Harry Greb in 1919

[travestyny]

Willie Pep 229

I haven't gotten anything back from you since I asked you for proof linking Dempsey's statement that he won't ever give Wills a shot for the championship to the event in MSG.


Is the proof forthcoming or did you make that all up?

[travestyny]

Jab and Klompton have not once aided you in argument.

Found it. Klompton never backed me up, right

You gotta stop lying, Rusty. It shows how pathetic you are.

Dont paint my quote as misinformation. If anyone is misinformed its you. Refute anything I said with actual facts. You cant. Its a plain and simple fact that Jack Dempsey actively avoided Wills. Period. You can pretend his motivations were this or that but when he states he'd meet the winner of Fulton-Wills and then signs to fight the ill, comebacking Billy Miske the day after Wills knocks out Fulton and crushes three of his ribs in the process dont tell me he was fighting the best he could. When he then fights Bill Brennan, who had failed to beat Greb or Miske in six consecutive fights the previous year and had faced no threatening competition since then and who also had, not coincidentally, been stopped by Dempsey two years earlier, it was a step back not forward. Does anyone doubt that the six foot two inch 220lb Wills wouldnt have crushed the 168lb overrated Carpentier? After Carpentier was the aforementioned fake contract used to keep Dempsey from being stripped (the first of two times they used that ruse). Then he sits out for two years and faced Tommy Gibbons. Why? There were two eliminations held in 1922 for Dempsey: The first was Harry Wills-Kid Norfolk. Wills knocked Norfolk out in 2 rounds. Norfolk was Brennan's chief sparring partner for Dempsey and the press said he handled Brennan easier than Dempsey (who struggled mightily with Brennan). They advised Dempsey to steer clear of Norfolk. Wills smashed him easily. Like a bug. The other elimination was Greb-Gibbons. Greb dominated Gibbons and beat him easily. The press were unanimous that Greb had exposed Gibbons as poor challenger for Dempsey. So of the top two contenders, one white and one black. Did Dempsey choose either? No. So Tommy Gibbons got his title shot by losing his elimination bout. Sound like a champion looking for the toughest fights? Next Dempsey fought Firpo. Firpo was very vocal about the fact that he didnt think he was ready for Dempsey. That he wanted more time. He stated that Wills should get first shot. Understanding that the opportunity and such a payday may never come again he took the shot. He went life and death with Dempsey dropping him three times, once knocking him out of the ring, before being stopped in the second. Dempsey didnt fight again for three years and never again defended his title successfully. Sorry, but Dempsey wasnt the fearless mankiller he is painted as his legend. He was a media hyped, protected fighter who people built a myth around and realized that the revenue he generated was so great that he had to be kept from people who would threaten that. Sorry but thats not sports. Thats professional wrestling. Go back and look at his run up to the title and see how the various fights that were suspected to be fixed at the time of his in order to build his reputation. Go back and examine his opponents and you will see he wasnt that impressive. He wasnt going anywhere near Wills and Kearns, who had briefly managed Wills years earlier and knew exactly what he was capable of wasnt going to let him either. Had they really been that confident that Dempsey would defeat Wills they would have signed on the dotted line, knocked him out quick and easy like his deluded fans think he would have, and in one fell swoop they would have gained the biggest payday of Dempsey's career by far, put to bed the myth of Wills, and upheld the supposed honor of the white race in the supposed racist America of the day. Nobody would have ever said another word about it. But they knew that beating Wills wasnt a given and they also knew better than you or I that Wills had massive support among both whites and blacks and that racism was just one excuse to pluck from the multitude they constantly came up with for not defending against Dempsey's top challenger.

[Willie Pep 229]

Willie Pep 229

I haven't gotten anything back from you since I asked you for proof linking Dempsey's statement that he won't ever give Wills a shot for the championship to the event in MSG.


Is the proof forthcoming or did you make that all up?

You said you didn't like where our conversation was going so I said OK and out of respect I said lets stop and gave you the final word on the subject. Now I come back on here and find you are skunking me.

[travestyny]

You said you didn't like where our conversation was going so I said OK and out of respect I said lets stop and gave you the final word on the subject. Now I come back on here and find you are skunking me.

No. I asked you for proof since you are so sure about what you are saying and you keep saying I'm wrong.


Do you have the proof? I'd love to see it.


I'm not sure what skunking means. I just want this to be above board. Either you got your information from somewhere, or you are completely making it up. I'd like to know which it is so I can know if I should take your posts seriously or not. I've backed up all of my information. I just want to know if you can do the same.


Because from what I can tell, the only link you had to the two events was that according to you, one occurred a few days after the other, but I already proved that to be false. So........what's the link and where's the proof?

[Willie Pep 229]

No. I asked you for proof since you are so sure about what you are saying and you keep saying I'm wrong.


Do you have the proof? I'd love to see it.


I'm not sure what skunking means. I just want this to be above board. Either you got your information from somewhere, or you are completely making it up. I'd like to know which it is so I can know if I should take your posts seriously or not. I've backed up all of my information. I just want to know if you can do the same.


Because from what I can tell, the only link you had to the two events was that according to you, one occurred a few days after the other, but I already proved that to be false. So........what's the link and where's the proof?

Ok I will try one last time.

I can't, no one can PROVE what Dempsey was thinking. Nor can you prove what he wasn't thinking!

With that said, if you look at Dempsey's remarks regrading a Wills fight between the period 1922 to 1926 you never see any anger in Dempsey's remarks.

Then in '26 the MSG event occurs (now regardless if it was a month or a day does not matter, so get over that trivial issue, please) it is after the MSG event that the angry posts occur.

In those two posts we encounter a very angry Dempsey for the first time. He is angry at Wills and he is angry at Reynolds.

You can tell from reading those two articles (that you posted) that Dempsey is reacting to the personal insult he encountered at The Garden.

If you don't want to put the articles in context and want to believe that Dempsey always felt that way about Wills, then you go ahead and believe it.

I say no. I can see the change in Dempsey's demeanor.

In regards to you always trying to lead the debate by asking challenging questions, that is bull crap.

What you do is try to drive the direction of the debate in your favor with questions, avoiding issues you don't want to deal with. That is why I don't answer your questions.

Considered this a complement but you are like a fighter with great footwork, trying to dictate the pacing and momentum of the fight.

I see through your ruse and I will not follow you around the ring. I will parry when I choose, I will counter when I want, and I will strike when it suits me.

I will not follow you around the ring.

So make your points and and I will read them, but expect your footwork (challenging questions) to be ignored.

Furthermore you over use the word "proof" -- everyone's opinion is automatically disregarded unless they are willing to meet YOUR definition of proof, which never seems to be satisfied.

In regards to 'skunking' me, that is you trying to put the stink on me as if I am afraid of you, when I believed we had chosen together to let the matter rest.

You 'skunked me' when I wasn't looking.

[Anthony342]

Brum ching... Take my wife please. Better watch it bud I was a Polish contract killer ya know! Wasn't too succesful though...No one would sign the damn thing!

Reminds me of that joke by comedian Rich Vos "Wanna buy a dryer...door?" haha Or the one about the Polish guy in the desert carrying a car door who said he could just roll down the window when he got too hot.

I take my wife everywhere, but she always finds her way back.

[travestyny]

These are the important parts in my opinion.

I can't, no one can PROVE what Dempsey was thinking. Nor can you prove what he wasn't thinking!

Ok, so you had no basis for saying I was wrong. Got it. Meanwhile, I've already shown proof that he was still willing to fight Wills, according to his own words, a mere 1 week after the MSG incident.

You and I both know you dvcked the **** out of that, so it doesn't impress me that you're projecting your slimy bullshlt on me. I've seen through you this entire time. Your snide remarks didn't go unnoticed, my friend. But since the information I've provided is supported and truthful, I didn't choose to respond to it. Reading through you try and fail over and over again was more than enough payback.

Everything you said trying to explain was snuffed out by the 1 week later statement Dempsey made saying he will demand to fight Wills, so all that bullshlt you wrote is irrelevant.

avoiding issues you don't want to deal with. That is why I don't answer your questions.

Oh really? Well today is your lucky day. Go ahead and ask me anything. I've never ducked anything here and you know it. So go ahead and ask away. Let's see what you got.

Furthermore you over use the word "proof" -- everyone's opinion is automatically disregarded unless they are willing to meet YOUR definition of proof, which never seems to be satisfied.

I just gave you a chance to prove your statement, and you returned with "no one knows," and completely ducked information I gave you that shows you are wrong. So get out of here with that bullshlt.

In regards to 'skunking' me, that is you trying to put the stink on me as if I am afraid of you, when I believed we had chosen together to let the matter rest.

You 'skunked me' when I wasn't looking.

Why would you be afraid of me? It was a conversation. One that you and I both know YOU have tried to manipulate with pure shlt. Making up things completely out of the blue.

Let me remind you, YOU'VE JUST ADMIT THAT YOU COMPLETELY MADE UP DEMPSEY'S STATEMENT BEING A FEW DAYS FROM THE MSG INCIDENT.

Thought that'd fit your agenda, huh? Did you think you'd get away with it? I bet you did, didn't you?

I've seen through you all along and I don't mind that it turned out this way.

If you want to get even nastier, maybe I'll teach you about the time Dempsey got ran out of Madison Square Garden's ring by Joe Jeannette. But of course, that will be all facts, too. Facts vs. your "no one really knows."

Cheers

ps. Your fandom makes you behave like less of a man. If you're so butthurt by the truth, go choke on your blue pill elsewhere.

[travestyny]

I'm just playing. We still cool, right?

[travestyny]

If you don't want to put the articles in context and want to believe that Dempsey always felt that way about Wills, then you go ahead and believe it.

Sorry, I almost forgot to respond to this part, which is actually the part that stood out to me the most.

What is wrong with you? I never said Dempsey always felt that way. I said he made the statement that he will never give Wills a chance because of Wills chasing him around, taking him to court with injunctions, preventing other fights from happening etc. YOU challenged me over it, and said it was about an MSG incident.

I never interjected an opinion about what Dempsey felt. In fact, the only time I did, I stated clearly that it was my personal opinion about what he could have been thinking. Besides that, the only things I've said here was the above, which is a fact, and the fact that Dempsey broke a valid contract that was followed exactly by the promoter. Point blank period. Whomever that bothers can take it up with history.




By the way, you're still free to ask me any question you have about this. I'm actually looking forward to proving you wrong yet again since now you're saying I avoid topics. Not sure what I supposedly avoided, but have at it, mate!

[BattlingNelson]

I'm just playing. We still cool, right?

Good. Keep up the sources and lessen down on the insults. There's solid info in this thread so no need for taking the convo-level down.