Why is there no fight footage of Harry Greb?

[travestyny]

- -You ain't the court of Law.

The Law prevented the fight as you have so amply provided.

End of save yer incessant moaning.

Why did Harry duck the other Harry?

We wanna know!

Sure. I'll answer all of your questions. But I bet you duck mine

1. I'm not the court, but I can read. Apparently you can't.
2. False. DEMPSEY prevented the fight. The law said he was full of shlt. Want proof?

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.

Hmmm.

3. Is this the end of your incessant lying?

4. Harry was waiting for Dempsey to grow a pair.


Now a simple question for you, that you keep ducking. Seems the Dempsey boys are shook of it.

DID DEMPSEY BREAK A VALID CONTRACT TO FIGHT HARRY WILLS ACCORDING TO A US COURT?

Let's see if you can read on your second try.

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.

.

[billeau2]

Honestly, I think your opinion on the matter is a bit different from the topic.

It seems you are giving your opinion about who would have won the match, but the discussion seems to be about whether Dempsey avoided the fight.

I know some have tried to say that they believe Dempsey would have won, so why would he have avoided the fight, but it certainly doesn't work that way.

For me, the bottom line is this. No one put a gun to Dempsey's head and told him to sign the contract for Wills. He even admits that he accepted $10 to bind him to the contract. The contract clearly stated when the first payment would be made. Dempsey broke the contract BEFORE that date even arrived. When the date did in fact arrive, the money was proven to be there waiting, exactly as the contract stipulated. And exactly as Dempsey agreed to.

I'm sorry, but I don't see how any fighter gets around signing a contract that says what is to happen, the contract is honored exactly, and the fighter pulls out claiming there was no contract, when a court of law literally said "it is inconceivable how Dempsey could have thought there was no contract when the details are made perfectly clear and his signature appears on the dotted line, along with him accepting $10 in consideration to bind him to the contract.

Any other fighter does this, it's a duck. I don't see why it's any different for Dempsey. The public wanted it. Wills wanted it. The promoter wanted it. Dempsey backed out.

Well T

I have not looked at the details of the contract so your correct that my issue is a little different. I concede that point.

I have two issues: The first is not really very important but when Klompton set up a straw man and put my name on it...it pissed me off a bit. That issue is how much Dempsey himself was a contributing factor to whatever shenanigans, negotiations, etc that took place between the camps. Again, I don't pretend to know, but I am aware that managers and profits became very integral at this point in "the game." So I don't know how much Dempsey ducked, was told who he would fight, etc. Just don't know...

The second issue is one I feel strongly about because I looked into it and researched it to a point where experts who felt many ways were included... I think Wills was talented, and an excellent fighter, but do not think he was as good as people describe him as a contrast to Dempsey. In my opinion Dempsey was a much stronger fighter.

I hope this post clarifies my stance.

[travestyny]

Well T

I have not looked at the details of the contract so your correct that my issue is a little different. I concede that point.

I have two issues: The first is not really very important but when Klompton set up a straw man and put my name on it...it pissed me off a bit. That issue is how much Dempsey himself was a contributing factor to whatever shenanigans, negotiations, etc that took place between the camps. Again, I don't pretend to know, but I am aware that managers and profits became very integral at this point in "the game." So I don't know how much Dempsey ducked, was told who he would fight, etc. Just don't know...

The second issue is one I feel strongly about because I looked into it and researched it to a point where experts who felt many ways were included... I think Wills was talented, and an excellent fighter, but do not think he was as good as people describe him as a contrast to Dempsey. In my opinion Dempsey was a much stronger fighter.

I hope this post clarifies my stance.

Yea, absolutely. I think that's completely fair.

With regards to your second issue in particular, I would say that it doesn't really seem like the kind of thing that can be researched to the point of a conclusion. I mean, very few people believed Ruiz was going to beat Joshua. People tend to want to point to Wills' loss to Jack Sharkey in 1926, but how long had he been chasing Dempsey before that? Wills had more fights and much much tougher competition than Dempsey. Besides, Dempsey himself lost the month before. In all honesty, both were likely out of their primes by 1926, much like Mayweather and Pacquiao in 2015. It's true that Dempsey then took out Sharkey the next year (with what looks honestly to me like a low blow. I think Klompton also mentioned this, if I'm not mistaken). But it's not like that was their only common foe (I think Klompton already compared their Firpo encounters). Wills beat Meehan in their only meeting, while Dempsey lost the first, won the next one, drew the next two, then lost the final one, if boxrec is accurate. Harry Wills went 13-2-2 against Sam Langford. Langford was an absolute beast that guys wouldn't go near even when he was damn near blind.

But beyond all that, the point, as you know where i'm going with this is...."That's why they fight the fights. Because you never know who has who's number." Who would have thought Mayorga would have made his name off of Vernon Forest, who made his fame off of Shane Mosley. Know what I'm saying?

Respect, Bill.

[QueensburyRules]

Sure. I'll answer all of your questions. But I bet you duck mine

1. I'm not the court, but I can read. Apparently you can't.
2. False. DEMPSEY prevented the fight. The law said he was full of shlt. Want proof?



Hmmm.

3. Is this the end of your incessant lying?

4. Harry was waiting for Dempsey to grow a pair.


Now a simple question for you, that you keep ducking. Seems the Dempsey boys are shook of it.

DID DEMPSEY BREAK A VALID CONTRACT TO FIGHT HARRY WILLS ACCORDING TO A US COURT?

Let's see if you can read on your second try.

.

- -You confusing knowing a few ABCs with reading.

Did Jack ever pay a settlement to Wills for breaking a contract?

You quoting snippets of a trial out of context means as much as what's found in yer diapers.

[travestyny]

- -You confusing knowing a few ABCs with reading.

Did Jack ever pay a settlement to Wills for breaking a contract?

You quoting snippets of a trial out of context means as much as what's found in yer diapers.

That's not an answer to my question. Are you going to keep ducking it? You Dempsey boys are looking real bad



Did Jack Dempsey sign on the contract, saying exactly what he needed to get that Wills deal done...and then duck out, breaking the contract, and getting an injunction slapped on his a$$?


Let me know, son

[Anthony342]

That's not an answer to my question. Are you going to keep ducking it? You Dempsey boys are looking real bad



Did Jack Dempsey sign on the contract, saying exactly what he needed to get that Wills deal done...and then duck out, breaking the contract, and getting an injunction slapped on his a$$?


Let me know, son

I knew about ducking in later times, but didn't know there was this much ducking of top contenders and of opponents fans wanted to see in the earlier days of boxing. So after taking in all this interesting information, the follow up question I have is, was ducking, waiting, gamesmanship and excuse making as common back then as it was in the later days of boxing or did it happen less often, so when it DID happen it was huge news not only because of the ducking but because of boxing being such a big sport back then? What say you guys? Was there also a lot of stuff like what Ray Leonard pulled with his rematches with Duran and his fight against Hagler or what people say about Mayweather having good to really good wins but not an ATG win on his resume, with Pacquaio being the closest back in the older days of boxing or did it become more common later?

[travestyny]

I knew about ducking in later times, but didn't know there was this much ducking of top contenders and of opponents fans wanted to see in the earlier days of boxing. So after taking in all this interesting information, the follow up question I have is, was ducking, waiting, gamesmanship and excuse making as common back then as it was in the later days of boxing or did it happen less often, so when it DID happen it was huge news not only because of the ducking but because of boxing being such a big sport back then? What say you guys? Was there also a lot of stuff like what Ray Leonard pulled with his rematches with Duran and his fight against Hagler or what people say about Mayweather having good to really good wins but not an ATG win on his resume, with Pacquaio being the closest back in the older days of boxing or did it become more common later?

That's a good question, man. I think maybe Klompton would be a good person to ask.

What I've found so funny is how similar situations from the past seem. Joshua and Wilder seemed to be going the direction of Mayweather/ Pacquiao, and looking into Dempsey/Wills certainly made me think of May/Pac often, too. You know what they say. The more things change, the more they stay the same.

[GhostofDempsey]

I knew about ducking in later times, but didn't know there was this much ducking of top contenders and of opponents fans wanted to see in the earlier days of boxing. So after taking in all this interesting information, the follow up question I have is, was ducking, waiting, gamesmanship and excuse making as common back then as it was in the later days of boxing or did it happen less often, so when it DID happen it was huge news not only because of the ducking but because of boxing being such a big sport back then? What say you guys? Was there also a lot of stuff like what Ray Leonard pulled with his rematches with Duran and his fight against Hagler or what people say about Mayweather having good to really good wins but not an ATG win on his resume, with Pacquaio being the closest back in the older days of boxing or did it become more common later?

We know that Jack Johnson drew the color line once he was champion. Refused to give Langford, Mcvea, Jeannete, Wills or any other black fighter a shot at his title. His best wins were against much smaller opponents and washed up has beens. He got KO’d by Willard and his last twenty or so opponents are all but forgotten.

Boxing has always been a shell game. At elsst back then there was one champ for each of the eight weight classes. Unlike today where “champion” isn’t nearly as prominent a title as it was prior to the alphabet belts.

[ShoulderRoll]

We know that Jack Johnson drew the color line once he was champion. Refused to give Langford, Mcvea, Jeannete, Wills or any other black fighter a shot at his title. His best wins were against much smaller opponents and washed up has beens. He got KO’d by Willard and his last twenty or so opponents are all but forgotten.

Boxing has always been a shell game. At elsst back then there was one champ for each of the eight weight classes. Unlike today where “champion” isn’t nearly as prominent a title as it was prior to the alphabet belts.

At least with Jack Johnson we know for a fact that he could beat Langford, McVea, and Jeannete.

We don't have to resort to "he would have probably beat them if they had fought" fantasy victories.

[GhostofDempsey]

At least with Jack Johnson we know for a fact that he could beat Langford, McVea, and Jeannete.

We don't have to resort to "he would have probably beat them if they had fought" fantasy victories.

Looking at old footage of McVea and Jeannette it is no surprise. Neither of them were great fighters. Langford was about 5’7” and 160 lbs when he fought 6’1” 200+ lb Johnson, so Johnson did what he was supposed to do against a middleweight. After that, Johnson wanted no part. Let’s face it, Johnson is best known for his win over middleweight Ketchel, long retired Jeffries, amd his loss to Willard.