So Dempsey and Jack Johnson are cherry pickers

[travestyny]

You know exactly what I’m talking about coward. Don’t try to play dumb now. You need to start hanging around a better class of people instead of those clown friends of yours in the ‘Dome. You have been caught in so many lies over the years. Mr. Ivy League, Mr. 0% body fat, Army vet, was at the towers during 9/11. The list goes on. Plus we are all familiar with your photoshop skills.

So, when are you reporting me snitch? Any time now?

Oh, I know what you're talking about? Then why won't you post it up?


I certainly will report you if it's found out you made up that quotation yourself. I'm waiting for you to give your source so I knew what's up, but you won't do it. Why?


By the way...

https://www.boxingscene.com/forums/s...ohnson&page=26

Do a search for the word "blame" on your link....IT DOESN'T EXIST


So why are you lying???? Where is the source for your article, Dempsey

[GhostofDempsey]

Oh, I know what you're talking about? Then why won't you post it up?


I certainly will report you if it's found out you made up that quotation yourself. I'm waiting for you to give your source so I knew what's up, but you won't do it. Why?


By the way...

https://www.boxingscene.com/forums/s...ohnson&page=26

Do a search for the word "blame" on your link....IT DOESN'T EXIST


So why are you lying???? Where is the source for your article, Dempsey

Keep looking Ivy League. Fetch!

I wonder if it’s a coincidence that your BFF/Alt is posting at the same time you are? Hmmm. Same posting styles, same behaviors, always posting at the same time, always cheerleading one another. Both worshipers of hateful anti-semites. Interesting.

[GhostofDempsey]

From a 1963 Dempsey interview.

From the inception of boxing in this country it has been dominated by men who developed out of struggle with life. Our first real heavyweight champion, Tom Molyneaux, was born a slave in ******ia and won his freedom with his fistic talent. Fighting as a freedman in New York he beat all challengers and earned the right to be called the first American heavyweight champion.

All of the great old-time Negro boxers were born under poor and depressing circumstances but rose above their environments to win acclaim wherever they fought. Peter Jackson, Sam Langford, George Dixon, Joe Gans, the immortal “Old Master,” and Jack Johnson all knew what it felt like to be up against the wall and cornered. Their bitter experiences were reflected in their superb endurance and their toughness of spirit. Their early poverty showed itself in the way they handled themselves as men and boxers.

I am personally indebted to a number of Negro boxers who worked as my sparring partners in the years when I was learning how to handle myself in a ring. When I was fighting I had many Negro sparring partners at my training camp. One of these, Bill Tate, became one of my best friends. Now living in Chicago, Illinois, he is one of the finest men I have ever known. Then there was Panama Joe Gans, a great and clever fighter, who taught me a lot. The Jamaica Kid, a very fine heavyweight, worked with me before the famous 1919 fight with Jess Willard. The Kid did a lot to get me into the superb condition that enabled me to beat Willard and win the world’s championship.

Sam Langford, one of the greatest of all heavyweights, is another Negro fighter who showed me some tricks and gave me the benefits of his vast experience. I worked with Old Sam in Chicago when I was a youngster. I never forgot what Langford taught me. He was cool, clever, scientific and a terrific hitter besides a fine man.
Battling Gee and Battling Jim Johnson, both Negroes were also on my payroll as sparring mates. I was a pretty rough customer in those days and my sparring partners had to be good and tough to stay with me. All of these men more than made the grade.

Many times I’ve had the charge hurled at me that I was prejudiced against Negroes. It is time this utter fiction was laid to rest once and for all. All my life I have believed that all men are basically brothers and that differences of color and religion are superficial. I hate prejudice. I hate discrimination. I hate intolerance. Boxing has been guilty of its share of color bias but I categorically deny that I ever practiced it either as a fighter, manager or promoter. The several Negro fighters who have been under my management will testify to my long-held belief in equality of treatment for all men, regardless of color.

Since I am on the subject of the color line in boxing, let me clear the air of the many rumors and su****ions and charges that have been moving around me as a result of my failure to fight Harry Wills. I have never run away from a fight in my life. Ever since I left public school to work in the Colorado mines, my credo has been to fight all comers and may the best man win. Harry Wills was a great fighter in his prime and I would have liked to have been matched with him. But it was not to be. The reasons had nothing to do with color prejudice on my part (which I have never held), nor fear of Wills fighting skill. I wanted to fight Wills badly, but Tex Rickard, who had the final say, never matched us.

Rickard was a Texan. He had a rough time of it out in San Francisco, California, after the Johnson-Jeffries fight which he promoted in Reno. The repercussions of that fight swirled about Rick’s head for a long time after the fight and he was a victim of ugly charges and a wicked smear campaign. This experience soured him on mixed fights for the heavyweight crown. As a result he was never anxious to promote a match between Wills and myself.

The facts clearly show that in 1926 I tried desperately to arrange a fight with Harry Wills but the deal collapsed when my guarantee was not forthcoming. Wills and I had signed to fight with a promoter named Floyd Fitzsimmons of Benton Harbor, Michigan. Wills, I understand, received fifty thousand dollars as his guarantee for signing the contract. I was to have received one hundred and twenty-five thousand dollars in advance of the fight. As the date of the fight grew nearer and my money did not appear, I became anxious and asked Fitzsimmons what was the matter. He wired me to meet him in Dayton, Ohio, assuring me that he would have the money for me there. I met Fitzsimmons in Dayton who handed me a certified check for twenty-five thousand dollars and a promise to let me have the balance almost immediately. I balked at that, demanding the full amount right away. Fitzsimmons tried to placate me by calling the bank where he said he had deposited the money. The bank, unfortunately for Fitzsimmons, informed him that it did not have that much money on hand, that there wasn’t enough to cover the twenty-five thousand dollar check he had given me. Furious, I returned the check to Fitzsimmons and told him the fight was off. Later, the Fitzsimmons syndicate financing the fight sued me for failure to honor a contract. I won the case.

When the Wills fight failed to materialize, Tex Rickard jumped back into the picture and matched me with Gene Tunney. The rest is history. And that is the real story behind the negotiations for the Harry Wills fight which never came off. I am sorry Wills and I never got a chance to square off in the ring. I am sure it would have been one beautiful scrap.”

[travestyny]

Keep looking Ivy League. Fetch!

I don't have to keep looking, liar Do a search for the word blame here....it comes up pronto.

Do a search for it in the thread you mentioned....and NOTHING.


So where is the source, huh? You are up shlt's creek without a paddle. How does that feel

I wonder if it’s a coincidence that your BFF/Alt is posting at the same time you are? Hmmm. Same posting styles, same behaviors, always posting at the same time, always cheerleading one another. Both worshipers of hateful anti-semites. Interesting.

LMAOOOOO. Look at you going with all of the conspiracy theories because you can't handle getting dismantled like this.


I love it. This is one of the more epic beat downs. Almost as bad as what I did to Bobby Deez. How does it feel

[travestyny]

From a 1963 Dempsey interview.

From the inception of boxing in this country it has been dominated by men who developed out of struggle with life. Our first real heavyweight champion, Tom Molyneaux, was born a slave in ******ia and won his freedom with his fistic talent. Fighting as a freedman in New York he beat all challengers and earned the right to be called the first American heavyweight champion.

All of the great old-time Negro boxers were born under poor and depressing circumstances but rose above their environments to win acclaim wherever they fought. Peter Jackson, Sam Langford, George Dixon, Joe Gans, the immortal “Old Master,” and Jack Johnson all knew what it felt like to be up against the wall and cornered. Their bitter experiences were reflected in their superb endurance and their toughness of spirit. Their early poverty showed itself in the way they handled themselves as men and boxers.

I am personally indebted to a number of Negro boxers who worked as my sparring partners in the years when I was learning how to handle myself in a ring. When I was fighting I had many Negro sparring partners at my training camp. One of these, Bill Tate, became one of my best friends. Now living in Chicago, Illinois, he is one of the finest men I have ever known. Then there was Panama Joe Gans, a great and clever fighter, who taught me a lot. The Jamaica Kid, a very fine heavyweight, worked with me before the famous 1919 fight with Jess Willard. The Kid did a lot to get me into the superb condition that enabled me to beat Willard and win the world’s championship.

Sam Langford, one of the greatest of all heavyweights, is another Negro fighter who showed me some tricks and gave me the benefits of his vast experience. I worked with Old Sam in Chicago when I was a youngster. I never forgot what Langford taught me. He was cool, clever, scientific and a terrific hitter besides a fine man.
Battling Gee and Battling Jim Johnson, both Negroes were also on my payroll as sparring mates. I was a pretty rough customer in those days and my sparring partners had to be good and tough to stay with me. All of these men more than made the grade.

Many times I’ve had the charge hurled at me that I was prejudiced against Negroes. It is time this utter fiction was laid to rest once and for all. All my life I have believed that all men are basically brothers and that differences of color and religion are superficial. I hate prejudice. I hate discrimination. I hate intolerance. Boxing has been guilty of its share of color bias but I categorically deny that I ever practiced it either as a fighter, manager or promoter. The several Negro fighters who have been under my management will testify to my long-held belief in equality of treatment for all men, regardless of color.

Since I am on the subject of the color line in boxing, let me clear the air of the many rumors and su****ions and charges that have been moving around me as a result of my failure to fight Harry Wills. I have never run away from a fight in my life. Ever since I left public school to work in the Colorado mines, my credo has been to fight all comers and may the best man win. Harry Wills was a great fighter in his prime and I would have liked to have been matched with him. But it was not to be. The reasons had nothing to do with color prejudice on my part (which I have never held), nor fear of Wills fighting skill. I wanted to fight Wills badly, but Tex Rickard, who had the final say, never matched us.

Rickard was a Texan. He had a rough time of it out in San Francisco, California, after the Johnson-Jeffries fight which he promoted in Reno. The repercussions of that fight swirled about Rick’s head for a long time after the fight and he was a victim of ugly charges and a wicked smear campaign. This experience soured him on mixed fights for the heavyweight crown. As a result he was never anxious to promote a match between Wills and myself.

The facts clearly show that in 1926 I tried desperately to arrange a fight with Harry Wills but the deal collapsed when my guarantee was not forthcoming. Wills and I had signed to fight with a promoter named Floyd Fitzsimmons of Benton Harbor, Michigan. Wills, I understand, received fifty thousand dollars as his guarantee for signing the contract. I was to have received one hundred and twenty-five thousand dollars in advance of the fight. As the date of the fight grew nearer and my money did not appear, I became anxious and asked Fitzsimmons what was the matter. He wired me to meet him in Dayton, Ohio, assuring me that he would have the money for me there. I met Fitzsimmons in Dayton who handed me a certified check for twenty-five thousand dollars and a promise to let me have the balance almost immediately. I balked at that, demanding the full amount right away. Fitzsimmons tried to placate me by calling the bank where he said he had deposited the money. The bank, unfortunately for Fitzsimmons, informed him that it did not have that much money on hand, that there wasn’t enough to cover the twenty-five thousand dollar check he had given me. Furious, I returned the check to Fitzsimmons and told him the fight was off. Later, the Fitzsimmons syndicate financing the fight sued me for failure to honor a contract. I won the case.

When the Wills fight failed to materialize, Tex Rickard jumped back into the picture and matched me with Gene Tunney. The rest is history. And that is the real story behind the negotiations for the Harry Wills fight which never came off. I am sorry Wills and I never got a chance to square off in the ring. I am sure it would have been one beautiful scrap.”

Seems to be missing this bit:

Another news article for you.

HARRY WILLS - AUGUST 11, 1926


Don’t blame Dempsey

Yes, I know, now, that Dempsey wanted to fight me, but the politics of the game were against it. Powerful politicians said that a black man shouldn’t fight Dempsey for the title. And that ended it.

I still think I had a great chance to beat him but I don’t’ think about that anymore.” Wills tells you.

And he can still grin, at the humorous aspects of his career.

You got a link?

[img]https://media.*****.com/media/l3E6uhDAN3W7vylji/*****.gif[/img]

Also missing that bit about...you know...a court finding that he broke a legally binding contract for $800,000, and a guarantee check waiting for him in accordance with the contract that he ran from

[Willie Pep 229]

This is great. But I'm confused as to why you think this means New York was against Dempsey.


This is under the Walker law, which ended the period of no decision fights in New York. It also clearly states the rules in the part of the article that you didn't post.

It says clearly that the bout must be a match to a decision. So what this shows you is that they were declining to let Dempsey fight Wills if he wouldn't put up the title.


So what [MENTION]GhostofDempse[/MENTION] was accusing Jack Johnson of trying to do (which was false and can be proven by one of Willards matches under the Frawley Act being for the title and everyone and their momma saying the fight would be for the title), we actually have Jack Dempsey being busted for: trying to have a non-title fight with Wills.

And the New York Commission says nope...not having it.

So you're saying New York was against Dempsey because they wouldn't allow him to NOT fight for the title? Does that make sense?

By the way, here's Commissioner Farley saying unequivocally that politics were NOT the reason that this fight wasn't to be, and saying he doesn't believe Dempsey would ever fight.

same article:

You are correct they had all the legal right necessary to refuse to accept the fight as a title fight, a technicality has to be legal or it's not a technicality.

The spirit of the law/rule was to promote a fight, but they got him on the decision issue.

"Commissioner Farley saying unequivocally" -- really doesn't mean much now does it? Nixon said he wasn't a crook, and Trump, well he lies almost everyday.

I have never heard a politician state he was making a 'politically' based move, have you?

Sorry didn't mean to hide any of the article -- I can't post the way you can and I have to cut and paste the damn things. That is why I made sure to cite the article and mention that it was 'edited.'

BTW if one stands on this argument, then one has to ask if the proposed Johnson-Jeannette match could ever have been considered a 'title' match.

[travestyny]

You are correct they had all the legal right necessary to refuse to accept the fight as a title fight, a technicality has to be legal or it's not a technicality.

The spirit of the law/rule was to promote a fight, but they got him on the decision issue.

I don't really see this as them "getting him." I'm not sure why you see it that way. All they wanted was for Dempsey to give Wills a shot at the title because he deserved it. I really don't think that's such a dastardly thing to ask for.

"Commissioner Farley saying unequivocally" -- really doesn't mean much now does it? Nixon said he wasn't a crook, and Trump, well he lies almost everyday.

I have never heard a politician state he was making a 'politically' based move, have you?

I agree with this. I wasn't trying to say that Farley is the be all end all of the matter. I was just trying to help express the way that the commission (at least 2 of the commissioners if I remember correctly) felt about this fight. It should count for something that a person in his position denies that the fight not taking place was due to political pressure, but by no means am I implying that settles the issue.

Sorry didn't mean to hide any of the article -- I can't post the way you can and I have to cut and paste the damn things. That is why I made sure to cite the article and mention that it was 'edited.'

no no no. I wasn't accusing you of hiding it. Don't misunderstand me. What I meant is that adding more might have helped anyone reading to understand where they were coming from. I didn't mean to imply that you did anything sneaky.

BTW if one stands on this argument, then one has to ask if the proposed Johnson-Jeannette match could ever have been considered a 'title' match.

Sure. That's why I added more information. This was under the Walker law, not under the Farley law. The Walker law got rid of non-decision fights, whereas under the Farley law, ALL bouts in New York were exhibitions. Everyone was aware that the Jeannette/Johnson fight was to be for the title. The promoters said as much, quoted Johnson saying as much, Jeannette's manager said as much. We also know that Willard defended his title in an exhibition in New York under the Farley law. So the contention that it wasn't for the title doesn't add up. Under the new rules, which you see in my excerpt of the article, the fight would have to be a decision fight. That certainly was not the case in the past with the Farley law, or there would have been NO title fights in New York for about a decade, and we know that's not true.


The contention that the bout was NOT to be for the title came completely out of GhostofDempsey's imagination. To this day he has failed to provide even 1 source stating as much, while I've provided plenty that say it was to be for the title. It should be starting to dawn on you guys how this dude operates, if it isn't already crystal clear. (Lie....lie...pull from ass...repeat lie....lie again.).

[Willie Pep 229]

I don't really see this as them "getting him." I'm not sure why you see it that way. All they wanted was for Dempsey to give Wills a shot at the title because he deserved it. I really don't think that's such a dastardly thing to ask for.




I agree with this. I wasn't trying to say that Farley is the be all end all of the matter. I was just trying to help express the way that the commission (at least 2 of the commissioners if I remember correctly) felt about this fight. It should count for something that a person in his position denies that the fight not taking place was due to political pressure, but by no means am I implying that settles the issue.



no no no. I wasn't accusing you of hiding it. Don't misunderstand me. What I meant is that adding more might have helped anyone reading to understand where they were coming from. I didn't mean to imply that you did anything sneaky.



Sure. That's why I added more information. This was under the Walker law, not under the Farley law. The Walker law got rid of non-decision fights, whereas under the Farley law, ALL bouts in New York were exhibitions. Everyone was aware that the Jeannette/Johnson fight was to be for the title. The promoters said as much, quoted Johnson saying as much, Jeannette's manager said as much. We also know that Willard defended his title in an exhibition in New York under the Farley law. So the contention that it wasn't for the title doesn't add up. Under the new rules, which you see in my excerpt of the article, the fight would have to be a decision fight. That certainly was not the case in the past with the Farley law, or there would have been NO title fights in New York for about a decade, and we know that's not true.


The contention that the bout was NOT to be for the title came completely out of GhostofDempsey's imagination. To this day he has failed to provide even 1 source stating as much, while I've provided plenty that say it was to be for the title. It should be starting to dawn on you guys how this dude operates, if it isn't already crystal clear. (Lie....lie...pull from ass...repeat lie....lie again.).

Any idea were we could get a complete copy of the Farley and Walker Acts? They would be a great read, especially when compared; they could give us a better understanding of the social change occurring (in the Roaring Twenties.)

[travestyny]

Any idea were we could get a complete copy of the Farley and Walker Acts? They would be a great read, especially when compared; they could give us a better understanding of the social change occurring (in the Roaring Twenties.)

I was searching a few weeks ago because I wanted to read the Farley Law, but I couldn't get a full copy of it. I think I once found something with some of it.... Can't really recall but I'll check my files and post it if I do.

I've only recently looked more into the Walker law. I know that's the law that's still in use today. I haven't really been able to find out anything that I didn't already know. That there would be decisions now etc.

I was wondering if the law mentioned in the article I posted is directly from the Walker law. Maybe....? That might be a good place to start. I'll see what I can find and I'll post anything I do.


---edit---
How I'm guessing this works actually is that the Walker law is going to allow for the formation of the commission, and all of the specific laws are just going to be the NYState athletic commission's laws.

[Willie Pep 229]

I was searching a few weeks ago because I wanted to read the Farley Law, but I couldn't get a full copy of it. I think I once found something with some of it.... Can't really recall but I'll check my files and post it if I do.

I've only recently looked more into the Walker law. I know that's the law that's still in use today. I haven't really been able to find out anything that I didn't already know. That there would be decisions now etc.

I was wondering if the law mentioned in the article I posted is directly from the Walker law. Maybe....? That might be a good place to start. I'll see what I can find and I'll post anything I do.

Thanks!


The article you posted refers to Paragrah 1, Section 7 of the Boxing Rules of the State Athletic Commission.

That sounds like detailed rules created later on by the NYSAC (my guess).

The Walker Law is likely a touch more general, and in it gives the Commission (it created) the authority to create, subsequently, more detailed rules. (This is usually how it works, not always).

I would love to get my hands on both. Walker Law and the NYSAC Boxing Rules.

Finding the NYSAC Boxing Rules would be a coup.

I think, in that article we get a good tatse of what they (the NYSAC's rules) would sound like; what they were trying to regulate.