Originally posted by HOUDINI563
View Post
Most of the time I find your posts to be well thought out and fair. However, when it comes to any criticism of Dempsey, you are incapable of being rational.
The fact of the matter is that, like one of the posters mentioned here, we didn't get to see Dempsey vs. some of his noteworthy contemporaries, mainly Harry Wills. And there are undeniable facts that you refuse to accept.
You have said that the reasons for this is the times and no promoter being willing to put it on. While that was certainly true at some points in time, that was NOT always the case.
As was previously posted here, the public demanded the Dempsey Wills fight. So that takes away the argument about the times.
Also, as previously posted here, there in fact was a promoter that was willing to put this fight on. A promoter that had a valid contract, that lived up to the contract, and was ready to get the thing going. Dempsey backed out of the valid contract.
Once you realize those facts, you can't blame the fight not happening on anyone or anything besides Dempsey. You keep insisting we need his in court testimony. I've provided you with a statement from Dempsey about this specific situation, being that he believed there was no valid contract. He was proven wrong. The court in their synapsis also made it clear that it was Dempsey's contention that there was no valid contract. So we know what his defense was. You refuse to accept that.
And his defense made no sense. Saying he was to receive $125,000 on the very date that he signed the contract and accepted $10 is asinine. Who accepts $10 on the day they claim they were due $125,000 and signs on the dotted line. If my math is correct, that would mean he signed a contract while knowingly being $124,990 short!!! If you can explain that, I'm all ears.
Again, just because he was a great champion and clearly a hero of yours does not put him above criticism. The facts speak for themselves, and it's clear that you can't handle the truth.
And this has nothing to do with any racial agenda of mine, as you've accused me of multiple times. Nor does it have anything to do with your pompous attitude of claiming to know so much more about boxing history than anyone else. It's only about the facts. Facts that I have backed up over and over again.
Comment