Harry Greb in 1919

[travestyny]

- -Been here all along.

U candy melting again?

- -You add nothing.

U still missing brain?

[travestyny]

- -What we have of Wills kills Wills.

I don't judge Harry at the end of his career, but U simpleton ways kills any gravitas U purport.

- -What you have of Wills is a great career and Dempsey ducking him.

I don't judge you for getting information about this wrong. I just think you don't know shlt about this topic

[QueensburyRules]

- -IBRO in the house-

http://www.ibroresearch.com/2006/09/heavyweight-rankings/

[billeau2]

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.

Its strange to me that this went to a jury. And the amount awarded makes no sense either. the amount seems a token.
With that said, saying something appears more complicated is not really a counter argument lol, so that statement is not a rebuttal. I just look at this and see other perspectives on the contract, the amounts involved, etc and it looks like something is not quite right.

I should say, I get the idea that no one can predict what a venue will bring, but at rewards like what the Plaintiff got from Dempsey, what is the incentive not to break any contract one does not like? It just stinks, something is not right.

[billeau2]

- -You add nothing.

U still missing brain?

That last post of Queeny's sheesh, just sounds really insane in the membrane. I am really hoping that when he is posting he is not spreading feces on the wall and laughing hysterically.

[travestyny]

Its strange to me that this went to a jury. And the amount awarded makes no sense either. the amount seems a token.
With that said, saying something appears more complicated is not really a counter argument lol, so that statement is not a rebuttal. I just look at this and see other perspectives on the contract, the amounts involved, etc and it looks like something is not quite right.

I should say, I get the idea that no one can predict what a venue will bring, but at rewards like what the Plaintiff got from Dempsey, what is the incentive not to break any contract one does not like? It just stinks, something is not right.

I agree with that. I think he got off easy. Perhaps the biggest victory for the plaintiff was getting the injunction to stop Dempsey from fighting anyone except Wills, but then it couldn't be enforced in other states.

I think the reason that this case is often studied at law schools is to show that you can have one case that turns out this way for nominal damages, and another case where it seems very similar, but have a completely opposite result. What I learned in law school is that you can pretty much argue anything and you never know what you will get in the end

[travestyny]

That last post of Queeny's sheesh, just sounds really insane in the membrane. I am really hoping that when he is posting he is not spreading feces on the wall and laughing hysterically.

He's a certified weirdo. I've noticed that the majority of the people that he writes to don't bother responding to his cryptic messages, likely because they make no sense.

[BattlingNelson]

Glad you enjoyed. Reading Compton's massive bio now. It's like a McCullough Pres bio. I'll review that as well when I'm done.

Compton (Klompton) is probably the worlds biggest expert on Greb. I think he used to post here in an earlier Greb-thread.

[Rusty Tromboni]

- -What you have of Wills is a great career and Dempsey ducking him.

I don't judge you for getting information about this wrong. I just think you don't know shlt about this topic

I actually believe you believe that.

Wills definitely didn't have a "great" career. And Dempsey's didnt "duck" him. But in your mind, i'm sure, you're convinced.

You also believed me when I told you that you're prettier than your sister and that I totally wasn't sleeping with her, too.

Everyone agrees that Dempsey's failure to fight Wills and Greb (maybe others as well?) is a tragedy. But mostly because Dempsey was a tremendous talent whose prime/potential went largely wasted. Those are fights that could have happened and it seems there was more opportunity than justifiable obstacle. At least there's no satisfying reason for why those fights didn't happen.

That's more or less what we can all agree upon. The bifurcations begin when we start to interpret those facts.

And while everyone has opinions, the fact that everyone is in constant disagreement with you should cause you pause. There's lots of acrimony here, but most of agree more than disagree. You're the one who coincidentally always runs against the grain, Maxine. You also tend to become the most vocal and fixated: in this case, Dempsey's failure to fight Wills and Greb isn't particularly egregious compared to almost every other Heavyweight Champion; there were far worse offenders.

That's why, even if you believe what you're saying, you ckearly still make the decision to be a diva. And that's why people prefer to antagonize you, rather than take you seriously.

Most of us play a part here. You overly-play yours.

[travestyny]

And while everyone has opinions, the fact that everyone is in constant disagreement with you should cause you pause. There's lots of acrimony here, but most of agree more than disagree. You're the one who coincidentally always runs against the grain, Maxine. You also tend to become the most vocal and fixated: in this case, Dempsey's failure to fight Wills and Greb isn't particularly egregious compared to almost every other Heavyweight Champion; there were far worse offenders.

That's why, even if you believe what you're saying, you ckearly still make the decision to be a diva. And that's why people prefer to antagonize you, rather than take you seriously.

Most of us play a part here. You overly-play yours.

All you gotta do is prove me wrong, dumbo.


I have FACTS, and EVERYTHING DOCUMENTED.

Those who have disagreed with me, have opinion. And there are also those who agree with me, as Jab has stated, as well as Klompton when he was around these parts. Klompton who has actually written books on these matters.


If you want to step up and place your facts against mine, let's do it. It will be fun to stomp you out for the 50732572507th time


How about we begin with question #1.

Is it a fact that a US Court found that Dempsey signed a legal contract to fight Wills and then broke that contract?

Don't duck it