Harry Greb in 1919

[JAB5239]

Im going to throw my hat in the ring on this issue: You can tell it is my hat, as it has the big pointy spot at the top...

This issue is complicated and probably has elements of all the different hypotheticals. But fair play to QueenB for bringing up the issue of Jack's decisions. It has become a little easy to give Wills the benefit of the doubt at all times.

1) The issues about promotion, Kearns, the confusion of the contracts, that QueenB brings up are valid issues. Jack was thrown into this as much as Wills.

2) Wills has become more and more an Eagle...the man was, to be clear, never a pigeon...Wills was by all accounts decent, an excellent fighter, yada yada... But skill wise? He was not a juggernaught to be avoided out of cold fear. He was not really much of a threat to Jack by most contemporary accounts.

3) Jack was a certain kind of person, as we all are. He did not want to take on management for his career and let others do so often enough. Keeping this in mind: we would not call Tim Witherspoon a snake because of management decisions that King enforced while managing him...Most notably putting his
r e t a r d e d son down for payola as witherspoon's supposed "manager."

None of this is to say anything bad about "The Black Panther" who was skilled, and decent...But frankly many of us feel he would not have been much for Dempsey to handle.

Do you agree he would have been a better opponent than an ailing Billy Miske?

Also my friend, do you not agree he should have fought Greb, instead of the guys Greb had already beaten?

Dempsey was a great fighter, but his resume after becoming champion is very soft, especially considering he never fought the long-standing number one contender.

[billeau2]

I know of one contract singed in '26 that Dempsey walked away from; the promoter Floyd Fitzsimmons (from Dempsey's earlier title defense against Billy Miske) was unable to come up with the 60K front money he promised. The contract itself promised Dempsey 800,000 for a Wills fight in Chicago, but when Fitz couldn't come up with he 60k training expenses he promised, Dempsey took a train back east and signed with Rickard to fight Tunney.

In 1932 an athletic club out of Chicago (likely a front for mobsters) whom Fitz had sold the useless contract to, sued Dempsey for breach of contract. The jury found that Dempsey did indeed break the contract but the judge only awarded the AC $1,200 for some legal expenses.

The judge laughed at the notion of a $800,000 suit because the AC never showed any ability to come even close to meeting its $800,000 guarantee. In fact all Dempsey ever got out of Fitz or the Chicago AC was a check for $20.

I have never heard of Wills receiving a 50K buy off. Fitzsimmons actually got Dempsey to accept a $20 check to seal the contract (which Dempsey foolishly accepted thus causing the jury to conclude he broke the contract.) so I find it hard to believe they gave Wills 50K.

Tex Rickard (who blocked Wills from getting a title shot at Dempsey) actually liked Harry Wills and in 1924 promoted Wills-Firpo in New Jersey. That night Wills earned $124,00.

It may have been from this fight that Wills bought the apartment building in Phily, because I agree that is where Wills ended up. Considering how many different people owned a piece of Harry Wills (including Tammany Hall politicians ) and then add in his taxes, Wills getting 50k out of the 124K actually sounds correct.

But I have never heard of anyone paying Harry Wills 'step-aside' money of any kind. I don't think that existed back then. But maybe.

Your post illustrates how complex contracts are lol. For example, when Dempsey accepted what is called legally "consideration" for the contract, there was no doubt a debate about if the basis for the contract (good funds) were, or could have been produced. There was also no doubt issues of duress. How exactly was Dempsey convinced to accept consideration?

Finally it sounds from your perspective as though the judge awarded a token amount. One good possibility is that the judge hoped the jury got it right, and when they didn't he did the next best thing...Its not exactly smart to have a jury trial for issues of Tort and Liability... These are really complex issues. That jury would have to be able to assess whether this front, could have provided what they said they would provide.

[billeau2]

Do you agree he would have been a better opponent than an ailing Billy Miske?

Also my friend, do you not agree he should have fought Greb, instead of the guys Greb had already beaten?

Dempsey was a great fighter, but his resume after becoming champion is very soft, especially considering he never fought the long-standing number one contender.

1) Yes. I just do not know exactly what the conditions were regarding contracts, etc. It seems there was a lot of confusion and conflicting points of view...and what has happened is that people have decided to assume Wills, or Dempsey were right, and the other was wrong. It has simplified something that may have been complex and not the responsibility of either man.

2) Well... Dempsey and Greb allegedlly fought lol. Their sparring sessions were fights according to those who saw them. I can be persuaded on this one. The one caveat being: Dempsey along with Ruth, were the first athletes to be managed as millionaire commodities. They became, "means to an end," and more than simply "the best."

What benefit was it for Dempsey to fight a middle weight who could kill ya? If he won, he takes punishment from the master of delivering such...and beats a middle weight. If he loses...the heavy weight champ loses to a middle weight.

Its not a particularly smart fight to take. Now... with that said, I agree Dempsey should have fought Greb for the right reasons.

3)Totally agree on Dempsey's record. But Jab...I have been saying the following for a while now, and frankly? it kind of shocked me! Look at a chart of the great heavyweight champions from Sullivan to the present... Now look at whom they fought, their competition.

Here is what you will find: Very few champions fought great competition at a similar prime level. As a matter of fact, if we take Ali and the magic 70's, Lewis, and Holyfield, there are not many more champs who fought great opposition consistently.

Here are a few examples:

1) Johnson. Obviously a great fighter, but fought mostly smaller men, no real ATG fellow greats AT heavy (did lose to Choyinski another great fighter, but not a heavy).
2) Dempsey... fought Tunney who was a great figher, but really was perhaps the greatest light heavy. And Sharkey who was not really a great fighter. Soft record indeed.
3) Joe Louis. Consistent, and great. fought many excellent fighters, not really any great ATG fighters... beat Max Bauer. soft record.
4) Marciano. Fought a lot of great fighters PAST prime. Soft record.
5) Liston. Cleveland Williams was a great fighter but not an ATG. Soft record, unless losing to Ali counts? And he was not competative with Ali. Obviously a great fighter....
6) Patterson? need I say it?
7) Lets jump past the golden days of the division, when Ali FRazier, Foreman were all fighting each other, because this was exceptional.

lets go to Tyson: Many people say Tyson never beat anyone of note...Well, lets say Michael Spinks is one of the greatest light heavies, as was Tunney... Tyson basically has a similar parity as Dempsey!!

My point is, no heavyweight has the luxury of having most of the human population able to compete... If we take a fighter like Robinson, Greb, Armstrong, they fought all kinds of great fighters. Most ATG's in the lower weight classes did have fellow ATG's to fight against. BUT with heavyweights, I think, because they are limited, most human beings are smaller, they wind up having to prove their skills against what is often, unremarkable talent. And yes, Dempsey was prone to that as well.

[Willie Pep 229]

Do you agree he would have been a better opponent than an ailing Billy Miske?

Also my friend, do you not agree he should have fought Greb, instead of the guys Greb had already beaten?

Dempsey was a great fighter, but his resume after becoming champion is very soft, especially considering he never fought the long-standing number one contender.

I believe that the Miske fight was exactly that a payday for the ailing Miske. They knew each other for some time.

I would point back to Dempsey's run for the title. Starting with Homer Smith in January 1918 Dempsey has 20 fights leading to Willard. 17 are stoppages (one is a 4 round loss to his nemesis Willie Mehan) and two fights are distance fights.

Those two distance fights belong to Miske. Dempsey didn't like having to pound on a friend and didn't.

When Dempsey made it to the top he gave his friend a payday and then dispatched the ailing Miske in three. BTW the fight wasn't an actual title defense, as it was scheduled as a no-decision fight.

I am not sure what long standing number one contender he could have faced. The NYSAC came into existence in 1920, the NBA in 1921, and the first Ring Magazine rankings appeared in 1924.

Before that any claim to being the number one contender would have been newspaper debated or mere hype by a particular fighter's team.

[Rusty Tromboni]

Some deeply insightful posts in this thread from Billeau and Willie

Good on Jab for being such agood sport.

While I disagree with his ranking and reasoning behind it, i really do like the rest of his list.

I particularly admire that he ranks Louis over Ali.

[QueensburyRules]

- -Greb fought Miske as well.

Jabbysan, U making a hot mess out of U puréed oatmeal.

Middle rankings:

https://boxrec.com/media/index.php/T...eweight--1920s

[JAB5239]

- -Greb fought Miske as well.

Jabbysan, U making a hot mess out of U puréed oatmeal.

Middle rankings:

https://boxrec.com/media/index.php/T...eweight--1920s

Thank you, you're making my point for me. Greb went 2-0-1 with Miske, beat a car better level of fighter after their meetings and Dempsey still went with Miske. Sounds like he was playing it safe, doesn't it?

[QueensburyRules]

Thank you, you're making my point for me. Greb went 2-0-1 with Miske, beat a car better level of fighter after their meetings and Dempsey still went with Miske. Sounds like he was playing it safe, doesn't it?

- -Mind U Manners and one day maybe U get to ask Jacks fist with U jaw.

[travestyny]

-The finances and racial politics didn't allow the fight.

False. The money was waiting for Dempsey at a bank. A guaranteed check, and Dempsey ran for the hills.

The judge laughed at the notion of a $800,000 suit because the AC never showed any ability to come even close to meeting its $800,000 guarantee. In fact all Dempsey ever got out of Fitz or the Chicago AC was a check for $20.

Some of your information is spot on, but some is a bit off. The court only would award minimal damages for the breach of contract because the CAC couldn't prove how much money the fight would bring in, but there was no issue with Dempsey's guarantee.

The contract clearly stated the exact date that the first payment was to be made to Dempsey (August 5th). Dempsey broke the contract before that date arrived. The money was waiting for him in a guaranteed check at a bank on the exact date as stipulated by the contract, meaning the funds were certainly there. Here is the proof.

[travestyny]

Your post illustrates how complex contracts are lol. For example, when Dempsey accepted what is called legally "consideration" for the contract, there was no doubt a debate about if the basis for the contract (good funds) were, or could have been produced. There was also no doubt issues of duress. How exactly was Dempsey convinced to accept consideration?

Finally it sounds from your perspective as though the judge awarded a token amount. One good possibility is that the judge hoped the jury got it right, and when they didn't he did the next best thing...Its not exactly smart to have a jury trial for issues of Tort and Liability... These are really complex issues. That jury would have to be able to assess whether this front, could have provided what they said they would provide.

Nah, bro. There was no confusion. The contract said when the first payment would be there, Dempsey broke the contract at least a month before that time, and lo and behold, the money was waiting there when the date came around. The court never made a decision that the CAC couldn't pay the guarantee. If it would have, it would have obviously been the wrong decision since, as I've shown, the money was there waiting for Dempsey exactly when it was supposed to be there.

The consideration was $10, and Dempsey likely agreed to it because the contract stipulated that if for any reason the fight doesn't come off, he could keep the initial payment of $300,000 and do as he pleases. So if the fight would have fallen through because of, say a coronavirus outbreak, Dempsey would be $300,000 richer and free to make the Tunney fight without one second of work.