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

[travestyny]

For anyone who wishes to comment on this, please, in accordance with the sticky on this forum, let's keep it civil. We are here merely to discuss the facts.

Here is an article from the New York Times dated August 19th, 1926.

Here are the highlights:
1. Dempsey says that he has wanted to fight Wills since 1919, and that Wills is the only fighter that he has wanted to face.

2. Dempsey says that he has never drawn the color-line.

3. Dempsey says that he has made great efforts to make the Wills fight, but no promoter would step up.

4. Dempsey says that he will now stop being silent on the issue and demand the fight be made, or demand to know why not.

5. Dempsey issues a winner take all challenge to Wills, if Wills can match his sum of $150,000.

First of all, one poster here has mentioned that the above information is so unbelievable that this article is a complete and utter fabrication on the part of the New York Times. In my opinion, that is ludicrous. This article can still be found at the NYTImes website today, and there are 2 additional articles relating to it, which I will post. One is regarding Wills manager stating that Dempsey is bluffing with this offer, complete with quotations from Harry Wills himself, and the other is Dempsey following up saying that this is no bluff.

So I would first like to know, what logical proof is there that this article is a fabrication?

Second, how much do you believe these statements by Dempsey. We have to admit that there are lots of fabrications here.

1. Hard to believe that Dempsey has wanted to fight Wills and only Wills since 1919. You would think the fight would have happened by the time of this article. He does blame it on promoters, but we know he broke a valid contract according to a US court to get out of fighting Wills. This is verifiable fact.

2. He did indeed draw the color line on two occasions. This is also verifiable fact and there are direct quotations from him to prove it.

3. Again, if Dempsey went through such great efforts to make the Wills fight, why did he break a valid contract to fight him?

4. After nearly 8 years, why is Dempsey suddenly saying that he will demand this fight or demand to know why it can't happen. Even saying that he will take it to Tijuana if need be. Why did it take 8 years for him to "make a stand"?

5. Is it believable that Dempsey is willing to face Wills for at most $300,000 and as little as $0????? Hasn't he always claimed that the fight didn't happen because of financial issues? Didn't he leave a $300,000 guaranteed check (only to be an initial payment) on the table in Chicago when he broke the contract to face Wills?

According to Wills side in the article that I will post later here, Dempsey should be well aware that a winner take all bout would be ILLEGAL everywhere because it would make the contest into a prize fight, which was illegal at the time. Also, side bets on fights were illegal, according to Wills' manager.



So who believes that the New York Times made up quotations from Dempsey, Mullins, and Wills regarding this statement? And Who believes that these statements by Dempsey are all truthful and believable?

[The Old LefHook]

Good point about winner-take-all bouts being illegal. That alone would raise serious questions about Dempsey's intentions. Hard to know what he was up to.

[travestyny]

Good point about winner-take-all bouts being illegal. That alone would raise serious questions about Dempsey's intentions. Hard to know what he was up to.

This might have been all a lie by Dempsey. I'll post more evidence. I'm just reading more into it.

By the way, no hard feelings about before. Hope you're doing well.

[travestyny]

Here's Mullins and Wills statement saying that this winner take all deal is a bluff, and also illegal. I think you should be able to enlarge it if necessary.

He also challenges the claims that no promoter was willing by discussing Dempsey bailing out after signing the contract and then refusing the $300,000 that was waiting for him. All of this is truthful and can be verified. If anyone wants the information about this, feel free to ask and I will provide it.

And here is Dempsey saying that the Winner Take All deal was not a bluff, and that he has already deposited the $150,000 in 6 $25,000 drafts to New York Broker, Tom Shaw. More on this in the following post.

[travestyny]

So Dempsey claimed that the $150,000 for his share of the winner take all bout was deposited to Thomas Shaw, a New York broker, in six $25,000 drafts, and he would await Wills $150,000, to be returned if Tunney wins their upcoming bout.

The problem is that due to Kearns suit against Dempsey, process servers went after Dempsey's belongings. A Saratoga County Deputy Sheriff and a New York Lawyer representing Kearns actually pulled over Dempsey's wife and took her out of a Rolls-Royce that they confiscated under a Writ of Attachment.

Hearing about Dempsey's boast of the $150,000 for the Winner Take All bout, they then visited Thomas Shaw. Tom Shaw stated that he had "No money belonging to Dempsey, either in cash, certified checks, or drafts."

Just to make this more clear, if a process server is a Deputy Sheriff (unless the law has changed), you can receive something like 9 months in prison and a $10,000 fine for making false statements. So unless Thomas Shaw was willing to go to jail for Dempsey, it seems that this was all a big lie by Dempsey.

Seems to me to be pretty good evidence that Mullins and Wills were right. This was all a bluff and outright lie by Dempsey. What do you guys think?

[HOUDINI563]

Here is an excellent article concerning Dempsey vs Wills. Instead of focusing on one incident which may or may not be indicative of the truth the writer describes the myriad of reasons the bout never occurred.

[QueensburyRules]

--- Musta been 100,000 or more offers to fighters in that time frame of various legitimacies.

Dempsey and Wills both game but as I mentioned, the politics and money not there. When Wills was offered Tunney in an eliminator to Dempsey, he refused and susequently beat by Sharkey.

Wills very interesting as going on prolonged fasts and being an early vegetarian of sorts. Nobody doubts he was gypped by the powers of his fight with Jack, but he should have rolled the dice and gone with Tunney instead of Sharkey.

I don't dismiss him for his decision as those were horrific times for all fighters. They settled the deal with a trilogy in Valhalla, so best pray and mind yer Ps and Qs and one day you can watch the replays...over and out...

[The Old LefHook]

This might have been all a lie by Dempsey. I'll post more evidence. I'm just reading more into it.

By the way, no hard feelings about before. Hope you're doing well.

Here's the deal. I don't even know what you are talking about. If I remembered every minor dispute I am involved in there would not be time for anything else. It rolls off me. In the end, this is only a boxing forum, and it is only boxing we are discussing. I occasionally embarrass myself. That is about all I remember. You seem to make some good points, which is more important. You appear to do some decent research. Over and out.

[travestyny]

Here is an excellent article concerning Dempsey vs Wills. Instead of focusing on one incident which may or may not be indicative of the truth the writer describes the myriad of reasons the bout never occurred.

I understand what he is saying, if I remember it correctly. I’ve read that site a few times. However, I’m wondering what people think of this Winner take All offer. Appears to have been a big lie.

Besides that, Wills manager makes a strong point about Dempsey ducking this fight, that can be verified by a valid contract and guaranteed money following the specific rules of the contract waiting for Dempsey. All of that can be verified.

[travestyny]

Here's the deal. I don't even know what you are talking about. If I remembered every minor dispute I am involved in there would not be time for anything else. It rolls off me. In the end, this is only a boxing forum, and it is only boxing we are discussing. I occasionally embarrass myself. That is about all I remember. You seem to make some good points, which is more important. You appear to do some decent research. Over and out.

No problem, and agree 100%. Thanks, bro.