Who would you say impacated boxing more Dempsey or Jack Johnson?

[Willie Pep 229]

What are you talking about? That wasn't aimed at you. I was agreeing that sometimes this place is like the twilight zone. Don't get all sensitive on me, brotha.

OK, sorry!

[travestyny]

OK, sorry!

No problem. I know we get testy sometimes because we often find ourselves on different sides of topics, but I swear I'm not at your throat. Hope you aren't at mine. The past is the past and I've never been the type that could hold a grudge even if it's warranted. Not saying that it's warranted with you. The only thing I really didn't like was when you accused me of being a racist, but I do respect you as a poster.

[Willie Pep 229]

Why is it that every time this comes up, you guys deflect to Kearns talking about plaster.


That is NOT what I'm referring to. I'm referring to this statement in 1920 by the man who wrapped his hands....who was currently his trainer and STILL his trainer thereafter.



Check out the book, The Magnificent Rube, which 'coincidentally' gives this eyewitness account.

I was not referring to the plaster claim by Kearns only that Kearns once dismissed started floating his version of self aggrandizement.

We need a more detailed history on this trainer; I will admit whoever wrapped Dempsey's hands for the Willard fight knew what he was doing. That adds to the preponderance of evidence for your side; this guy looks like someone who took his position and chores seriously (was on the cutting edge as the game advanced) and could well be the type of guy who could load gloves.

But there is way too many of disgruntled managers/trainers who have bashed fighters they once worked for; we need to know more about this guy.

Oh! and because he said it "straight up" doesn't mean anything, people lie straight up.

The article quoting the trainer you posted is from 1964, how is that a primary source?

I have no clue what The Magnificent Rube is, but I am assuming that isn't contemporaneous with the event either. Will look it up though.

[travestyny]

I was not referring to the plaster claim by Kearns only that Kearns once dismissed started floating his version of self aggrandizement.

We need a more detailed history on this trainer; I will admit whoever wrapped Dempsey's hands for the Willard fight knew what he was doing. That adds to the preponderance of evidence for your side; this guy looks like someone who took his position and chores seriously (was on the cutting edge as the game advanced) and could well be the type of guy who could load gloves.

But there is way too many of disgruntled managers/trainers who have bashed fighters they once worked for; we need to know more about this guy.

Oh! and because he said it "straight up" doesn't mean anything, people lie straight up.

The article quoting the trainer you posted is from 1964, how is that a primary source?

I have no clue what The Magnificent Rube is, but I am assuming that isn't contemporaneous with the event either. Will look it up though.

Read the New York Times article. The man reporting on it is a pulitzer prize winner. The article is from 1920 that he is referring to. Also, it's not the only time that DeForest gave this statement. Deforest was pissed when later people started talking about aluminum, plaster, etc. He gave another statement to once again clarify.

From Nat Fleischer's '50 years at ringside.' He was present during a press conference when it was stated yet again.

Deforest became riled when the loaded gloves stories began to appear. I recall a press conference he had with several reporters, including myself, at which he angrily remarked:

"I regard the stories I put plaster of Paris on Jack's bandages as plain libel. I'm tired of hearing people talk about such nonsense. It's pure trash. These rumors affect my reputations for honesty and fair dealing. I did not apply any foreign substance to them. I used a hard adhesive tape. This certainly was not irregular. It was not against the rules. It was the same kind of tape I always used when I bandaged Kid McCoy's hands."

So unless Fleischer is lying about that press conference....?


Another interesting tidbit is that for the Tunney fight, bicycle tape was specifically prohibited.

[HOUDINI563]

Their are very clear photos of Dempsey in his corner before the fight clearly showing his hand wraps. Nothing unusual here whatsoever.

[QueensburyRules]

Ah, regarding domestic abuse. Fair enough.

But do you give the same treatment to Dempsey who many believe dislocated his wife's jaw and claimed she tripped over a door frame?

- -More believe U was hatched, eaten, and then regurgitated.

Last time I seen U, U was race baiting the Lounge and had me on ignore.

What's up with all that? U still searching for masculinity U was never endowed with?

[billeau2]

Hard to quantify some things. Johnson was not a trailblazer by choice, rather he wanted to do as he pleased... And this attitude obfiscates some of what he did manage to accomplish as a Black man in the Sport.

Dempsey was the first mega star in boxing. The 1920's being the age of the superstar (Ruth another one).

So socially they both were big... Technique wise Johnson used a jab along with a lead, and was technically able to do many other such things... dempsey wrote the tome on boxing that preceded the modern approach.

[louis54]

Yes agree here with pep

[travestyny]

Their are very clear photos of Dempsey in his corner before the fight clearly showing his hand wraps. Nothing unusual here whatsoever.

Wasn't it you that was going to bat for Fleischer and his book that was mentioned, which stated clearly what Jimmy DeForest did?

Yea, it was:

FYI Fleischer devotes a full chapter to the Johnson Willard bout in “50 years at Ringside” providing many details. There is no great thought that he was not present at the event. There is no great thought that he made things up. Again revisionist BS.

Can't keep playing it both ways to fit your agenda. The man said it while he was STILL Dempsey's trainer. We both remember your tale about bicycle tape when we discussed this before and Nelson ran you out of the thread with proof that you were wrong about it only being black.

It amazes me how you guys will throw anyone under the bus to protect Dempsey from any criticism. Now legendary trainer Jimmy DeForest is a liar. Yet he never had a falling out with Dempsey. I have friendly mail correspondence between the two of them in 1925. It was all hugs and kisses. If you want a peek, ask. Or look it up yourself.

[Willie Pep 229]

Wasn't it you that was going to bat for Fleischer and his book that was mentioned, which stated clearly what Jimmy DeForest did?

Yea, it was:


Can't keep playing it both ways to fit your agenda. The man said it while he was STILL Dempsey's trainer. We both remember your tale about bicycle tape when we discussed this before and Nelson ran you out of the thread with proof that you were wrong about it only being black.

It amazes me how you guys will throw anyone under the bus to protect Dempsey from any criticism. Now legendary trainer Jimmy DeForest is a liar. Yet he never had a falling out with Dempsey. I have friendly mail correspondence between the two of them in 1925. It was all hugs and kisses. If you want a peek, ask. Or look it up yourself.

OK three things T

1. I want to read the letters (not claiming they don't exist; this is not a challenge, they just sounds interesting).

2. I don't see why you keep referring to later interviews (NYT 1964) and later written biographies (Fleischer) as proof that anything was actually said in 1920. That's not proof that the statements are primary to 1920. RE FLEISCHER: You and I always disagree on this, but I view Fleischer as a sycophant and a liar and quotes from him are meaningless/useless in trying to discern the truth on any topic. Just a self aggrandizing old man who should have kept his mouth shut in Lewiston.

3. The third one is complicated. The way this seems to be playing out -- bicycle tape not plaster; Willard's people watching Dempsey's hands being wrapped, photos of what Dempsey hands looked like, Dempsey sitting in the ring in front of everyone for a long period of time with his hands wrapped and no one reacting; the fighters gloves being put on their hands in the ring in front of everyone . . . and on and on -- with all this behavior, bicycle tape or no bicycle tape, why are we suppose to believe that there was somehow cheating going on when it seems everyone involved must have seen his hands/wraps and accepted them? Doesn't the term "loaded gloves" imply breaking the rules? The way you (and De Forest) tell the story they don't seem to have broken any rules. So "bicycle tape or no bicycle tape" why do you call it "loaded gloves"?

I still say the litmus test is to just look at Dempsey's hands in the photo I posted, they do not look like loaded wraps just well wrapped!

Hey I am out for the day so I won't be able to reply until nite. Really would love to read the letter though. Take care and have a great day..