Why is Jack Johnson rated so high...

[travestyny]

No one should be upset with me here. I've literally only posted Dempsey's words along with other sources that support his words.



Anyone is free to post evidence that contradicts what I've stated. But it's going to be pretty damn hard getting over what comes out the horse's mouth. If you want to prove Dempsey himself was lying when he made the statements, go for it! Not sure how you prove that he wasn't afraid if he said he was. Also not sure how you prove he didn't state he would fight two white men instead of Jeannette when not only he is quoted in his own article of saying it, but one of the most well respected newspapers detailed not only that offer but the two White men who stepped up to the challenge, and were then denied.

So feel free to disprove any of it

[GhostofDempsey]

Try to understand what I'm saying to you. The argument is NOT about who would win or who was worthy of an offer even. You may very well be right about all of that. That doesn't change that Dempsey himself said he was too afraid to fight Langford.



Again, my argument was never that he was entitled to the fight. When did I ever try to make that argument????




You guys are desperately trying to shift the argument. I have to admit, it's pretty creative to say Dempsey never admit to being afraid of Langford because promoters never offered the fight. Not sure how one precludes the other. If anyone can explain that, please let me know.

You refuse to accept that Dempsey’s quote was regarding the earliest challenge while he was under contract to Reisler. There were no serious offers or negotiations to fight Langford any time between 1918 to Langford’s retirement in 1925. Langford lost sight in one eye in his fight with Fulton and was damaged goods.

You then cling to the 1923 Kearns quote as if Dempsey would have feared Sam even then. By 1923, Sam was about 41, half blind and broken down. Dempsey had too much respect for him to humiliate him in the ring for less money than he could make elsewhere.

Langford could say he wanted the fight all day and all year, it means nothing. A hundred other guys wanted the fight too, and Langford hadn’t done anything in 1918 to prove himself worthy. In Dempsey’s autobiography he closes the book saying “I keep thinking of the good ones who wound up with nothing, except maybe clippings. Like Langford, the man I was afraid to fight as a kid, and the great old middleweight whose name I took.” He clearly states he was just a kid at the time he refused Langford.

You insist on cherry picking quotes to believe, and refusing to accept the quotes from fighters you defend. That is unreasonable and irrational.

[Willie Pep 229]

Sure. It's from Clay Moyle's book on Sam Langford.

Langford speaking via your quote: "First Dempsey goes west and signs with Floyd Fitzsimmons then he goes east and signs with Tex Rickard."

Langford puts Fitz as the mover and shaker of Dempsey signing for Wills out west.

• We know it was Fitz who brought Dempsey out west to sign.
• We know that Fitz abandoned that deal.
• We know that Dempsey then abandoned that deal.
• We know that Fitz then appears in Dempsey's camp as spokes person for the Tunney fight.
• We know that Fitzsimmons and Dempsey have a relationship that goes back to at least the Miske fight in 1920 where Dempsey buys Fitz's wife a 10K + auto as a gift.

Langford unwittingly helps confirm my theory that Dempsey breached the Chicago contract because Fitz walked away from it first and then took Dempsey back east and delivered him to Rickard. Dempsey then brought Fitz on to his team to give him a taste.

The Chicago deal fell through because Fitz was no longer willing to be involved.

All conjecture yes, but to Langford the Dempsey deal out west was with Fitzsimmons, which helps support the argument that it was Fitz's lead, first in, and then out, that Dempsey was following.

[Willie Pep 229]

You refuse to accept that Dempsey’s quote was regarding the earliest challenge while he was under contract to Reisler. There were no serious offers or negotiations to fight Langford any time between 1918 to Langford’s retirement in 1925. Langford lost sight in one eye in his fight with Fulton and was damaged goods.

You then cling to the 1923 Kearns quote as if Dempsey would have feared Sam even then. By 1923, Sam was about 41, half blind and broken down. Dempsey had too much respect for him to humiliate him in the ring for less money than he could make elsewhere.

Langford could say he wanted the fight all day and all year, it means nothing. A hundred other guys wanted the fight too, and Langford hadn’t done anything in 1918 to prove himself worthy. In Dempsey’s autobiography he closes the book saying “I keep thinking of the good ones who wound up with nothing, except maybe clippings. Like Langford, the man I was afraid to fight as a kid, and the great old middleweight whose name I took.” He clearly states he was just a kid at the time he refused Langford.

You insist on cherry picking quotes to believe, and refusing to accept the quotes from fighters you defend. That is unreasonable and irrational.

Langford first approached Kearns and Fitzsimmons in 1920 where he was given a shot at Bill Tate on the Miske undercard. Which Langford lost.

It was probably there they realized that Langford was no longer a serious contender.

[travestyny]

You refuse to accept that Dempsey’s quote was regarding the earliest challenge while he was under contract to Reisler. There were no serious offers or negotiations to fight Langford any time between 1918 to Langford’s retirement in 1925. Langford lost sight in one eye in his fight with Fulton and was damaged goods.

You then cling to the 1923 Kearns quote as if Dempsey would have feared Sam even then. By 1923, Sam was about 41, half blind and broken down. Dempsey had too much respect for him to humiliate him in the ring for less money than he could make elsewhere.

Langford could say he wanted the fight all day and all year, it means nothing. A hundred other guys wanted the fight too, and Langford hadn’t done anything in 1918 to prove himself worthy. In Dempsey’s autobiography he closes the book saying “I keep thinking of the good ones who wound up with nothing, except maybe clippings. Like Langford, the man I was afraid to fight as a kid, and the great old middleweight whose name I took.” He clearly states he was just a kid at the time he refused Langford.

You insist on cherry picking quotes to believe, and refusing to accept the quotes from fighters you defend. That is unreasonable and irrational.

I'm not refusing to accept it. I'm asking you to show me the proof of it. I haven't seen it! You can't just make up your own narrative and go with it. The narrative I present is backed up by sources. If you show your source for why you believe that then maybe we can get somewhere.

[travestyny]

Langford speaking via your quote: "First Dempsey goes west and signs with Floyd Fitzsimmons then he goes east and signs with Tex Rickard."

Langford puts Fitz as the mover and shaker of Dempsey signing for Wills out west.

• We know it was Fitz who brought Dempsey out west to sign.
• We know that Fitz abandoned that deal.
• We know that Dempsey then abandoned that deal.
• We know that Fitz then appears in Dempsey's camp as spokes person for the Tunney fight.
• We know that Fitzsimmons and Dempsey have a relationship that goes back to at least the Miske fight in 1920 where Dempsey buys Fitz's wife a 10K + auto as a gift.

Langford unwittingly helps confirm my theory that Dempsey breached the Chicago contract because Fitz walked away from it first and then took Dempsey back east and delivered him to Rickard. Dempsey then brought Fitz on to his team to give him a taste.

The Chicago deal fell through because Fitz was no longer willing to be involved.

All conjecture yes, but to Langford the Dempsey deal out west was with Fitzsimmons, which helps support the argument that it was Fitz's lead, first in, and then out, that Dempsey was following.

Fritz didn't have a deal to abandon. Once he agreed to give the fight to the Chicago Coliseum Club, his role was done.


Also, Fitz can't force Dempsey to do anything. If Dempsey walked it was because he decided to do so. Fitz didn't own him.


You're really reaching with Langford helping you here Please stop. Your arguments just become more and more desperate.

[Willie Pep 229]

Fritz didn't have a deal to abandon. Once he agreed to give the fight to the Chicago Coliseum Club, his role was done.


Also, Fitz can't force Dempsey to do anything. If Dempsey walked it was because he decided to do so. Fitz didn't own him.


You're really reaching with Langford helping you here Please stop. Your arguments just become more and more desperate.

"his role was done" --- Tha'ts when Dempsey was done. That was the moment of abandonment.

"[F]orce" -- of course not they were friends and it looks as though Fitz held some level of mentor.

I'm not reaching. What Langford did was show us that to the contemporaries what they saw was Dempsey move from Fitz to Rickard. No mention of Chicago, contracts, injunctions, ETC.

To Langford Dempsey switched fights when he switched promoters, and saw it as a duck of Wills. Because in his mind fighters fought for promoters so Langford saw it as which promoter Dempsey chose. This helps confirm that Fitz was a key part of the deal because that's who Langford remembered, thought to mention as important.

A good unwitting confirmation of Fitz's importance.

[travestyny]

"his role was done" --- Tha'ts when Dempsey was done. That was the moment of abandonment.

"[F]orce" -- of course not they were friends and it looks as though Fitz held some level of mentor.

I'm not reaching. What Langford did was show us that to the contemporaries what they saw was Dempsey move from Fitz to Rickard. No mention of Chicago, contracts, injunctions, ETC.

To Langford Dempsey switched fights when he switched promoters, and saw it as a duck of Wills. Because in his mind fighters fought for promoters so Langford saw it as which promoter Dempsey chose. This helps confirm that Fitz was a key part of the deal because that's who Langford remembered, thought to mention as important.

A good unwitting confirmation of Fitz's importance.

LMAO. No. Langford said precisely what he meant. He stated Dempsey was scared. How do you equate that to Langford blaming Fitz.


Fitz was done when Dempsey signed the papers to be under the Chicago Coliseum Club. That was not the moment of the broken contract. That was where the contract began. Yes, you are reaching. And it's annoying because it's clear you make no sense. The only thing that's hard to figure out is if you really believe these outlandish things you say because you can't face reality or are you just wasting time and space here by openly lying to yourself.


You need some serious help. The irony is that you are the same as the MAGA people, just for Dempsey. Yall are definitely in some strange kinda cult drinking the koolaid. Seek help. Really.

[Willie Pep 229]

LMAO. No. Langford said precisely what he meant. He stated Dempsey was scared. How do you equate that to Langford blaming Fitz.


Fitz was done when Dempsey signed the papers to be under the Chicago Coliseum Club. That was not the moment of the broken contract. That was where the contract began. Yes, you are reaching. And it's annoying because it's clear you make no sense. The only thing that's hard to figure out is if you really believe these outlandish things you say because you can't face reality or are you just wasting time and space here by openly lying to yourself.


You need some serious help. The irony is that you are the same as the MAGA people, just for Dempsey. Yall are definitely in some strange kinda cult drinking the koolaid. Seek help. Really.

If Fitz was done when they signed why is it Fitz who takes Dempsey to the bank when the check fails to cash. If Fitz is done why is he the one who covers the $20 check to keep Dempsey committed?

If Fitz was done at the moment of signing why does Langford remember it as a Fitzsimmons promoted fight?

I guess you're better informed than Langford.

Fitz was going to be done alright - as quickly as he learned it was a cluster phuck he pulled himself out of it and took Dempsey with him.

I am curious how can you prove Fitz was done when Dempsey signed?

You really have a concrete mind and can't read between the lines. You're reduced to being a quote factory with no insight just a regurgitation of quotes.

Let the name calling continue. Doesn't change the reality, Dempsey wasn't scare of Wills, Dempsey was scared of amateur promoters who never promoted a million dollar gate and with Fitz out of the picture never!

[travestyny]

If Fitz was done when they signed why is it Fitz who takes Dempsey to the bank when the check fails to cash. If Fitz is done why is he the one who covers the $20 check to keep Dempsey committed?

Because that was a different instance of this fight

Jesus Christ man. You gotta let this go. The bounced check was BEFORE the Chicago Coliseum Club got involved.

If Fitz was done at the moment of signing why does Langford remember it as a Fitzsimmons promoted fight?

I guess you're better informed than Langford.

Now you are reaching into Langford's mind He remembers Dempsey signing with Fitz. That doesn't mean Fitz was still the promoter. He wasn't. The court made it clear that Fitz had nothing to do with the issue. You better go check that court brief again

Fitz was going to be done alright - as quickly as he learned it was a cluster phuck he pulled himself out of it and took Dempsey with him.

False. He was already done when they signed the new contract in March. If the deal was for him to transfer over the fight, how the hell did that not happen when Dempsey signed with the Chicago Coliseum Club?

I am curious how can you prove Fitz was done when Dempsey signed?

You really have a concrete mind and can't read between the lines. You're reduced to being a quote factory with no insight just a regurgitation of quotes.

Let the name calling continue. Doesn't change the reality, Dempsey wasn't scare of Wills, Dempsey was scared of amateur promoters who never promoted a million dollar gate and with Fitz out of the picture never!

You are curios. Say no more


From the court brief:

Certain agree- ments previously entered into by the defendant with one Floyd Fitzsimmons for a Dempsey-Wills boxing match were declared to be void and of no force and ef- fect.

Think that makes it clear. Dempsey shouldn't have signed with Chicago Coliseum Club if he didn't want to work with the Chicago Coliseum Club. Give up.