Fuel to the fire. Johnson admits Langford did in fact for him!

[travestyny]

No I am saying his hands were wrapped as per the new methods of wrapping that were being deployed for the day. If it gave Demosey an advantage the fault lies with Willard's people for not keeping abreast of the innovations of the game.

As I said Dempsey didn't hesitate to let his wrappings be photographed. It suggest they were not hiding anything.

Yes with those wrappings he could hit harder. Whether they made the gloves harder, I don't know. Willard was satisfied.

I don't get the bicycle tape thing but do you have a source where Tunney explicitly refers to bicycle tape? I assume since Tunney is making demands it was the '27 fight. If so then it makes me ask how were Dempsey's hands wrapped in '26?

no no no, that makes no sense. He wasn't using normal tape. It was even abnormal for the tape that is used today. Look at Paul Beston's quotation:

Were Dempsey’s gloves loaded in Toledo? Yes—but only in comparison with the softer wrappings that modern fighters wear. The foul-play accusations that surround the Willard fight make wonderful lore but poor history. These were different times.

He's acknowledging that you could get away with a lot of shlt back then, but by the way Willard was complaining that he wanted no funny business with the wraps, Dempsey should have gone for an even playing field.


And I'm not sure why you guys keep talking about how the wraps could be seen. The whole purpose of it being a trick is that they harden once you put the gloves over them. It's like you guys are purposely tuning that out.

Willard was not satisfied. Willard first of all wanted the hands to be wrapped in the ring. That's how worried he was. Tex Rickard agreed, and then Kearns got him to change his mind.

On July 1 the matter was settled. “Jess Willard and Jack Dempsey will go into the ring for the heavyweight championship contest here Friday with bare hands, and all the bandaging and taping will be done in the view of the spectators and seconds of the heavyweight rivals. This announcement was made today by Tex Richard, promoter of the contest.”

Jack Kearns protested against this. The next day tex Rickard reversed his decision and announced that the fighters would tape their hands in their dressing room in the presence of a representative of the rival camp. The change occurred, Doc Kearns said “because of the blazing heat.” Another reason given was that to tape in the ring would create unnecessary delay. Either way, Dempsey entered the ring with hands heavily wrapped in tape and Willard had lost a critical battle to Doc Kearns.”

Here's what Willard wanted:

Willard said that he would insist upon a thin layer of cotton surgical band aces, and only enough tape to hold the bandages in place.
https://www.newspapers.com/newspage/49749739/

And here were the supposed rules:

The rules of the Boxing Commission in Toledo specified soft bandages. Willard declared that he planned to use plain cotton bandages with a couple of layers of surgical tape to hold the bandages in place. “that’s all I care to use, and I think Dempsey should feel the same way about it. I believe it always looks bad to the spectators to see a boxer come into the ring with his hands looking as hard as a club because protected by some heavy material.”

Pretty sure that info. is coming from here.

https://books.google.co.kr/books?id=...0brine&f=false



The information about the Tunney fight was from Arne K Lang's book, "Prizefighting: An American History."

IOPL39.png

[GhostofDempsey]

Dude, you're going all the way back to 2016??? What I'm telling you is let's cut out the immature extracurricular bullshlt and have a normal conversation. Deal?


Ok. So your source that it wasn't bicycle tape is by Klompton looking at the pictures and stating that it wasn't bicycle tape?
Now tell me this. Kid McCoy's opponents couldn't look at the tape and tell that it was bicycle tape. So how was Klompton able to do this from looking at the picture? Does that make sense to you? It was tape. What should it have looked like? Wire?

But ok, I accept your single source. Now tell me if you will accept all of mine. I have much more than one.

Arthur Daley— Pulitzer Prize winner for reporting and commentary--outstanding coverage and commentary on the world of sports; The National Sportscasters and Sportswriters Association "Sportswriter of the Year.”


Paul Beston—Author of The Boxing Kings: When American Heavyweights Ruled the Ring.


Paul Beston Again:


Carlos Acevedo—Boxing Writers Association of America/Intenational Boxing Research Organization.


Randy Warren Roberts — “Nearly 40 years later, Roberts’s biography remains the best book written about Jack Dempsey, and it’s not even close.”


Charles Samuel - "The Magnificent Rube: The Life and Gaudy Times of Tex Rickard." By the way, he received info from Ned Brown, who was in the dressing room.


Grantland Rice - Prizefighting: An American History





You are referring to a quotation from the New York Times on July 12, 1910, from what I can find in the book. I have absolutely no problem with this. I'm going to say that again so you let it sink in. I have absolutely no problem with it and I'm not ignoring it. If thats' what he said, then that's what he said. He didn't say it in reference to Langford. The very next line he's talking about fighting Al Kaufmann. I agree. He was not going to make that amount of money. I don't blame him for trying.

So now, what happened in September of 1910 when Jack Johnson and Sam Langford agreed that Sam's team would put up $20,000 for the match and Johnson would match it. What was the outcome? Can you blame Jack Johnson for Langford agreeing to terms and not being able to come through?

And no, they weren't closing in on $30,000 back then. They didn't get to $30,000 until the proposed Australia fights, which Johnson accepted. Right?



Go look how much the black heavyweights were fighting for. They were sharing $6000. The gate wasn't even that big for major battles between the top black heavyweights. Compare it to what Johnson did with Moran in France. At that time, it was believed that Sam Langford wasn't going to pull as much because he had just lost to Gunboat Smith. In fact, the promoters stated that the gate for his bout with jennette in France would be reduced by $10,000 due to his loss. Langford / Jennette pulled in a gate of $11,370. The gate for Jennette vs. Capentier pulled in $30,000. Johnson vs. Moran pulled in 30,000 people and $40,000. I'm not convinced that a match with Langford would pull more than a match with a white contender. But if anyone wants to help me come to an agreement about this by doing some research into how much was being made from these fights, I'm game for it.


Most importantly, I saw no source for the Jennette fight not being for the title. Again, Johnny Kilbane specifically stated that his match at the same venue and same date as the original planned Jeannette / Johnson fight (this was to be one of the championship fights on the same card as Jennette/Johnson) was indeed for the title. So are you going to address this or not?

All Daley is saying is that DeForests claim that a certain kind of adhesive tape seems plausible. He is neither insisting or denying it, just leaving it open for speculation. The rest of your sources are doing the same thing more or less, they are speculating. Not offering definitive proof. They all hinge their OPINION on that one DeForest interview.

Then there is Kearns himself who was quoted in an article claiming the bicycle tape was black, which is obvious Dempsey’s hands are not wrapped in black tape.

”I was a product of the days—have they ever ended?—when it was every man for himself,” Kearns would write years later. “In those times you got away with everything possible. Turn your head, or let the other guy turn his, and knuckles were wrapped in heavy black bicycle tape or the thick lead foil in which bulk tea was packaged. The net result was much like hitting a man with a leather-padded mallet.”

As you can see, we can loop around in circles and speculate to no end. For me, I accept the testimony of countless witnesses who watched Dempsey’s hands being wrapped. Willard himself who inspected his wraps prior to fight and his own cornerman who witnessed the hands being wrapped. Not one of them ever said anything about bicycle tape or any other type of hardening adhesive, and they were there! None of those sources you cited were there, they all levy their opinion on one contradictory statement from DeForest, who also never mentioned any sort of bicycle or adhesive tape in his own article who wrote about the fight in 1923. One has to wonder why his story changed.

As for Johnson, how much did he earn to fight Jim Johnson? Certainly Langford, McVey and Jeannette would have been worth as much or more. Regardless, the fact remains that Johnson was quoted enough to convince the fighters, historians and press that he refused to give them a title shot.

[Willie Pep 229]

no no no, that makes no sense. He wasn't using normal tape. It was even abnormal for the tape that is used today. Look at Paul Beston's quotation:




He's acknowledging that you could get away with a lot of shlt back then, but by the way Willard was complaining that he wanted no funny business with the wraps, Dempsey should have gone for an even playing field.


And I'm not sure why you guys keep talking about how the wraps could be seen. The whole purpose of it being a trick is that they harden once you put the gloves over them. It's like you guys are purposely tuning that out.

Willard was not satisfied. Willard first of all wanted the hands to be wrapped in the ring. That's how worried he was. Tex Rickard agreed, and then Kearns got him to change his mind.




Here's what Willard wanted:




And here were the supposed rules:




Pretty sure that info. is coming from here.

https://books.google.co.kr/books?id=...0brine&f=false



The information about the Tunney fight was from Arne K Lang's book, "Prizefighting: An American History."

IOPL39.png

The sources that look to be primary to the event only talk about where the taping was done and while it suggest much tape was used no bicycle tape it mentioned.

One source used the term surgical tape but that source seems to come later and I have no clue what surgical tape is.

The Tunney source is pretty useless to this argument the writer has Kearns doing the taping. It is the only source that uses the term bicycle tape but it's obviously secondary and as I said it has Kearns doing the taping. This source seems more as a narration of a conventional wisdom than a properly researched work.

[travestyny]

All Daley is saying is that DeForests claim that a certain kind of adhesive tape seems plausible. He is neither insisting or denying it, just leaving it open for speculation. The rest of your sources are doing the same thing more or less, they are speculating. Not offering definitive proof. They all hinge their OPINION on that one DeForest interview.

Then there is Kearns himself who was quoted in an article claiming the bicycle tape was black, which is obvious Dempsey’s hands are not wrapped in black tape.

”I was a product of the days—have they ever ended?—when it was every man for himself,” Kearns would write years later. “In those times you got away with everything possible. Turn your head, or let the other guy turn his, and knuckles were wrapped in heavy black bicycle tape or the thick lead foil in which bulk tea was packaged. The net result was much like hitting a man with a leather-padded mallet.”

As you can see, we can loop around in circles and speculate to no end. For me, I accept the testimony of countless witnesses who watched Dempsey’s hands being wrapped. Willard himself who inspected his wraps prior to fight and his own cornerman who witnessed the hands being wrapped. Not one of them ever said anything about bicycle tape or any other type of hardening adhesive, and they were there! None of those sources you cited were there, they all levy their opinion on one contradictory statement from DeForest, who also never mentioned any sort of bicycle or adhesive tape in his own article who wrote about the fight in 1923. One has to wonder why his story changed.

As for Johnson, how much did he earn to fight Jim Johnson? Certainly Langford, McVey and Jeannette would have been worth as much or more. Regardless, the fact remains that Johnson was quoted enough to convince the fighters, historians and press that he refused to give them a title shot.

Correct. And your source of Klompton is denying it based on his own perception.

Can we agree that the only man who would know for sure is DeForest, and he stated exactly what he did? That's why I asked if you believe he is lying, but you never gave a definitive answer.

We've already been through the color in the original thread. No tape has to be a specific color. Battling Nelson came into the thread himself and proved that bicycle tape could be white.

Dude, Deforest mentioned the use of this tape two separate times. He never said that he didn't use this tape. There were no contradicting stories. You are pretending he said he used it and then said he didn't use it. That never happened.

I'm not sure how much Johnson made to fight Jim Johnson, but certainly not a lot, as it was just a quick money grab to be had before he fought Moran, which he was already signed for. That was to be the main fight. I know the Jim Johnson fight only pulled in a gate of about $5,000. The problem was that Johnson broke his arm and the Moran fight had to be postponed. He wasn't going to risk his big payday vs. Moran.

You still won't say anything regarding the Jennette fight being for the title. Why can't you just admit that? Do you see what I mean? You keep ducking it and ducking it.

[travestyny]

The sources that look to be primary to the event only talk about where the taping was done and while it suggest much tape was used no bicycle tape it mentioned.

One source used the term surgical tape but that source seems to come later and I have no clue what surgical tape is.

The Tunney source is pretty useless to this argument the writer has Kearns doing the taping. It is the only source that uses the term bicycle tape but it's obviously secondary and as I said it has Kearns doing the taping. This source seems more as a narration of a conventional wisdom than a properly researched work.

I don't know if you are following what I'm giving you.

The purpose of the info about Willard was not to prove bicycle tape. Jimmy Deforest did that himself. It was also confirmed by Charles Samuel in "The Magnificent Rube." Information he got from Ned Brown, who was in the dressing room. The information about Willard that I gave was simply to show that he made a huge deal about the wraps and didn't want there to be anything other than soft bandages just enough to cover the hands and then just enough tape to hold it in place. That's it.

I don't know if that source is saying Kearns did the taping specifically for the Willard fight. But I agree that Kearns was not doing the taping. The point is that Tunney made sure that bicycle tape was not to be allowed, no matter who was doing the taping.

[GhostofDempsey]

Correct. And your source of Klompton is denying it based on his own perception.

Can we agree that the only man who would know for sure is DeForest, and he stated exactly what he did? That's why I asked if you believe he is lying, but you never gave a definitive answer.

We've already been through the color in the original thread. No tape has to be a specific color. Battling Nelson came into the thread himself and proved that bicycle tape could be white.

Dude, Deforest mentioned the use of this tape two separate times. He never said that the didn't use this tape. There were no contradicting stories. You are pretending he said he used it and then said he didn't use it. That never happened.

I'm not sure how much Johnson made to fight Jim Johnson, but certainly not a lot, as it was just a quick money grab to be had before he fought Moran, which he was already signed for. That was to be the main fight. I know the Jim Johnson fight only pulled in a gate of about $5,000. The problem was that Johnson broke his arm and the Moran fight had to be postponed. He wasn't going to risk his big payday vs. Moran.

You still won't say anything regarding the Jennette fight being for the title. Why can't you just admit that? Do you see what I mean? You keep ducking it and ducking it.

All of your sources are hinged on one DeForest interview. Meanwhile, Dempsey’s hands are wrapped in front of several members of the press, Willard’s cornerman, and inspected by Willard himself. Those are the ones who matter. Willard never said anything after the fight about Dempsey’s wraps nor did he ever even suggest something wonky wih his wraps. He only said that he was told a metal railroad spike was found in the ring but it is obvious Dempsey didn’t use a spike or metal object in his glove. DeForest insists he didn’t use anything outside of how he would normally wrap Dempsey’s hands. In the photo of Dempsey just prior to the fight, his hands are not wrapped in any way suggesting a tight wad of adhesive tape that would inflict serious injury. In fact, Willard’s injuries were greatly exaggerated by the media, which was the reason for the speculation about loaded gloves to begin with.

Jeannette himself said Johnson never gave him a shot at his title. No one is ducking the question. You just insist Jeannette is a liar on the word of a newspaper articles looking to sell newspapers.

[travestyny]

All of your sources are hinged on one DeForest interview. Meanwhile, Dempsey’s hands are wrapped in front of several members of the press, Willard’s cornerman, and inspected by Willard himself. Those are the ones who matter. Willard never said anything after the fight about Dempsey’s wraps nor did he ever even suggest something wonky wih his wraps. He only said that he was told a metal railroad spike was found in the ring but it is obvious Dempsey didn’t use a spike or metal object in his glove. DeForest insists he didn’t use anything outside of how he would normally wrap Dempsey’s hands. In the photo of Dempsey just prior to the fight, his hands are not wrapped in any way suggesting a tight wad of adhesive tape that would inflict serious injury. In fact, Willard’s injuries were greatly exaggerated by the media, which was the reason for the speculation about loaded gloves to begin with.

Jesus Christ, man. Let me try to explain this one more time.

You can't look at the tape and know that it would harden. That's why it was labeled a "trick of the trade." Looking at it, it appears to be normal tape. However, the tape hardens after time, and especially once the gloves are put on. That's why DeForest says it hardens.....once the gloves are put on.

So looking at it before the gloves are put on, means nothing. Which is why one of the quotations I have for you says this:

Is it possible that Willard actually inspected Dempsey’s hands before the tape hardened?

Of course it's possible if the tape hardens once the gloves are put on. Do you get it now?????

Jeannette himself said Johnson never gave him a shot at his title. No one is ducking the question. You just insist Jeannette is a liar on the word of a newspaper articles looking to sell newspapers.

No. You are purposely pretending to not understand, but I can't really believe that there is any way that you don't understand this.


You said the fight could not have been for the title because it was an exhibition. One of the fights on the card, that was also an exhibition, was for the title. Johnny Kilbane made it clear that his exhibition fight that went on as planned in the same place on the very day that the Jennette Johnson fight was to be held, was for the title.


Therefore, these fights were fights....for the titles. Just like the McMahon brothers stated they were. Do you understand what I'm saying? Kilbane's exhibition fight was for the title. I don't know how many different ways I can say that. Do you understand? I've presented you with the proof of him saying as much.

Also, as I found out in another thread I made, Benny Leonard won the title from Freddie Welsh in an exhibition/no-decision bout in New York in 1917. All bouts in NY at this time were exhibitions/no-decision, but that doesn't mean the title was not up for grabs. It was.

[Willie Pep 229]

Jesus Christ, man. Let me try to explain this one more time.

You can't look at the tape and know that it would harden. That's why it was labeled a "trick of the trade." Looking at it, it appears to be normal tape. However, the tape hardens after time, and especially once the gloves are put on. That's why DeForest says it hardens.....once the gloves are put on.

So looking at it before the gloves are put on, means nothing. Which is why one of the quotations I have for you says this:




Of course it's possible if the tape hardens once the gloves are put on. Do you get it now?????




No. You are purposely pretending to not understand, but I can't really believe that there is any way that you don't understand this.


You said the fight could not have been for the title because it was an exhibition. One of the fights on the card, that was also an exhibition, was for the title. Johnny Kilbane made it clear that his exhibition fight that went on as planned in the same place on the very day that the Jennette Johnson fight was to be held, was for the title.


Therefore, these fights were fights....for the titles. Just like the McMahon brothers stated they were. Do you understand what I'm saying? Kilbane's exhibition fight was for the title. I don't know how many different ways I can say that. Do you understand? I've presented you with the proof of him saying as much.

Let's be precise - Kilbane's fight was a 10 round no decision fight with the KO clause in place. (Dundee 1912)

Title was at risk by KO loss only. Agreed?

Jeannette was a scheduled 10 round no decision as well and we are assuming that the KO clause would have been in effect. But we don't have such a confermation. (Except Kilbane confirms for us it did apply that night to him.)

We agree that it is impossible for the HW champion to get KOed in any type of fight, (exhibition, no decision, benefit, ETC) and not have the opponent claim the title.

But I am not sure if a fight like that gets the full moniker 'title defense.'

Kilbane would a year later fight Dundee (1923) to a 20 round draw; that fight Boxrec IDs as a title fight.

So it seems you guys are stuck in a semantics argument. Title at risk, but not a title fight. Only in boxing.

[travestyny]

Let's be precise - Kilbane's fight was a 10 round no decision fight with the KO clause in place. (Dundee 1912)

Title was at risk by KO loss only. Agreed?

Jeannette was a scheduled 10 round no decision as well and we are assuming that the KO clause would have been in effect. But we don't have such a confermation. (Except Kilbane confirms for us it did apply that night to him.)

We agree that it is impossible for the HW champion to get KOed in any type of fight, (exhibition, no decision, benefit, ETC) and not have the opponent claim the title.

But I am not sure if a fight like that gets the full moniker 'title defense.'

Kilbane would a year later fight Dundee (1923) to a 20 round draw; that fight Boxrec IDs as a title fight.

So it seems you guys are stuck in a semantics argument. Title at risk, but not a title fight. Only in boxing.

It's clear that there would have to be a knockout for the title to change hands. Or rather, it could be what happened with Benny Leonard in New York in 1917. The referee stopped the fight because Freddie Welsh was getting pummeled...and Benny Leonard walked away with the title. So clearly the title was up for grabs. There are various articles that stated that Kilbane would defend his title vs. Dundee.

dao2WK.png

It was originally meant for a card full of championship fights:

2n1GJgl.png

The point is clearly that Jennette would have a chance to win the title.

[GhostofDempsey]

Jesus Christ, man. Let me try to explain this one more time.

You can't look at the tape and know that it would harden. That's why it was labeled a "trick of the trade." Looking at it, it appears to be normal tape. However, the tape hardens after time, and especially once the gloves are put on. That's why DeForest says it hardens.....once the gloves are put on.

So looking at it before the gloves are put on, means nothing. Which is why one of the quotations I have for you says this:




Of course it's possible if the tape hardens once the gloves are put on. Do you get it now?????




No. You are purposely pretending to not understand, but I can't really believe that there is any way that you don't understand this.


You said the fight could not have been for the title because it was an exhibition. One of the fights on the card, that was also an exhibition, was for the title. Johnny Kilbane made it clear that his exhibition fight that went on as planned in the same place on the very day that the Jennette Johnson fight was to be held, was for the title.


Therefore, these fights were fights....for the titles. Just like the McMahon brothers stated they were. Do you understand what I'm saying? Kilbane's exhibition fight was for the title. I don't know how many different ways I can say that. Do you understand? I've presented you with the proof of him saying as much.

Also, as I found out in another thread I made, Benny Leonard won the title from Freddie Welsh in an exhibition/no-decision bout in New York in 1917. All bouts in NY at this time were exhibitions/no-decision, but that doesn't mean the title was not up for grabs. It was.

For the fight, Dempsey and Willard would be allowed to wear soft bandages and tape on their hands, as per agreement. This included “soft tape over gauze”. The Boxing Commission’s rule said, “All tape and bandages on hands of boxers shall be examined by referee and examine physician’s”. Willard insisted that just two thicknesses of tape would be allowed.

DeForest said he wrapped Jack’s hands in seven layers of gauze and two layers of adhesive.

According to several newspapers, Willard’s manager “Archer examined the bandages on Dempsey’s hands and watched Manager Kearns tie on the gloves. Monaghan also observed for Willard. Neither camp’s reps raised any objections regarding the tape, bandages, or gloves; both sides having examined the wraps and gloves.

“In the Ring with Jack Dempsey” by Adam Pollack, who cites several news articles in his book.

As you can see, it was two layers of tape, examined by ref, doctors, Willard’s second and manager and Willard himself. There was no magic tape, and even if there were there was no opportunity to wet them into something that would harden with all those witnesses standing around and having examined Dempsey’s hands as they went into his gloves.

I don’t need you to explain it to me one more time. You dug yourself into a position you refuse to move from, that’s your choice. I’m content with the testimony of over a dozen people who were there to witness Dempsey’s hands wrapped and gloved, to include Willard and his people, the ref and ringside physician. You think none of these people knew what bicycle tape was? You think none of them would recognize a different type of tape that magically hardens in the glove? Was DeForest practicing witchcraft?