A Peculiar Offer By Dempsey: Winner Take All vs. Wills

[travestyny]

On March 7th there is an article mentioning a Floyd Fitzsimmons who claims to hold a contract for "Dempsey's and Will's services." Interesting! Need to know more about said contract.

Article says Dempsey confirmed the contract. But you have to remember back in '22 Dempsey got off the boat in New York, from London and announced he had signed a rematch for Carpentier next July. Kearns and Rickard had to explain to Dempsey he hadn't and that the fight wasn't going to happen. It didn't.

You want to understand Dempsey? Try thinking of Mike Tyson, his immaturity and business innocence, surrounded by Don King, Bill Clayton, and Bob Arum.

Dempsey was being tugged between, Kearns, Rickard, Tammany Hall (NYSAC), and the media. He was a babe in the wood. Place as much stock in anything Dempsey says as you would in anything Tyson might of said.

Kearns was smart, Rickard was smart, Dempsey was a nice guy.

I'm reading up and gathering more information now. Man, this is crazy.

There is an article with Rickard guaranteeing that Dempsey won't meet Wills in 1926, but rather meet Tunney. This was at around the time that the contract was made.

And sure enough, that's exactly what happened. And this is before a shltload of articles about Rickard considering Wills for the fight. It's clear that Rickards never considered him at all, but we already knew that.

What I'm not understanding is why Dempsey kept deferring to Rickard (which you kind of mentioned with the Mike Tyson bit).

I'm just reaching the part where they are discussing the broken contract. For now, I'll remind you of what it was:

Appellate Court of Illinois, Chicago, First District.?65 Ill. App. 542 (Ill. App. Ct. 1932)
CHICAGO COLISEUM CLUB V. DEMPSEY

Background:


Chicago Coliseum Club, a corporation, as plaintiff, brought its action against William Harrison Dempsey, known as Jack Dempsey, to recover damages for breach of a written contract executed March 13, 1926, but bearing date of March 6 of that year.

Under the terms of the written agreement, the plaintiff was to promote a public boxing exhibition in Chicago, or some suitable place to be selected by the promoter, and had engaged the services of one Harry Wills, another well known boxer and pugilist, to engage in a boxing match with the defendant Dempsey for the championship of the world. Under the terms of the contract between the plaintiff and Dempsey and the plaintiff and Wills, the contest was to be held during the month of September, 1926.

Dempsey's Financial Agreement: The Plaintiff agreed to...

• Pay Dempsey an initial amount of $10 for consideration, receipt of which was acknowledged
• pay to Dempsey the sum of $300,000 on the 5th day of August 1926
• Pay Dempsey $500,000 in cash at least 10 days before the date fixed for the contest
• Pay Dempsey 50 per cent of the net profits over and above the sum of $2,000,000 in the event the gate receipts should exceed that amount
• Pay Dempsey 50 per cent of the net revenue derived from moving picture concessions or royalties received by the plaintiff

Dempsey Also:

• agreed to have his life and health insured in favor of the plaintiff in a manner and at a place to be designated by the plaintiff.
• agreed not to engage in any boxing match after the date of the agreement and prior to the date on which the contest was to be held.

The Facts:

July 10, 1926, plaintiff wired Dempsey at Colorado Springs, Colorado, stating that representatives of life and accident insurance companies would call on him for the purpose of examining him for insurance in favor of the Chicago Coliseum Club, in accordance with the terms of his contract, and also requesting the defendant to begin training for the contest not later than August 1, 1926. In answer to this communication plaintiff received a telegram from Dempsey, as follows:

"BM Colorado Springs Colo July 10th 1926

B. E. Clements
President Chicago Coliseum Club Chgo:

Entirely too busy training for my coming Tunney match to waste time on insurance representatives. Stop as you have no contract. Suggest you stop kidding yourself and me also.

Jack Dempsey."

• on August 3, 1926, plaintiff, as complainant, filed a bill in the superior court of Marion county, Indiana, asking to have Dempsey restrained and enjoined from engaging in the contest with Tunney, which complainant was informed and believed was to be held on the 16th day of September, and which contest would be in violation of the terms of the agreement entered into between the plaintiff and defendant at Los Angeles, March 13, 1926.

• September 13, 1926, a decree was entered in the superior court of Marion county, finding that the contract was a valid and subsisting contract between the parties, and that the complainant had expended large sums of money in carrying out the terms of the agreement
  
• Also, a decree was entered that Dempsey be perpetually restrained and enjoined from in any way, wise, or manner, training or preparing for or participating in any contracts or engagements in furtherance of any boxing match, prize fight or any exhibition of like nature, and particularly from engaging or entering into any boxing match with one Gene Tunney, or with any person other than the one designated by plaintiff.

We are unable to conceive upon what theory the defendant could contend that there was no contract, as it appears to be admitted in the proceeding here and bears his signature and the amounts involved are sufficiently large to have created a rather lasting impression on the mind of anyone signing such an agreement

The court found that Dempsey could only be on the hook for damages that came between the time of the signing of the contract and the time of the breach of the contract. So the plaintiff was not awarded for any amount they could have gained (because they couldn't prove how much money the fight would bring in), couldn't recoup the $50,000 they gave to Wills (at least not in this case), and couldn't get the amount of money they spent to get the injunction to stop Dempsey from fighting Tunney.

The Court did find that there were some incidental damages, such as secretaries' salaries and consultation with an architect to build the ring ($300).


So the point is, Dempsey was to get the money on August 5th! He breached the contract on July 10th!!! The complaint by the promoter was filed August 3rd!!!!


There is a couple of things I found interesting about this. One being that Dempsey saying he was training for Tunney in July....but there are plenty of articles after that where they claim they are still open to Wills.

This was much more of a mess than Pacquioa/Mayweather! History really does repeat itself.

[QueensburyRules]

--- Tyny dearie, who is to blame for hi******* his own thread?

We thought so!

[travestyny]

On March 7th there is an article mentioning a Floyd Fitzsimmons who claims to hold a contract for "Dempsey's and Will's services." Interesting! Need to know more about said contract.

Article says Dempsey confirmed the contract. But you have to remember back in '22 Dempsey got off the boat in New York, from London and announced he had signed a rematch for Carpentier next July. Kearns and Rickard had to explain to Dempsey he hadn't and that the fight wasn't going to happen. It didn't.

You want to understand Dempsey? Try thinking of Mike Tyson, his immaturity and business innocence, surrounded by Don King, Bill Clayton, and Bob Arum.

Dempsey was being tugged between, Kearns, Rickard, Tammany Hall (NYSAC), and the media. He was a babe in the wood. Place as much stock in anything Dempsey says as you would in anything Tyson might of said.

Kearns was smart, Rickard was smart, Dempsey was a nice guy.

Man, what you said above is very accurate. I think I've finally pieced together what happened here. I'm convinced that this was orchestrated by Rickard (but we already knew that, right?). Still, it doesn't absolve Dempsey for going along with it. But this is, it seems what happened.


Dempsey had a contract with Fitzsimmons. Through him, he was going to fight Wills.

In September 1925, a sum of $125,000 of what was supposed to be an initial payment of $300,000, was to be paid to Dempsey. Fitzsimmons claimed he only had $25,000 to spare. He wrote a check to Dempsey for it. It bounced. Dempsey then walked away from the fight.

March, 1926, Fitzsimmons and Dempsey agree to transfer his promoter contract to the Chicago Coliseum Club. They begin negotiating early March and finally the contract is signed on March 13th, specifically for a Wills fight. The initial payment is to be $300,000 to be paid on Aug. 5th, and then 500,000 to be paid 10 days before the fight. If the fight doesn't come off, Dempsey is allowed to keep the $300,000 as per the contract.

Rickard comes into the picture, even before the signing of this contract...early March, and states that he will bet anyone that Dempsey doesn't fight Wills and instead fights Tunney. Here is the proof of him saying that before the contract was even signed:

March 1st. Nearly two weeks before Dempsey even signs the contract...Rickard says EXACTLY what will happen.

Apparently, at some point Rickard came in and changed Dempsey's mind. But how can Dempsey now get out of his contract? That is the problem.

It seems clear to me what the plan was. Dempsey would argue that since Fitzsimmons didn't come thru with the $125,000 in September, that voided his contract. Therefore, there would be no contract to transfer to the Chicago Coliseum Club. It was a good try by Dempsey's lawyers...but it didn't work, though they got what they wanted in the end anyway.

Here is Dempsey stating that they didn't pay him the $125,000, though he says it was due March 13th.

They were never supposed to pay $125,000 on March 13th. The contract clearly stipulated that the $300,000 was due August 5th, and the Chicago Coliseum Club actually fulfilled that requirement.

The $125,000 is the story that everyone and their mother has been sharing.

In September 1925, Dempsey and Wills traveled to Benton Harbor, Michigan and signed for a 1926 title fight with promoter Floyd Fitzsimmons. Wills received $50,000 as his guarantee for signing the contract. Dempsey was to receive $125,000. Unfortunately, the fight never happened. This is what Dempsey wrote in a 1950 Ebony article:

"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."

The story of the $25,000 bounced check has been repeated a billion times in a billion places, but the key is that it always takes place in September of 1925. That was BEFORE this contract was signed. That's the key.

Plus, the contract was executed on March 13th. That means Dempsey signed it on March 13th and received $10 as consideration to be bound to the contract on that day. But in the article above, he says he didn't receive $125,000 on March 13th. Now, if you are expecting $125,000 on March 13th, why would you sign a contract and accept $10 to bind you to it on that very day????? IT MAKES NO SENSE!

In this article, he acknowledges accepting the $10 to bind him to the contract. It also confirms, just like the court case document, that the contract was SIGNED on March 13th:

In one of the articles also, Dempsey states that Fitzsimmons was a gentleman by agreeing to move to the side to allow Rickard to come in. Hmmm. It is clear what happened. Rickard made some kind of arrangement to get Fitzsimmons on his side, got Dempsey to change his mind about whom the opponent will be, and got Dempsey to agree to break this contract. The way they went about it was by bringing up the old bounced Fitzsimmons check for $125,000 that wasn't advanced. The final piece of evidence supporting that is what the court said about it.

Court Case:

Certain agreements previous entered into by the defendant and one Floyd Fitzsimmons for a Dempsey-Wills boxing match were declared to be void and of no force or effect.

The court listened to what Dempsey said about there being no contract because of Fitzsimmons bouncing that check, but the scheme didn't work because:

1. The incident with the $125,000 occurred on September 29th, 1925 (the tale of the $25,000 bounced Fitzsimmons check).
2. Dempsey's signed the new contract on March 13th, 1926.
3. The initial payment of $300,000 was clearly stipulated to be paid on Aug. 5th, 1926, and they wound up coming through with it!
4. Dempsey broke the contract on July 10th, 1926, nearly a month before the first payment was to be paid.

In the end, the court granted an injunction to stop Dempsey from fighting Tunney, but it couldn't be upheld in Pennsylvania, so Dempsey went along with the fight anyway. This is why Rickard abandoned his plans to have the Tunney fight in Chicago. He couldn't do it because of the injunction!

Rickard wasn't able to mastermind this the way he wanted to, but he didn't have to. It did make him sweat a little and he had to stop his plans a few times to see what was going on here, but in the end he was made certain that the Tunney fight couldn't be stopped no matter what.

So yes, Rickard came in and convinced Dempsey to DUCK the man he wanted to fight since 1919, breaking a valid contract to fight for a LOWER guarantee. The Wills contract was to give him a guarantee of $800,000. For Tunney, he got $770,000.

So why did he break the contract to accept less money...that beats me. But one thing is clear. Dempsey went along with this scheme and played his part to break this contract. Whether he ducked Wills for more money (which on face value he didn't get unless there was more coming other than the guarantee) or whether he ducked him because he was scared, or whether he ducked him because he didn't want the embarrassment if he possibly lost to a black fighter, or simply thought Tunney would be an easier fight, I don't know. But he definitely ducked out on fighting Harry Wills with regards to this incident. There is really no way around it.

Another tidbit....because of this court case, Dempsey declared that as long as he is champion, Harry Wills will NEVER get a shot at fighting for the championship, unless Wills accepts the winner take all bout, which we know was impossible. I would share that article, but I think I'm at my picture limit.

[travestyny]

--- Tyny dearie, who is to blame for hi******* his own thread?

We thought so!

Obviously you're real hurt by the information presented here. I hope you choke and die on your grief

[Mr.MojoRisin']

....but.....then you're saying that Dempsey was a racist??

No buddy...no...smh

Are you saying he was a racist or he wasn't? And if you are adamant that the use of the term "negro" was racist, how are you arguing that he wasn't a racist if he gave the above quotations.

That's what I'm not understanding.

This is where the split comes. I'm saying those weren't his exact words while you say they were. The reporter probably paraphrased Dempsey's words and in those times you could openly show disdain for blacks and it was completely okay.

Think of it like this. If you had a conversation with someone that refers to black people as "people of color" and talked about the historical social injustices against black people then they spoke to another person to tell them what you said on the subject, they are going to insert "people of color" where you say "black people" when paraphrasing your words.

[travestyny]

No buddy...no...smh



This is where the split comes. I'm saying those weren't his exact words while you say they were. The reporter probably paraphrased Dempsey's words and in those times you could openly show disdain for blacks and it was completely okay.

Think of it like this. If you had a conversation with someone that refers to black people as "people of color" and talked about the historical social injustices against black people then they spoke to another person to tell them what you said on the subject, they are going to insert "people of color" where you say "black people" when paraphrasing your words.

You're saying they changed his quotations just to use the word Negro?

He has been quoted using that word multiple times.

Here's an article that appeared in Ebony ****zine. I doubt they went through and changed all of his "coloreds" to "negro."

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.

And you also said that the article is full of blatant lies and is unexplainably dumb.

But now it seems that you're saying they are accurate except that they, for some reason, inserted the word Negro. Come on, bro. Why would you believe that people cared enough whether he said colored or Negro? Isn't it possible that, if what you say is true and the word was undeniably racist, that he was just following the time without thought about whether it's racist or not.

I, for one, don't believe he was a racist, but he DEFINITELY used that word on more than one occasion.

[Dempsey-Louis]

Man, what you said above is very accurate. I think I've finally pieced together what happened here. I'm convinced that this was orchestrated by Rickard (but we already knew that, right?). Still, it doesn't absolve Dempsey for going along with it. But this is, it seems what happened.


Dempsey had a contract with Fitzsimmons. Through him, he was going to fight Wills.

In September 1925, a sum of $125,000 of what was supposed to be an initial payment of $300,000, was to be paid to Dempsey. Fitzsimmons claimed he only had $25,000 to spare. He wrote a check to Dempsey for it. It bounced. Dempsey then walked away from the fight.

March, 1926, Fitzsimmons and Dempsey agree to transfer his promoter contract to the Chicago Coliseum Club. They begin negotiating early March and finally the contract is signed on March 13th, specifically for a Wills fight. The initial payment is to be $300,000 to be paid on Aug. 5th, and then 500,000 to be paid 10 days before the fight. If the fight doesn't come off, Dempsey is allowed to keep the $300,000 as per the contract.

Rickard comes into the picture, even before the signing of this contract...early March, and states that he will bet anyone that Dempsey doesn't fight Wills and instead fights Tunney. Here is the proof of him saying that before the contract was even signed:

March 1st. Nearly two weeks before Dempsey even signs the contract...Rickard says EXACTLY what will happen.

Apparently, at some point Rickard came in and changed Dempsey's mind. But how can Dempsey now get out of his contract? That is the problem.

It seems clear to me what the plan was. Dempsey would argue that since Fitzsimmons didn't come thru with the $125,000 in September, that voided his contract. Therefore, there would be no contract to transfer to the Chicago Coliseum Club. It was a good try by Dempsey's lawyers...but it didn't work, though they got what they wanted in the end anyway.

Here is Dempsey stating that they didn't pay him the $125,000, though he says it was due March 13th.

They were never supposed to pay $125,000 on March 13th. The contract clearly stipulated that the $300,000 was due August 5th, and the Chicago Coliseum Club actually fulfilled that requirement.

The $125,000 is the story that everyone and their mother has been sharing.



The story of the $25,000 bounced check has been repeated a billion times in a billion places, but the key is that it always takes place in September of 1925. That was BEFORE this contract was signed. That's the key.

Plus, the contract was executed on March 13th. That means Dempsey signed it on March 13th and received $10 as consideration to be bound to the contract on that day. But in the article above, he says he didn't receive $125,000 on March 13th. Now, if you are expecting $125,000 on March 13th, why would you sign a contract and accept $10 to bind you to it on that very day????? IT MAKES NO SENSE!

In this article, he acknowledges accepting the $10 to bind him to the contract. It also confirms, just like the court case document, that the contract was SIGNED on March 13th:

In one of the articles also, Dempsey states that Fitzsimmons was a gentleman by agreeing to move to the side to allow Rickard to come in. Hmmm. It is clear what happened. Rickard made some kind of arrangement to get Fitzsimmons on his side, got Dempsey to change his mind about whom the opponent will be, and got Dempsey to agree to break this contract. The way they went about it was by bringing up the old bounced Fitzsimmons check for $125,000 that wasn't advanced. The final piece of evidence supporting that is what the court said about it.

Court Case:


The court listened to what Dempsey said about there being no contract because of Fitzsimmons bouncing that check, but the scheme didn't work because:

1. The incident with the $125,000 occurred on September 29th, 1925 (the tale of the $25,000 bounced Fitzsimmons check).
2. Dempsey's signed the new contract on March 13th, 1926.
3. The initial payment of $300,000 was clearly stipulated to be paid on Aug. 5th, 1926, and they wound up coming through with it!
4. Dempsey broke the contract on July 10th, 1926, nearly a month before the first payment was to be paid.

In the end, the court granted an injunction to stop Dempsey from fighting Tunney, but it couldn't be upheld in Pennsylvania, so Dempsey went along with the fight anyway. This is why Rickard abandoned his plans to have the Tunney fight in Chicago. He couldn't do it because of the injunction!

Rickard wasn't able to mastermind this the way he wanted to, but he didn't have to. It did make him sweat a little and he had to stop his plans a few times to see what was going on here, but in the end he was made certain that the Tunney fight couldn't be stopped no matter what.

So yes, Rickard came in and convinced Dempsey to DUCK the man he wanted to fight since 1919, breaking a valid contract to fight for a LOWER guarantee. The Wills contract was to give him a guarantee of $800,000. For Tunney, he got $770,000.

So why did he break the contract to accept less money...that beats me. But one thing is clear. Dempsey went along with this scheme and played his part to break this contract. Whether he ducked Wills for more money (which on face value he didn't get unless there was more coming other than the guarantee) or whether he ducked him because he was scared, or whether he ducked him because he didn't want the embarrassment if he possibly lost to a black fighter, or simply thought Tunney would be an easier fight, I don't know. But he definitely ducked out on fighting Harry Wills with regards to this incident. There is really no way around it.

Another tidbit....because of this court case, Dempsey declared that as long as he is champion, Harry Wills will NEVER get a shot at fighting for the championship, unless Wills accepts the winner take all bout, which we know was impossible. I would share that article, but I think I'm at my picture limit.

Good post, some interesting facts.

There is much here, I got spun around on the details of the court case.

In regards to the $800,000 promised, I think it unfair to ask why Dempsey would "take less money" - I believe the 'bird in the hand' cliche applies here. Fitzsimmons had already once 'not come up with the money,' was it realistic to think the Chicago Club would?

We both agree Doc Kearns was out of the picture and Dempsey was promoting himself (which really never worked out)

I mentioned earlier that Dempsey (actually did) sign a contract in Euorpe to fight Carpentier again, without Kearns and Rickard's knowledge. They put the nix on that contract too.

After the fiasco in Shelby (summer 1923) Dempsey pulled away from Kearns and was taking Rickard's council. Rickard had made him close to $500,000 for Firpo and the two became friends. Then Dempsey didn't fight for three years. I actually think he felt he owed Rickard the '26 fight. The one thing Dempsey could be sure of was that Rickard would pay him.

Look at what happened to Dempsey over his past three fights:

• Rickard made him big bucks (and paid him) for Carpentier.
  
• Kearns and Rickard disputed and Dempsey didn't fight in 1922.
  
• Kearns promotes and then blows the Shelby fight and Dempsey only gets part of his guarantee and no percentage.
  
• Dempsey fights for Rickard (Firpo) and gets the biggest payday ever, (almost $500,000)
  
• Then Fitzsimmons bounces a mere $25,000 check

Why would Dempsey not go with Rickard? Over his past three fights it was Rickard who was making him (and paying him) what he promised, everyone else he dealt with (including Kearns) made promises but then didn't deliver on those promises.

I think your last post alone should convince you that Dempsey chose Rickard over the Chicago deal, not that he chose Tunney over Wills.

I think you want to make this mono a mono when it really was all about the money. You think of it as a fight fan and believe the is some honor that has to be met, convinced Dempsey was scared of Wills. It was Rickard who was scared of the Wills fight (for several reasons).

Also remember this was Chicago in the mid-twenties, (the city was politically very dirty) we have to ask, who was Dempsey actually dealing with? And once again I bring up the bounced check, you have to wonder just how legit were these Chicago people/Fitzsimmons.

Also it is worth a mention that the injunction to stop the fight in '26 came from a Chicago court. And once the civil suit proper in '32 got moved into federal court, it got thrown out.

But to ask Demspey to walk away from Rickard and go with the Chicago people after what Dempsey had been through with bad promotions and broken promises is unfair; Rickard had already proven that he could deliver.

The funny thing is (because of your post) I see Dempsey signing the Chicago contract as proof that he wasn't afraid of Wills and would have fought him if it was Rickard promoting.

Also I want to restate, I actually do believe Dempsey felt he owed Rickard a fight.

I think you are blaming Dempsey (DUCK) for what Rickard did.

BTW

Rickard liked Wills and promoted his biggest fights. In 1924 he got Wills and Firpo together for the biggest fight of the year. Got Wills parity with Fipro and made him (a Black man) the highest paid athlete of the year.

He also took care of Wills with the Sharkey fight, intending to match him against Dempsey if Wills had gotten by Sharkey. The Yankee Stadium fight in summer '27 was suppose to be Wills fight.

But nevertheless Rickard got burned so bad by the Jack Johnson mess that he just didn't want a black man holding the title (my opinion).

Ironically Jack Johnson considered Rickard the only white man he could trust, that's why Rickard ended up refereeing the Jeffries fight.

Rickard is difficult to understand, but I feel certain it was Rickard, not Demspey (or even Kearns) who wanted Wills ducked.

My assessment: Dempsey would have taken a Wills fight (in any year) if Rickard promoted it.

[Mr.MojoRisin']

You're saying they changed his quotations just to use the word Negro?

He has been quoted using that word multiple times.

Here's an article that appeared in Ebony ****zine. I doubt they went through and changed all of his "coloreds" to "negro."




And you also said that the article is full of blatant lies and is unexplainably dumb.

But now it seems that you're saying they are accurate except that they, for some reason, inserted the word Negro. Come on, bro. Why would you believe that people cared enough whether he said colored or Negro? Isn't it possible that, if what you say is true and the word was undeniably racist, that he was just following the time without thought about whether it's racist or not.

I, for one, don't believe he was a racist, but he DEFINITELY used that word on more than one occasion.

Can't find the original article online...

How come he never once uses the word negro in his autobiography? Which he himself wrote. I mean you seem to be flush with sources you claim are his true words and not paraphrased where he throws around the word negro like it's dollar bills in a strip club. How come he doesn't use it in over 300 pages of his life?

[travestyny]

Good post, some interesting facts.

There is much here, I got spun around on the details of the court case.

In regards to the $800,000 promised, I think it unfair to ask why Dempsey would "take less money" - I believe the 'bird in the hand' cliche applies here. Fitzsimmons had already once 'not come up with the money,' was it realistic to think the Chicago Club would?

We both agree Doc Kearns was out of the picture and Dempsey was promoting himself (which really never worked out)

I mentioned earlier that Dempsey (actually did) sign a contract in Euorpe to fight Carpentier again, without Kearns and Rickard's knowledge. They put the nix on that contract too.

After the fiasco in Shelby (summer 1923) Dempsey pulled away from Kearns and was taking Rickard's council. Rickard had made him close to $500,000 for Firpo and the two became friends. Then Dempsey didn't fight for three years. I actually think he felt he owed Rickard the '26 fight. The one thing Dempsey could be sure of was that Rickard would pay him.

Look at what happened to Dempsey over his past three fights:

• Rickard made him big bucks (and paid him) for Carpentier.
  
• Kearns and Rickard disputed and Dempsey didn't fight in 1922.
  
• Kearns promotes and then blows the Shelby fight and Dempsey only gets part of his guarantee and no percentage.
  
• Dempsey fights for Rickard (Firpo) and gets the biggest payday ever, (almost $500,000)
  
• Then Fitzsimmons bounces a mere $25,000 check

Why would Dempsey not go with Rickard? Over his past three fights it was Rickard who was making him (and paying him) what he promised, everyone else he dealt with (including Kearns) made promises but then didn't deliver on those promises.

I think your last post alone should convince you that Dempsey chose Rickard over the Chicago deal, not that he chose Tunney over Wills.

I think you want to make this mono a mono when it really was all about the money. You think of it as a fight fan and believe the is some honor that has to be met, convinced Dempsey was scared of Wills. It was Rickard who was scared of the Wills fight (for several reasons).

Also remember this was Chicago in the mid-twenties, (the city was politically very dirty) we have to ask, who was Dempsey actually dealing with? And once again I bring up the bounced check, you have to wonder just how legit were these Chicago people/Fitzsimmons.

Also it is worth a mention that the injunction to stop the fight in '26 came from a Chicago court. And once the civil suit proper in '32 got moved into federal court, it got thrown out.

But to ask Demspey to walk away from Rickard and go with the Chicago people after what Dempsey had been through with bad promotions and broken promises is unfair; Rickard had already proven that he could deliver.

The funny thing is (because of your post) I see Dempsey signing the Chicago contract as proof that he wasn't afraid of Wills and would have fought him if it was Rickard promoting.

Also I want to restate, I actually do believe Dempsey felt he owed Rickard a fight.

I think you are blaming Dempsey (DUCK) for what Rickard did.

BTW

Rickard liked Wills and promoted his biggest fights. In 1924 he got Wills and Firpo together for the biggest fight of the year. Got Wills parity with Fipro and made him (a Black man) the highest paid athlete of the year.

He also took care of Wills with the Sharkey fight, intending to match him against Dempsey if Wills had gotten by Sharkey. The Yankee Stadium fight in summer '27 was suppose to be Wills fight.

But nevertheless Rickard got burned so bad by the Jack Johnson mess that he just didn't want a black man holding the title (my opinion).

Ironically Jack Johnson considered Rickard the only white man he could trust, that's why Rickard ended up refereeing the Jeffries fight.

Rickard is difficult to understand, but I feel certain it was Rickard, not Demspey (or even Kearns) who wanted Wills ducked.

My assessment: Dempsey would have taken a Wills fight (in any year) if Rickard promoted it.

Good post! I agree with some things you say, but disagree with some. But first I want to correct you on one thing...

I am NOT saying that Dempsey was afraid of Wills. However, I'm also not saying that he wasn't. I simply don't know what the deal was here. If you put a gun to my head, I'd say that my opinion is that he wasn't afraid of Wills mono a mono. My guess is that he was very cautious to go through with a Wills fight because of the potential to lose to a Black fighter and have to live with that on his legacy. Perhaps this is also the reason that he drew the color line, erased it, drew it again, and erased it again! Remember the Joe Jeannette situation, where he claimed he would face any white fighter, but not a black one. I don't think he was afraid of Jeannette either. I think just that he could possibly lose was enough to make him double think this, and figure it's not worth the risk. Also, if he loses to Jeannette at that stage, people may be afraid that their future heavyweight champion would lose to a black fighter in the future, and that could weigh on his future outlook by people. That's my hunch, but it could also be that I'm wrong about that and he just thought he was going with the right deal, as you mentioned. Let me explain why I don't think that was the case.

The first payment of $300,000 was set to be delivered on August 5th, 1926. The contract stipulated that if they don't come through with the bout thereafter, he would be able to keep the $300,000. This means that he had a great opportunity to wait until August 5th and pocket $300,000 for doing absolutely nothing if the fight doesn't come off for some reason. And if it didn't, he now has $300,000 and can then make the fight with Rickard and Tunney or whomever. Dempsey vs. Tunney in Philadelphia was announced on August 18th, which was after Dempsey's license was declined in New York on August 16th. That means there would have been plenty of time to still make this fight after August 5th! See what I'm saying?

The only thing I'm wondering about is when the guarantee was set for Dempsey and when he received it. He was guaranteed $450,000 for Tunney, and the newspaper articles show that this was revealed on September 8th.

It could have been earlier that he agreed to this, but I don't think it was earlier than August 5th. In his autobiography, if it is to be taken in chronological order, it seems it was around early August when they had the meeting about the guarantee. It was around the time that they were discussing the New York license. It's hard to piece together from the autobiography because the dates weren't given, but just events. Anyway, if we take it as the most skewed in Dempsey's favor as possible, it could go down like this:

When accepting the Wills Contract:

• Early august, he has a guaranteed $300,000.
• If the fight goes through, he has a guaranteed $800,000 ($500,000 more) 10 days before the fight, with a chance to make more if the fight does over $2million.
• If the fight falls through, he still has the $300,000, PLUS WHATEVER HE WOULD MAKE FOR TUNNEY.

When accepting the Tunney Contract:

• Early August (if paid at that time) he has $475,000
• He gets a percentage above $1million.
• He winds up getting $770,000. $30,000 less than he would have been guaranteed for Wills, and much less than if he took the initial Wills payment and added to it the $770,000 for the Tunney fight.

Of course it could be argued that he thought he would get more in the Tunney bout, but I've read various statements that Rickard and Dempsey (I could be wrong about one of them, but I think both) have said that they expected Wills would bring in more money.

So what I'm trying to say is, I don't see why he wouldn't have just grabbed that $300,000, especially when he was already signed to the VALID contract and he claims Wills was the ONLY man he wanted to fight since 1919.

He ducked out on Wills for Tunney. If it was because of money, then he ducked out on Wills for more money. That very well may have been the reason, but it seems that he wound up getting less money, even if the Wills fight didn't go through!

[travestyny]

Can't find the original article online...

How come he never once uses the word negro in his autobiography? Which he himself wrote. I mean you seem to be flush with sources you claim are his true words and not paraphrased where he throws around the word negro like it's dollar bills in a strip club. How come he doesn't use it in over 300 pages of his life?

I don't think you have the right edition of that autobiography. Clay Moyle, who is a well respected writer, quoted the autobiography with the word "negro" written in it. It was also Clay Moyle's post where I got the information about that Ebony ****zine post.

Why would Clay Moyle, or anyone for that matter, make this up?

He claims it was on page 182-183 of his edition of the autobiography.


Then claims this was the article in Ebony ****zine.



The quotation with the "gypped" quotation was why I asked you if that was in your version of the autobiography. I have a feeling it was later edited out, along with any other reference to "negro."

Then there are the other newspaper articles where he is quoted as using the term "negro." Of course he used the word. It would be silly for so many people to change this word just because they hated black people, or to try to paint him as a racist.