Why is Jack Johnson rated so high...

Collapse
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • travestyny
    Banned
    Franchise Champion - 20,000+ posts
    • Sep 2008
    • 29107
    • 4,962
    • 9,405
    • 4,074,546

    #361
    Originally posted by Willie Pep 229

    That's twisted bs; a conveniently illogical conclusion to draw.

    What conclusion did I draw? I asked you a question and you are ducking. Question is, are you ducking enough to take a knee? You going to swing back or what, Jr.?


    Once again. If Farley wants the Dempsey Wills fight and he is a NY Commissioner who knows about who is for and against this fight. He says there is no barrier to the fight and that the only reason the fight is not being made is because Dempsey doesn't want it.

    Why would he be lying? Would he be protecting someone who doesn't want the fight or what? Do enlighten us.

    Comment

    • Willie Pep 229
      hic sunt dracone
      Super Champion - 5,000-10,000 posts
      • Mar 2020
      • 6365
      • 2,824
      • 2,772
      • 29,169

      #362
      Originally posted by travestyny


      What conclusion did I draw? I asked you a question and you are ducking. Question is, are you ducking enough to take a knee? You going to swing back or what, Jr.?


      Once again. If Farley wants the Dempsey Wills fight and he is a NY Commissioner who knows about who is for and against this fight. He says there is no barrier to the fight and that the only reason the fight is not being made is because Dempsey doesn't want it.

      Why would he be lying? Would he be protecting someone who doesn't want the fight or what? Do enlighten us.
      Kearns, Kearns, Kearns DID NOT WANT A NEW YORK FIGHT BECAUSE OF RICKARD THUS HE ENDS UP IN MONTANA!

      NOTHING TO DO WITH WILLS.

      There was nothing for NY (Tammanny, NYSAC, NY press, NY venues) for a Wills-Dempsey fight to take place anywhere except NY - Kearns didn't want a NY fight because he wanted Rickard out of the picture? Thus Shelby!

      Wills had a relationship with Rickard which means a Wills fight likely brings in Rickard. Thus Shelby, Montana!

      GOT IT?

      This is truly becoming perverse.

      Comment

      • travestyny
        Banned
        Franchise Champion - 20,000+ posts
        • Sep 2008
        • 29107
        • 4,962
        • 9,405
        • 4,074,546

        #363
        Originally posted by Willie Pep 229

        Kearns, Kearns, Kearns DID NOT WANT A NEW YORK FIGHT BECAUSE OF RICKARD THUS HE ENDS UP IN MONTANA!

        NOTHING TO DO WITH WILLS.

        There was nothing for NY (Tammanny, NYSAC, NY press, NY venues) for a Wills-Dempsey fight to take place anywhere except NY - Kearns didn't want a NY fight because he wanted Rickard out of the picture? Thus Shelby!

        Wills had a relationship with Rickard which means a Wills fight likely brings in Rickard. Thus Shelby, Montana!

        GOT IT?

        This is truly becoming perverse.
        So then you admit that Farley is right that there was no barrier to Dempsey fighting Wills in New York.


        The only barrier being Dempsey's team.


        Thank you for proving the point. Kearns worked for whom? Did Dempsey have the power to fire Kearns? Did he fire Kearns during his career?


        But let's get this Farley business out of the way first. Farley was right that there was no barrier to the fight, correct? No political opposition or otherwise besides Dempsey and his team. Correct?
        Last edited by travestyny; 04-16-2022, 01:54 PM.

        Comment

        • travestyny
          Banned
          Franchise Champion - 20,000+ posts
          • Sep 2008
          • 29107
          • 4,962
          • 9,405
          • 4,074,546

          #364
          Originally posted by Willie Pep 229

          Kearns, Kearns, Kearns DID NOT WANT A NEW YORK FIGHT BECAUSE OF RICKARD THUS HE ENDS UP IN MONTANA!

          NOTHING TO DO WITH WILLS.

          There was nothing for NY (Tammanny, NYSAC, NY press, NY venues) for a Wills-Dempsey fight to take place anywhere except NY - Kearns didn't want a NY fight because he wanted Rickard out of the picture? Thus Shelby!

          Wills had a relationship with Rickard which means a Wills fight likely brings in Rickard. Thus Shelby, Montana!

          GOT IT?

          This is truly becoming perverse.
          By the way, I'm not sure why you are talking about Shelby, Montana, and Kearns. That happened in 1923.


          Farley's statement was in 1926. Pretty sure Kearns was already gone and suing Dempsey. So you want to shift blame yet again?


          June 12th, 1926: "I don't believe Dempsey ever intends to fight Wills....why doesn't [he] inform the public or retire."

          Comment

          • travestyny
            Banned
            Franchise Champion - 20,000+ posts
            • Sep 2008
            • 29107
            • 4,962
            • 9,405
            • 4,074,546

            #365
            Originally posted by Willie Pep 229

            Ghost is correct you're just a anti-Dempsey troll.
            Speaking of your good friend, Ghost, he must be an anti-Dempey troll, too.


            He claims that I ignore his information. Well here is a little gem that he dropped for us.

            Originally posted by GhostofDempsey
            Dempsey defeated Luis "The Wild Bull of the Pampas" Firpo in a brutal 1923 slugfest, and then took life easy. He avoided fighting Harry Willis, made movies, traveled extensively in Europe.

            Unless Harry Willis isn't a typo, I'd say his research got us to the same conclusion. How about you?

            Comment

            • Poet682006
              Banned
              Unified Champion - 10,00-20,000 posts
              • Mar 2007
              • 17931
              • 1,181
              • 1,350
              • 26,849

              #366
              Originally posted by travestyny

              Speaking of your good friend, Ghost, he must be an anti-Dempey troll, too.


              He claims that I ignore his information. Well here is a little gem that he dropped for us.




              Unless Harry Willis isn't a typo, I'd say his research got us to the same conclusion. How about you?
              The impression I get is he's not even particularly a Dempsey fan (I am, fwiw), he's just whyte knighting the poor oppressed whyte dude

              Comment

              • travestyny
                Banned
                Franchise Champion - 20,000+ posts
                • Sep 2008
                • 29107
                • 4,962
                • 9,405
                • 4,074,546

                #367
                Originally posted by StarshipTrooper

                The impression I get is he's not even particularly a Dempsey fan (I am, fwiw), he's just whyte knighting the poor oppressed whyte dude
                I really can't say what he is. Honestly he's seeming more and more like a troll recently.

                Comment

                • Willie Pep 229
                  hic sunt dracone
                  Super Champion - 5,000-10,000 posts
                  • Mar 2020
                  • 6365
                  • 2,824
                  • 2,772
                  • 29,169

                  #368
                  Originally posted by travestyny

                  So then you admit that Farley is right that there was no barrier to Dempsey fighting Wills in New York.


                  The only barrier being Dempsey's team.


                  Thank you for proving the point. Kearns worked for whom? Did Dempsey have the power to fire Kearns? Did he fire Kearns during his career?


                  But let's get this Farley business out of the way first. Farley was right that there was no barrier to the fight, correct? No political opposition or otherwise besides Dempsey and his team. Correct?
                  Kearns! Kearns! Kearns!

                  No a fighter gives a % to a manager and then listens to him.

                  Comment

                  • travestyny
                    Banned
                    Franchise Champion - 20,000+ posts
                    • Sep 2008
                    • 29107
                    • 4,962
                    • 9,405
                    • 4,074,546

                    #369
                    Originally posted by Willie Pep 229

                    Kearns! Kearns! Kearns!

                    No a fighter gives a % to a manager and then listens to him.
                    Kearns was busy suing Dempsey in 1926.

                    You want to try again?


                    I guess Kearns forced Dempsey to say he can't get into condition, huh?


                    You give Dempsey no credit, or should I say discredit, because you can't face reality. Let's pretend he was a big dumb slave to save face, shall we!
                    Last edited by travestyny; 04-16-2022, 04:26 PM.

                    Comment

                    • Willie Pep 229
                      hic sunt dracone
                      Super Champion - 5,000-10,000 posts
                      • Mar 2020
                      • 6365
                      • 2,824
                      • 2,772
                      • 29,169

                      #370
                      Originally posted by travestyny

                      By the way, I'm not sure why you are talking about Shelby, Montana, and Kearns. That happened in 1923.


                      Farley's statement was in 1926. Pretty sure Kearns was already gone and suing Dempsey. So you want to shift blame yet again?


                      June 12th, 1926: "I don't believe Dempsey ever intends to fight Wills....why doesn't [he] inform the public or retire."
                      Yes Kearns spent all 1922 looking for a fight away from NY. In Januaray 1923 he began his negotiations with Shelby for a July fight.

                      1926 is not Kearns, enter Fitzsimmons.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      TOP