Why is Jack Johnson rated so high...

[Willie Pep 229]

I think Fury might stop him late.

Fury better stop him. We got people putting him on their ATG lists already and all we got is a UD over a fading Wald and the Wilder saga.

If Fury is half as good as we are being told by his fans on this board he better not even struggle with Whyte.

He has been stopped by Povetkin and Josuha. Fury better stop him as well.

What if we were to come on line would you like to text out your experience live?

94K in one place is always a special experience.

[travestyny]

He was losing fights to Tate as early as 1917. He also lost vision in one eye in his KO loss to Fulton in 1917. By 1918 he is in obvious decline, and it doesn't get any better from there on out. The timing of a Dempsey/Langford fight just wasn't there. It's a lot like Ali/Holmes. There was never a time where Holmes could have fought a better version of Ali, Holmes didn't hit his prime until 1978, even though he was fighting since 1973. Would anyone fault Holmes if he declined a fight with Ali in '74 or '75? Absolutely not, but they sure did give him a lot of heat for beating up on Ali in 1980 when he was all but washed up. This is what Dempsey/Langford looked like to anyone who followed their careers back then.

I don't know if anyone really disagrees with you. The reason no one, to my knowledge, accuses Dempsey of ducking Langford is because the time frame doesn't add up.


That doesn't change what he stated clearly.

[travestyny]

Bottom line there was no demand for a Dempsey title defence against Langford at any time.
I've been reading for years Dempsey ducked Jeannette ,Langford ,and McVey , on forums ,and it's a lot of horse ****.

And again here, I don't know if anyone disagrees with you.


However, that doesn't change what Dempsey said regarding his own feelings on fighting Langford.


I've never heard anything about Dempsey/McVey. As for Jeannette, never heard anyone say Dempsey ducked him other than what happened at MSG, and I certainly can see the point in that.

[travestyny]

There are photos of Tunney dining with Joe Louis so I am assuming colour prejudice was not the reason he never met one in the ring

Nah. Tunney drew the color line on everyone besides Wills. Funny enough, there seems to be an instance of Wills agreeing to fight Tunney but Tunney's side backing out of it.


Then after Tunny got the title, he drew the color line on Wills as well.

[Ivich]

Nah. Tunney drew the color line on everyone besides Wills. Funny enough, there seems to be an instance of Wills agreeing to fight Tunney but Tunney's side backing out of it.


Then after Tunny got the title, he drew the color line on Wills as well.

No sorry this wont fly,less than a month after Tunney took the title from Dempsey,Wills was beat up by Jack Sharkey and fouled out to save himself further punishment.Nine months later he was ko'd in 4 rds by Uzcudun.
Bottom line, during Tunney's reign he was no longer relevant as far as world title honours were concerned

[Ivich]

And again here, I don't know if anyone disagrees with you.


However, that doesn't change what Dempsey said regarding his own feelings on fighting Langford.


I've never heard anything about Dempsey/McVey. As for Jeannette, never heard anyone say Dempsey ducked him other than what happened at MSG, and I certainly can see the point in that.

You basically have one," quote," and repeat it over and over ,attached to that clipping is another"quote ,"Dempsey denying he avoided Wills.If you believe the first part,do you also believe the second? You've yet to provide any evidence that Dempsey was not just referring to the proposed match in1916,which everyone seems to accept is the case.

[Ivich]

Fury better stop him. We got people putting him on their ATG lists already and all we got is a UD over a fading Wald and the Wilder saga.

If Fury is half as good as we are being told by his fans on this board he better not even struggle with Whyte.

He has been stopped by Povetkin and Josuha. Fury better stop him as well.

What if we were to come on line would you like to text out your experience live?

94K in one place is always a special experience.

I totally agree Fury;s resume at top level is exceedingly thin,and certainly no better ,if as deep as Whyte's.
Sorry my technical expertise isn't up to much,but perhaps I'll be able to take some pics?

[travestyny]

No sorry this wont fly,less than a month after Tunney took the title from Dempsey,Wills was beat up by Jack Sharkey and fouled out to save himself further punishment.Nine months later he was ko'd in 4 rds by Uzcudun.
Bottom line, during Tunney's reign he was no longer relevant as far as world title honours were concerned

Slow down. What I mean is immediately after winning the title. He made it clear Wills would not get a shot.

[travestyny]

You basically have one," quote," and repeat it over and over ,attached to that clipping is another"quote ,"Dempsey denying he avoided Wills.If you believe the first part,do you also believe the second? You've yet to provide any evidence that Dempsey was not just referring to the proposed match in1916,which everyone seems to accept is the case.

I thought I already explained this.

First, the quotation from Dempsey is him talking about how he feels. I don't know what other source you can get for how he feels.

Second, it's about proof. If Dempsey says he didn't avoid Wills, of course we need not believe him when there is so much evidence that says otherwise.



And yes, I did provide evidence. Dempsey made it clear that he was referring to multiple times he was asked to fight Langford. So unless all of those times came in 1916, then it's obviously about other times. And what we know is that this fight was only talked about a few times, once being 1916 and then again in 1918. We also know that Kearns is on record saying he wanted someone easier than Langford for Dempsey. Kearns was Dempsey's manager in what year? 1917 I believe. So clearly that's not 1916.


Obviously the information points to this being about other times than 1916.


Not one of you has given any proof of what you say...that it's only about 1916. All of you claim it is, but please tell me. Why am I the only one so far with proof to back up my claim.


Still waiting for you guys to show your proof. Any day now......

[QueensburyRules]

I thought I already explained this.

First, the quotation from Dempsey is him talking about how he feels. I don't know what other source you can get for how he feels.

Second, it's about proof. If Dempsey says he didn't avoid Wills, of course we need not believe him when there is so much evidence that says otherwise.



And yes, I did provide evidence. Dempsey made it clear that he was referring to multiple times he was asked to fight Langford. So unless all of those times came in 1916, then it's obviously about other times. And what we know is that this fight was only talked about a few times, once being 1916 and then again in 1918. We also know that Kearns is on record saying he wanted someone easier than Langford for Dempsey. Kearns was Dempsey's manager in what year? 1917 I believe. So clearly that's not 1916.


Obviously the information points to this being about other times than 1916.


Not one of you has given any proof of what you say...that it's only about 1916. All of you claim it is, but please tell me. Why am I the only one so far with proof to back up my claim.


Still waiting for you guys to show your proof. Any day now......

- - Dempsey proof got U Duhdrunken stoopid.

Proof Jack walks out of a contract worth $75, just pitiable.