Since I can see the conversation here has gone back to Dempsey's wraps, I think I should be able to comment without anyone accusing me of hi******* the thread.
I'd like to remind everyone to think logically and without emotion here. If you do, it's not hard to realize that what Jimmy Deforest says happened here is indeed what happened. There is simply too much evidence of it to be ignored.
And let's not try to change the narrative to it being done to protect Dempsey's hands. It was done to give him an advantage. Again, DeForest mentioned that this was NOT illegal, which is why he had no problem mentioning it IN DEFENSE of Dempsey against the other debunked theories of plaster or an iron spike.
Some of you seem to question whether such a tape could have existed. Think about it. Why would there be an article 10 years before this fight stating that such a tape existed and was in use by boxers in this same exact manner to give an advantage. And I suppose it's just coincidence that the article was written up about the same exact fighter that Deforest mentioned he wrapped Dempsey's hands similar to. It's no coincidence, people. It would make no sense to argue that the article written in 1910 was complete bullshlt just made up about a tape that didn't exist and a method of wrapping a boxer's hands to give an advantage that also never existed.
Was Deforest lying about this method for 10 years before the Willard Dempsey fight? What sense would that make? It's clear the tape and the method in which it was used existed. The article, and Deforest's quotation, make it clear why it was used. To do "unusual punishment." It's not even the only source for this.
Mark Kram (author of Ghosts of Manila):
From the article previously posted here, and posts like that above, we know the tape existed, and we also know why it was used.
Again, Deforest said this was done less than a year after the fight took place, and IN DEFENSE OF DEMPSEY NOT USING PLASTER OR ALUMINUM on his wraps.
We know Dempsey was familiar with bicycle tape. He claimed he also used it to make jump rope handles in his book. Not only that, but we also know that he was said to often use it on his wraps, to the degree that it was prohibited for the Tunney bout.
Again, was there a "bicycle tape conspiracy" against Dempsey made by all of these guys? NO!
I'm labeled as a Dempsey hater for putting 1 and 1 together and making 2, but if that's true, then you'd have to say Jimmy Deforest (who was buddy buddy with Demp throughout his career), Arthur Daley, Paul Beston, Carlos Acevedo, Grantland Rice, Arne K. Lang, Randy Warren Roberts, and Charles Samuel are also all Dempsey haters for buying into this as making perfect sense or providing evidence leading to this conclusion.
It's the logical explanation. Refutations refer to Willard looking at Dempsey's wraps, which misses the entire point of the "trick" that was used. It's not something you notice with your eyes, people. That's the entire point. Again, not illegal, but certainly referred to as a trick, NOT to secure a fighters hands, but to give an advantage.
What we know is that Willard took a stance against wraps like this BEFORE the fight taking place. Still, one guy went into the fight with this advantage, and the other didn't. You can blame Willard for that, and that can be seen as a fair assessment since he could have gotten away with it too. It doesn't change that Dempsey clearly had an advantage that Willard not only rejected, but objected to. Is that why Dempsey won, I personally don't think so. Did it help? Certainly it must have. We know that the affects of wraps could be felt through gloves from what's mentioned above, and also directly from Willard who said as much before the fight, which was backed up by Gunboat Smith who admit to ripping up Willard's ear with a type of tape he wore in their fight. Houdini claimed I need to discuss the mechanics of how this was done, but Willard himself stated BEFORE the fight that wraps could be felt (like iron) through the gloves, so I didn't feel compelled to even entertain this question, but if it's necessary, we know that horsehair gloves are not like gloves with foam padding. Horsehair has no memory, meaning, once the hair is moved in the glove, it doesn't return to it's previous place. If during the match the horsehair is moved as punches are landed where the knuckle is, the hair moves away from the knuckle area and doesn't return. Especially if these gloves were worn before, the hair may already be away from the knuckle. We know about this already through the Mayweather/Maidana fight and one of Jean Pascal's fights where this issue came up.
It's simple logic that the tape existed, the method existed, Dempsey was linked to using the tape by multiple sources, including his trainer who was the very man who wrapped his hands and admit, indignantly, that he used the method when angered by reports of using other methods. It's quite simple logic.
And for God's sake I hope this is the last time I have to write about this, but I suppose those of you who are too emotionally invested will still dispute it calling the very hall of fame trainer who directly wrapped Dempsey's hands a liar based on absolutely nothing but emotion. To that I say, carry on!
I'd like to remind everyone to think logically and without emotion here. If you do, it's not hard to realize that what Jimmy Deforest says happened here is indeed what happened. There is simply too much evidence of it to be ignored.
And let's not try to change the narrative to it being done to protect Dempsey's hands. It was done to give him an advantage. Again, DeForest mentioned that this was NOT illegal, which is why he had no problem mentioning it IN DEFENSE of Dempsey against the other debunked theories of plaster or an iron spike.
Some of you seem to question whether such a tape could have existed. Think about it. Why would there be an article 10 years before this fight stating that such a tape existed and was in use by boxers in this same exact manner to give an advantage. And I suppose it's just coincidence that the article was written up about the same exact fighter that Deforest mentioned he wrapped Dempsey's hands similar to. It's no coincidence, people. It would make no sense to argue that the article written in 1910 was complete bullshlt just made up about a tape that didn't exist and a method of wrapping a boxer's hands to give an advantage that also never existed.
Was Deforest lying about this method for 10 years before the Willard Dempsey fight? What sense would that make? It's clear the tape and the method in which it was used existed. The article, and Deforest's quotation, make it clear why it was used. To do "unusual punishment." It's not even the only source for this.
Mark Kram (author of Ghosts of Manila):
The trade evolved first toward shoddiness, when, among other things, trainers would tape hands with lethal bicycle tape and would use razor blades to relieve swelling.
Again, Deforest said this was done less than a year after the fight took place, and IN DEFENSE OF DEMPSEY NOT USING PLASTER OR ALUMINUM on his wraps.
We know Dempsey was familiar with bicycle tape. He claimed he also used it to make jump rope handles in his book. Not only that, but we also know that he was said to often use it on his wraps, to the degree that it was prohibited for the Tunney bout.
A provocative article by widely syndicated sportswriter Grantland Rice was more fodder for the notion that Tunney was a live underdog. Rice noted that Dempsey had never had his hands wrapped by anyone but Kearns since graduating from the tank towns. It was Doc's custom to wrap Dempsey's hands with several yards of hard black bicycle tape over a thick cushion of gauze and cotton. For this bout, the fighters were required to enter the ring bare-fisted and their hands would be dressed with inspectors looking on. Bicycle tape was prohibited, forcing Dempsey to fight with far less bandaging than was his custom.
I'm labeled as a Dempsey hater for putting 1 and 1 together and making 2, but if that's true, then you'd have to say Jimmy Deforest (who was buddy buddy with Demp throughout his career), Arthur Daley, Paul Beston, Carlos Acevedo, Grantland Rice, Arne K. Lang, Randy Warren Roberts, and Charles Samuel are also all Dempsey haters for buying into this as making perfect sense or providing evidence leading to this conclusion.
It's the logical explanation. Refutations refer to Willard looking at Dempsey's wraps, which misses the entire point of the "trick" that was used. It's not something you notice with your eyes, people. That's the entire point. Again, not illegal, but certainly referred to as a trick, NOT to secure a fighters hands, but to give an advantage.
What we know is that Willard took a stance against wraps like this BEFORE the fight taking place. Still, one guy went into the fight with this advantage, and the other didn't. You can blame Willard for that, and that can be seen as a fair assessment since he could have gotten away with it too. It doesn't change that Dempsey clearly had an advantage that Willard not only rejected, but objected to. Is that why Dempsey won, I personally don't think so. Did it help? Certainly it must have. We know that the affects of wraps could be felt through gloves from what's mentioned above, and also directly from Willard who said as much before the fight, which was backed up by Gunboat Smith who admit to ripping up Willard's ear with a type of tape he wore in their fight. Houdini claimed I need to discuss the mechanics of how this was done, but Willard himself stated BEFORE the fight that wraps could be felt (like iron) through the gloves, so I didn't feel compelled to even entertain this question, but if it's necessary, we know that horsehair gloves are not like gloves with foam padding. Horsehair has no memory, meaning, once the hair is moved in the glove, it doesn't return to it's previous place. If during the match the horsehair is moved as punches are landed where the knuckle is, the hair moves away from the knuckle area and doesn't return. Especially if these gloves were worn before, the hair may already be away from the knuckle. We know about this already through the Mayweather/Maidana fight and one of Jean Pascal's fights where this issue came up.
It's simple logic that the tape existed, the method existed, Dempsey was linked to using the tape by multiple sources, including his trainer who was the very man who wrapped his hands and admit, indignantly, that he used the method when angered by reports of using other methods. It's quite simple logic.
And for God's sake I hope this is the last time I have to write about this, but I suppose those of you who are too emotionally invested will still dispute it calling the very hall of fame trainer who directly wrapped Dempsey's hands a liar based on absolutely nothing but emotion. To that I say, carry on!
Funny story, my dad was ***ish, my mother Gentile, and dad would take me to visit grandma out in Brooklyn. She would look at me and say in broken Yiddish/English to my dad "Is he going to be a doctor, or a lawyer?" My dad would give me the dirtiest look...
Comment