Jack Dempsey's Refusal to Fight Joe Jeanette

[HOUDINI563]

Note that Coffroth states he advised Kearns not to accept the “forced piece of trickery”. Also Coffroth states Dempsey was ready to fight the “substitutes”.

[travestyny]

Thought some of you might like to see this even more from Dempsey's perspective.


They Call Me A Bum
by Jack Dempsey as told to John B. Kennedy (September 1925)

http://freepdfhosting.com/4de7c17555.pdf

If anyone wants the rest of the article, let me know.



From his quotation there, it's clear it's about the color line. My question is....why did he draw the color line before becoming champion? And why for an exhibition?

[QueensburyRules]

Thought some of you might like to see this even more from Dempsey's perspective.


They Call Me A Bum
by Jack Dempsey as told to John B. Kennedy (September 1925)

http://freepdfhosting.com/4de7c17555.pdf

If anyone wants the rest of the article, let me know.



From his quotation there, it's clear it's about the color line. My question is....why did he draw the color line before becoming champion? And why for an exhibition?

- -Teensysan, pray tell us unwashed Rubes how many rds this obviously presanctioned slight of hand farce was supposed to go?

At that point the mighty Joe Jeannette was used as fumigation, not fighting. And your author wrote a fantasy peice whilst hoist on his own petard after ingestion of bad majic beans.

What grade U be demoted to this year

[HOUDINI563]

The official in charge of the entire event absolved Dempsey of any wrongdoing. He stated that Dempsey was willing to fight any of the opponents but he himself told Kearns to walk away. All of this was quoted within days of the event in 1918.

All this falls in line with the vast predominance of the written history. Fleischer as an example wrote about this event multiple times from the 1930’s through to the 1960’s (that I am aware). He was present at the fight card that evening. He called it a set up (it obviously was) and laid no blame upon Dempsey. It’s beyond insulting to set up a fight card, especially for a charitable event, and purposely allow a sham substitution to occur in front of the paying crowd without forewarning. It can be characterized as nothing less than a set up just at face value and even more so looking at particulars.

Their was a reference to James Farley prior. Farley and Dempsey were close friends. Farley considered Dempsey the greatest of all heavyweight champions.

Fleischer wrote extensively concerning Dempsey-Wills through the years. Of course it was well understood that he purposefully pushed every button he could to integrate the heavyweight division in terms of allowing mixed championship matches during the 20’s including razzing Dempsey any way he could. It was one of his major goals when he launched Ring magazine to help make a mixed heavyweight championship fight happen. Thus he wrote whatever he felt it would take to push Dempsey-Wills to occur.

However Nat never laid blame on Dempsey if you read his post 1920’s writings. In his book the idol of Fistania Fleischer stated it would be untrue to believe Dempsey was afraid to fight Wills. In fact he would fight Wills untrained if need be. He sited Kearns, promoters and commissioners as the culprits. In Fleischers book “50 years at Ringside” Nat nary mentions Wills. Langford and Johnson are highly praised with mentions of McVey and Jeanette. In his chapter concerning the greats of the heavyweight division again not a single mention of Wills. Langford and Johnson are given high praise with specific discussions of their respective attributes. Dempseys speed, punching power and explosiveness are discussed at length. Wills however does not rate and is not given any mention.

[Marchegiano]

What happened was that Dempsey drew the colorline.

New York Tribune Nov 19:





It's tedious to correct all the spelling and stuff. You guys can read the article here:

https://chroniclingamerica.loc.gov/l...e=range&page=1

It ****ing is, isn't it!

[travestyny]

- -Teensysan, pray tell us unwashed Rubes how many rds this obviously presanctioned slight of hand farce was supposed to go?

At that point the mighty Joe Jeannette was used as fumigation, not fighting. And your author wrote a fantasy peice whilst hoist on his own petard after ingestion of bad majic beans.

What grade U be demoted to this year

4-6 rounds. I can't remember which one.


Apparently, the author is Dempsey. You see his name there, don't you?

[travestyny]

The official in charge of the entire event absolved Dempsey of any wrongdoing. He stated that Dempsey was willing to fight any of the opponents but he himself told Kearns to walk away. All of this was quoted within days of the event in 1918.

All this falls in line with the vast predominance of the written history. Fleischer as an example wrote about this event multiple times from the 1930’s through to the 1960’s (that I am aware). He was present at the fight card that evening. He called it a set up (it obviously was) and laid no blame upon Dempsey. It’s beyond insulting to set up a fight card, especially for a charitable event, and purposely allow a sham substitution to occur in front of the paying crowd without forewarning. It can be characterized as nothing less than a set up just at face value and even more so looking at particulars.

If everything occurred at the event, I don't know how much of a "set up" it could have been. They would have had to know Bonds' decision about whether he would allow the substitution or not. It's entirely possible that they put Joe Jeanette up to it, but it's not even necessary to go that route. Jeanette himself clearly played a big part in it. My question is, what is the purpose of drawing the color line on an exhibition.

If you think Dempsey was really willing to fight, I have a bridge to sell you. His quotation about not wanting to fight a "colored boy," and this being an issue at all, shows he didn't want to fight.

Their was a reference to James Farley prior. Farley and Dempsey were close friends. Farley considered Dempsey the greatest of all heavyweight champions.

This is the same commissioner that stated Dempsey was, without a doubt, ducking Wills. So how do you reconcile that?

Fleischer wrote extensively concerning Dempsey-Wills through the years. Of course it was well understood that he purposefully pushed every button he could to integrate the heavyweight division in terms of allowing mixed championship matches during the 20’s including razzing Dempsey any way he could. It was one of his major goals when he launched Ring magazine to help make a mixed heavyweight championship fight happen. Thus he wrote whatever he felt it would take to push Dempsey-Wills to occur.

However Nat never laid blame on Dempsey if you read his post 1920’s writings. In his book the idol of Fistania Fleischer stated it would be untrue to believe Dempsey was afraid to fight Wills. In fact he would fight Wills untrained if need be. He sited Kearns, promoters and commissioners as the culprits. In Fleischers book “50 years at Ringside” Nat nary mentions Wills. Langford and Johnson are highly praised with mentions of McVey and Jeanette. In his chapter concerning the greats of the heavyweight division again not a single mention of Wills. Langford and Johnson are given high praise with specific discussions of their respective attributes. Dempseys speed, punching power and explosiveness are discussed at length. Wills however does not rate and is not given any mention.

Once again, Kearns wasn't involved in what happened with that broken contract. He was suing Dempsey at the time.

It seems you are trying to appeal to authority but there were plenty then that DID think Dempsey was ducking Wills. Including Farley whom you just mentioned as a friend of his who thought he was a great champion and has a boxing HOF award named after him for honesty and integrity.

[QueensburyRules]

4-6 rounds. I can't remember which one.


Apparently, the author is Dempsey. You see his name there, don't you?

- -U can't read and decipher?

Stupid author John B Kennedy speaking in an over the top over dramatic dialect not of Dempsey.

U be needing more than my meds next at this rate of decline.

[travestyny]

- -U can't read and decipher?

Stupid author John B Kennedy speaking in an over the top over dramatic dialect not of Dempsey.

U be needing more than my meds next at this rate of decline.

You don't see any quotations there, I guess


Go check out the rest of the article. Lots of quotations directly from him. And being that his name is on the article, I doubt he disagrees with anything said, dumbo

[QueensburyRules]

You don't see any quotations there, I guess


Go check out the rest of the article. Lots of quotations directly from him. And being that his name is on the article, I doubt he disagrees with anything said, dumbo

- -U Dempsey blow up doll made U cross eyed.

U dolly ain't Dempsey. Gitta grip!