conversation with Dempsey. Everyone knows many convicted on flimsier evidence than that by judges and juries in courts of law.

Thus far the evidence reads: Eskin 2 - You Zipp00000000-d000000000-duhhhhhhhh

First off, your ever-beloved stats are wrong. Johnson was INACTIVE for two years out of prison (as your article verifies) and when he began fighting professionally in 1923 scored only one knockout until his loss to Bob Lawson.

Dempsey never admitted to anything, and ONE dodgy newspaper article that was verified by NO-ONE and not reported in ANY OTHER PAPER means JACK SQUAT. I can show you newspaper articles with reports of little green men and bigfoot . . .I can see your brain has corresponded with the former many a time.

As for Mr. Eskine, I'm sure he was a good guy and I don't think he neccesarily falsified anything written here, but I will contend it is a sloppily written piece taken as serious journalism, but if taken as more or less of a fun 'what the hell' foray into a mythical event (as I think Lew intended it to be), it's fine. Boxing is full of crazy stories that never really happened.

I think Lew intended it as "Hey, guys, look what I found in a scrapbook. I can't disprove it. Waddaya think?"

[Djanders]

I enjoyed reading that! Thanks for posting it, BroughtonRulesRefuge!