Harry Greb in 1919

[Rusty Tromboni]

Back the truck up Rusty. In the post you quote I deliberately did not insinuate anything. Its a problem of maturity. Just admit that legally the contract was deemed enforcable. Nobody is disputing there were aspects to the situation. I have said on many occasions that there are two things that are strange to me about the case, one is a jury trail for what amounts to a complex Tort issue, and the other is the amount of the reward.

But legally the contract was broken. Rusty... your really something sometimes! Instead of admitting the contract was broken you go into a point about how contracts are the equivalent of henchmen! Let me ask you something...and I am ethnically one of those third generation, Ukraine, Litho, Russian with a smidgen of Polish thrown in...that you think are so naturally endowed, But my question is: Do you have Polish in you?

because you are getting a construction crew together to turn a building while you hold a lightbulb that needs changing! The whole institution of contracts is at fault...not Dempsey's people?
I am on record as having a different take on the whole events concerning Dempsey than T. But facts are facts. my position is that we do not know about a lot of things that were material to dempsey's fighting acoutements, and I see many perspectives on the Wills fight.

Also, why denegrate Wills? I happen to think he was not tough for Dempsey, but he was a great fighter in his day. Got off to a late start and still managed to do good things. One could even argue that Tunney was a lot tougher... Its not Will's fault he wanted to fight the best. He would have been a decent opponent, I would have bet on Jack for that one though!

You me assumptions sometimes when it is just easier to admit that something is true without denegrating everybody and everything associated with it Rusty.

You're repeating what I said, not disputing it.

Review what I wrote and you'll find nothing discordant with what you've posted here.

We only really disagree on Wills. I'm looking at facts:

He lost to everyone good he fought.

The best he fought wasn't as good as Dempsey.

He resorted to fouling against Sharkey, and built his career bullying smaller men.

No one refers to him having been skilled.

He was his era's Bob Sapp.

And, finally, my grandmother was Slovak, from the Coal Region. My grandfather was born to parents from Ireland.
My dad's family emigrated to Virginia from England in the 1600s. I know you have an appreciation for irony- supposedly i'm related to royalty!
I hope you were sitting down for that... my apologies if you're still in shock.

[billeau2]

You're repeating what I said, not disputing it.

Review what I wrote and you'll find nothing discordant with what you've posted here.

We only really disagree on Wills. I'm looking at facts:

He lost to everyone good he fought.

The best he fought wasn't as good as Dempsey.

He resorted to fouling against Sharkey, and built his career bullying smaller men.

No one refers to him having been skilled.

He was his era's Bob Sapp.

And, finally, my grandmother was Slovak, from the Coal Region. My grandfather was born to parents from Ireland.
My dad's family emigrated to Virginia from England in the 1600s. I know you have an appreciation for irony- supposedly i'm related to royalty!
I hope you were sitting down for that... my apologies if you're still in shock.

Wills was a good fighter, just not IMO on the level of Jack. Some thought he was...

Rusty on the ole Mayflower! I like it. I went to school in Southern Maryland in a town that had similar settlement patterns as Virginia. LOts of old graveyards. There were literally more dead people than alive in the town.

You can probably trace your family for generations! I envy that... But then I look at my kids!!! They are 1/4 jewish, They got Russian, Ukraine, Lithuanian, Polish, and thats just my side! The wife is Irish, Cajun French, and Norman French. Those poor kids! they get a hot dog they don't know whether to ask for a KNish, or chop it up, dowse it with hot sauce and ask for some rice...

[Willie Pep 229]

Dempsey-Wills should have taken place in 1922 at the Polo Grounds. It would have been a 'fight of the century' and likely would have lived up to the hype.

Most mistakenly think that Wills must have been a great boxer. I believe this misconception comes from a 'positive prejudice' we have regarding the 'holy three' (Langford, Jeanette, and McVea) and Jack Johnson, that all the great black fighters of that era were great technicians. They all weren't.

Wills wasn't, he was a banger and a dirty fighter as well, he would have been a perfect foil for Dempsey. Expect no lateral movement here.

I can't see the fight going past three rounds, and I think it was a pick-um.

I also think there is an irony to the 1926 contract dispute. It turned out that by 1926 Wills was past it, he got beaten up by Sharkey and had to foul out just to avoid being knocked out. It was the end of a long career.

Had Dempsey honored that Chicago contract, it is likely he takes Wills apart in '26.

Tunney of course, as we know had the perfect technical style to beat Dempsey.

Had Dempsey fought Wills in '26 he would have unwittingly ducked Tunney and likely remained champion.

[Rusty Tromboni]

I wasn't insulted by that.

I'm frustrated that I've taken up much of my time by showing you all of this information that backs up exactly what I say and you are still trying to inject into it what you want to believe because you can't handle the facts.


Again, it's not fair to Harry Wills, and it's not fair to history. The truth is what matters here. I know you love Dempsey, but that's no way to go about it.

So you need to show me the proof. Do you have it?

I'd like to see your proof that Harry Wills was a "great fighter".

LOL, that one had me in stitches.


And while you're at it, what was his pre-fab'd excuse for the beatdown Dempsey would bestow upon him?

Wilder had his suit.

Robinson had the heart.

Foreman was given a weird drink by Dick Saddler.

Louis ate too many bananas and had to cut a massive five pounds.

Johnson was hot.

Gans threw the fight.

I'm dying to hear Wills' excuse. Maybe his bootlaces? Maybe the wrong pillows in the hotel the night before? Maybe his bottle of hair relaxer leaked and didn't have enough?

If anyone has enough time on her/his/gender fluid hands to research and enter into petty inconsequential arguments over this shyte, it's you Aunty Maxine.

[Anthony342]

Wills was a good fighter, just not IMO on the level of Jack. Some thought he was...

Rusty on the ole Mayflower! I like it. I went to school in Southern Maryland in a town that had similar settlement patterns as Virginia. LOts of old graveyards. There were literally more dead people than alive in the town.

You can probably trace your family for generations! I envy that... But then I look at my kids!!! They are 1/4 jewish, They got Russian, Ukraine, Lithuanian, Polish, and thats just my side! The wife is Irish, Cajun French, and Norman French. Those poor kids! they get a hot dog they don't know whether to ask for a KNish, or chop it up, dowse it with hot sauce and ask for some rice...

Norman French, whose he? Never heard of him HAH!

[Rusty Tromboni]

Dempsey-Wills should have taken place in 1922 at the Polo Grounds. It would have been a 'fight of the century' and likely would have lived up to the hype.

Most mistakenly think that Wills must have been a great boxer. I believe this misconception comes from a 'positive prejudice' we have regarding the 'holy three' (Langford, Jeanette, and McVea) and Jack Johnson, that all the great black fighters of that era were great technicians. They all weren't.

Wills wasn't, he was a banger and a dirty fighter as well, he would have been a perfect foil for Dempsey. Expect no lateral movement here.

I can't see the fight going past three rounds, and I think it was a pick-um.

I also think there is an irony to the 1926 contract dispute. It turned out that by 1926 Wills was past it, he got beaten up by Sharkey and had to foul out just to avoid being knocked out. It was the end of a long career.

Had Dempsey honored that Chicago contract, it is likely he takes Wilnls apart in '26.

Tunney of course, as we know had the perfect technical style to beat Dempsey.

Had Dempsey fought Wills in '26 he would have unwittingly ducked Tunney and likely remained champion.

Great insights as always!

I wish Dempsey HAD fought Wills and Greb, and many others. The more stiff challenges from diverse challengers the better.

Even if he were to have lost i'm sure it would've been our good fortune because he would've returned better.

That also means we get a better Tunney. Gene was just coming into his best when he retired. If Dempsey weren't available, he likely figures Stribling and rematches Loughran before finally getting his shot at Jack.

Maybe that also means Tunney would hang around afterwards to defend against men like Shatkey, Baer and Louis.

I've always believed Tunney's was the greatest Heavyweight reign that never happened.

[billeau2]

Norman French, whose he? Never heard of him HAH!

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!

[travestyny]

I'd like to see your proof that Harry Wills was a "great fighter".

LOL, that one had me in stitches.


And while you're at it, what was his pre-fab'd excuse for the beatdown Dempsey would bestow upon him?

Wilder had his suit.

Robinson had the heart.

Foreman was given a weird drink by Dick Saddler.

Louis ate too many bananas and had to cut a massive five pounds.

Johnson was hot.

Gans threw the fight.

I'm dying to hear Wills' excuse. Maybe his bootlaces? Maybe the wrong pillows in the hotel the night before? Maybe his bottle of hair relaxer leaked and didn't have enough?

If anyone has enough time on her/his/gender fluid hands to research and enter into petty inconsequential arguments over this shyte, it's you Aunty Maxine.

The proof is that he made the Great Dempsey run for the hills, and this is a fact.


None of you have been able to dispute it yet



Right?????? LMAOOOO. Still waitinggggggg



By the way, please tell me. Who has a better resume? Wills or Dempsey.

[travestyny]

What facts?

I've stuffed you with facts, like I have so often stuffed your mouth with my co.ck

I guess it's my fault I've always left you begging for more Ms. Walters

Your h@mosexual fantasies don't impress anyone, son.


Here's a fact that you keep dodging.


Did Dempsey break that contract . Yes or no

[travestyny]

Just a few things to help this even further, Billeau.


1. The concept of "consideration" is certainly not foreign to contracts. One of the first things that I found interesting when looking over trials about contracts. Usually in the court cases I've looked at, consideration is a mere $1. That's what was often given, AND ACCEPTED, to bind a contract.

Dempsey never ever claimed that he was tricked into taking the $10. In fact, he stated that on the very day that he accepted the $10 he was due $125,000. Now why anyone would accept $10 AND sign a legally binding document ON THE EXACT SAME DAY that he claims he is due $125,000 is beyond me. No one with a brain would do that, and I don't believe Dempsey to be nearly that daft.

One thing I can say about Dempsey is that he certainly was not the most honest man, as he has been caught cold in obvious lies like, "I never drew the color line." But even he didn't lie about the $10. He simply said he was owed more money. But the contract didn't stipulate that, and the amount he claims he was owed upon signing is surely enough to give people pause about believing him when he signed and took $10 instead.

What happened here was Dempsey's defense was that there was no contract at all. He tried to argue this because his prior dealing with Fitzsimmons turned into nothing since Fitzsimmons bounced a check to him (this is actually where the $125,000 comes from, NOT from the CAC). So Dempsey argued there was no contract to transfer since the contract that Fitz transferred should have been voided with the bounced check, and this would allow Dempsey to get out of there being any contract to transfer to CAC. The court didn't buy it. Dempsey accepted the new terms and the court specifically said that his dealings with Fitz had nothing to do with this matter.

The contract was transferred over in a legal way, and Dempsey was obviously happy with it at the time. At some point, he changed his mind and made up an excuse (that hand nothing to do with the $10, and actually, nothing to do with the CAC) to get out of it.

People can debate why he wanted out of it, but the facts of what happened are there.

2) We don't know what the contract stated as far as When funds were to be delivered. It may have been that for Dempsey he had an option where he could take the money and if the fight did not materialize, he could keep the money.

But why the ten bucks then? and why not a provision for Dempsey to by out his performance (fight Wills) with a financial sum to be given back IF he did not fight Wills? So to me this does not make much sense.

BINGO!!!! We do know when the money was to be delivered.

1. $10 for consideration to bind the contract.

2. $300,000 on August 5th. AND YOU CALLED IT...THE CONTRACT STIPULATED THAT DEMPSEY COULD KEEP THIS MONEY IF FOR SOME REASON THE FIGHT DIDN'T COME OFF. So even if he thought they couldn't come up wit the money, all he had to do was wait till Aug 5th and a court would have all they need for him to be $300,000 richer with no work if something fell through.

3. $500,000 to be given 10 days before the fight.

The Chicago Coliseum Club held up their end of the bargain. On August 5th, $300,000 was waiting for Dempsey. Of course, Dempsey didn't even wait for that date as he broke the contract a month earlier.