Until I Did My Own Research...

[travestyny]

This is a thread for my haters. To anyone who thinks I've been biased about certain topics here.


As it goes when certain topics come up here and some of us give our input, there are always those who want to accuse others with differing opinions of being biased or hating certain fighters.

I don't really feel I need to do this, but I thought it would be a good opportunity to provide some proof regarding how open-minded I've been about these topics.

I just wrote this in another thread:

At that point, I never trusted anything I was told. I always made an effort to look into what really happened on my own from as many sources as I could. And I found out a whole lot that folks here don't like

And that made me think back to things I blindly accepted. Like "Jack Johnson drew the color line." And "Jack Dempsey didn't fight Harry Wills because the money wasn't there." These seemed to be pretty popular beliefs and I accepted them.

Here is the proof that before I did my own research, I did not have any issue with these misplaced notions.

Here I am stating that Jack Johnson ducked black fighters.....

And yea, Jack Johnson ducked black fighters as well once he became champion. I can't remember which black fighter asked him why he won't fight him, and Johnson said something like, "I've got nothing to gain fighting you." And the guy responded, "Yes you do, an ass kicking" or something to that effect.

Found it. It was actually...Langford!

He did fight Langford (as you mentioned), and Langford said it was the hardest he ever hit the canvas. Gave him a lot of respect for how he handled him in that fight, but was upset that he wouldn't fight him again as a champ.

Until I did MY OWN RESEARCH... and learned that he agreed to fight Langford on 3 separate occasions, agreed to fight Joe Jeannette, and agreed to fight Sam McVey. And obviously it was impossible that he drew the color line after becoming champion because he fought Battling Jim Johnson.

I guess yall just wanted me to see things like this and ignore it:

Here I am, before learning of the second contract for the Wills / Dempsey proposed match, thinking there was only the fiasco that took place in NY, where I am clearly willing to accept that the fight fell through because of financial reasons.

He never fought Wills, though he claimed he would, and he said it was because the money didn't show up. Whether that was the true reason or not, I can't know.

I'm not convinced that he tried very hard to make this Wills fight at all, and I have a hunch that it was all done with his understanding to just string along the public, but that's my personal opinion based on his whole color-line waffling. I'm willing to take it for what it was and just say the fight fell through.

I've also stated previously, I think even on this page of this thread or the previous page, that I'm willing to accept that it didn't come off because of financial reasons, though I remain su****ious as to whether Dempsey really wanted it or not.

My favorite part about this one is the ending.

While I'm willing to accept that he wanted the fight, I still have my su****ions that he didn't really want it as much as some say he did. I've heard everything from Tex Rickard is worried about race riots, to Tex Rickard also wanted it but thought it would make the heavyweight championship worthless, to Dempsey wasn't offered enough money. It could have been all of those. It could have been none. I have no idea. Do I personally think Dempsey was afraid of Wills? I don't. But was the fear of potentially losing to a black fighter the reason that he/they steered clear? Perhaps.

I just wonder if Dempsey really wanted it, could more have been done? Dempsey had been seen as going around Rickard before. Could he have done his best to go around Rickard (and Kearns)?

These are all things that I feel I'm not equipped to answer. I'm not against trying to flush out more info about this if you guys want to continue discussing Wills. Just want to make it clear that Wills was never my focus here because I usually take the stance that if someone says something, I'm in no position to deny what he said. Dempsey said he wanted the fight. I can't prove that he didn't want it. I'll look more into it to see if there is anything interesting that can be added.

Until I did my own research and found this... should I have just ignored it????

I think you will find that I have been very reasonable about these topics. I don't have an agenda beyond the truth. And what I found out is that both of the above notions are false.


So I'd like to say....I aint a hater, I just crush a lot. To anyone still talking that Dempsey Hater or Johnson Stan shlt, pucker up.


When yall prove me wrong about these things, I'll be man enough to admit it. Until you do, keep crying I suppose. And stay a sheep if you want.

[ShoulderRoll]

You've done a lot of good research and brought many facts to light. If the truth offends people then oh well. That's their problem.

[travestyny]

You've done a lot of good research and brought many facts to light. If the truth offends people then oh well. That's their problem.

Thanks, bruv. Really appreciate that!

[Willie Pep 229]

No one said Dempsey didn't fight Wills because the money wasn't there. I have personally said, on several occasions, that the fight would have packed the Polo Gounds just like Firpo did. You are the one who keeps saying it is a Dempsey argument so you can claim to debunk it. But you are debunking a claim no one makes but you.

In 1922 Dempsey didn't fight Wills because Rickard didnt want the fight, period.

And why would suggest that a fighter would ever want to "go around" his own manager and promoter's advice to satisfy some racial philosophy? That's just plain silly. Why do you keep thinking Dempsey owed you or anyone anything?

Dempsey didn't fight Wills in 1922 for three reasons:

1. Rickard did not want the fight.
2. Kearns did not want a New York fight (he wanted Rickard and the NYSAC out of the picture).
3. There was much resistance to staging a 'mixed' HW title fight ( At one time or another that year [1922] New York, Boston, and New Jersey all publically announced they would not accept a mixed race fight.

Why Dempsey pulled out of the 1926 Chicago contract I am certain has something to do with Floyd Fitzsimmons but I can't figure what they (Dempsey and Fitz) were up to, but Fitz, whom Dempsey signed the original Wills contract with in 1925/1926 and then breached, somehow ends up acting as Dempsey's manager for the Tunney fight.

I am convinced to understand what happen with Chicago you have to go through Fitzsimmons.

[travestyny]

No one said Dempsey didn't fight Wills because the money wasn't there. I have personally said, on several occasions, that the fight would have packed the Polo Gounds just like Firpo did. You are the one who keeps saying it is a Dempsey argument so you can claim to debunk it. But you are debunking a claim no one makes but you.

This is clearly false. You are not the only one that posts here, Pep. GhostofForgery has said a billion times that the money wasn't present. Others have said the same. If I've debunked that, then great.

To prove my point, here. And there were more from other posters as well.

Clearly false. As you can see above, they did NOT renege on the money.
By the way, look at all the excuses. Dempsey had to avoid riots....but he was willing to look past riots if they gave him enough money, which they didn't (but they did). LMAOOOOO.

In 1922 Dempsey didn't fight Wills because Rickard didnt want the fight, period.

And why would suggest that a fighter would ever want to "go around" his own manager and promoter's advice to satisfy some racial philosophy? That's just plain silly. Why do you keep thinking Dempsey owed you or anyone anything?

What are you talking about? Dempsey owing me or anyone anything???? This was not meant to be a conversation about what has already been hashed out a million places here, but Dempsey ducked Wills. Plain and simple. He was his #1 contender for something like 5 years and STATED HIMSELF THAT WILLS WAS THE ONLY MAN HE WANTED TO FIGHT SINCE BECOMING CHAMPION. Rickard didn't promote every fight of his. Kearns wasn't his manager during his entire career. Stop with the excuses already.

Dempsey didn't fight Wills in 1922 for three reasons:

1. Rickard did not want the fight.
2. Kearns did not want a New York fight (he wanted Rickard and the NYSAC out of the picture).
3. There was much resistance to staging a 'mixed' HW title fight ( At one time or another that year [1922] New York, Boston, and New Jersey all publically announced they would not accept a mixed race fight.

Why Dempsey pulled out of the 1926 Chicago contract I am certain has something to do with Floyd Fitzsimmons but I can't figure what they (Dempsey and Fitz) were up to, but Fitz, whom Dempsey signed the original Wills contract with in 1925/1926 and then breached, somehow ends up acting as Dempsey's manager for the Tunney fight.

I am convinced to understand what happen with Chicago you have to go through Fitzsimmons.

Don't do your head in. All you have to know is what is laid out as plain as day. There was a legit and lucrative contract to fight and Dempsey of his own accord decided to break it. Stop looking for others to lay the blame on.

[markusmod]

This is clearly false. You are not the only one that posts here, Pep. GhostofForgery has said a billion times that the money wasn't present. Others have said the same. If I've debunked that, then great.

To prove my point, here. And there were more from other posters as well.

Clearly false. As you can see above, they did NOT renege on the money.
By the way, look at all the excuses. Dempsey had to avoid riots....but he was willing to look past riots if they gave him enough money, which they didn't (but they did). LMAOOOOO.





What are you talking about? Dempsey owing me or anyone anything???? This was not meant to be a conversation about what has already been hashed out a million places here, but Dempsey ducked Wills. Plain and simple. He was his #1 contender for something like 5 years and STATED HIMSELF THAT WILLS WAS THE ONLY MAN HE WANTED TO FIGHT SINCE BECOMING CHAMPION. Rickard didn't promote every fight of his. Kearns wasn't his manager during his entire career. Stop with the excuses already.







Don't do your head in. All you have to know is what is laid out as plain as day. There was a legit and lucrative contract to fight and Dempsey of his own accord decided to break it. Stop looking for others to lay the blame on.

Wills may have a point here with the Fitzsimmons theory

[travestyny]

Wills may have a point here with the Fitzsimmons theory

What I know about Fitzsimmons is that after he sold the contract to the Chicago Coliseum Club, he then tried to help Dempsey get out of the contract. Dempsey argued in court that there was no contract, conceivably because Fitzsimmons initially bounced a check to Dempsey, so the claim would be that it made the original contract null, and thus there was nothing to transfer over. The problem is that Dempsey signed a new agreement with the Chicago Coliseum Club afterward. The court didn't buy the notion that there was no contract, stating:

We are unable to conceive upon what theory the defendant (Dempsey) 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.

Once the new agreement was signed, Fitzsimmons had nothing to do with the arrangement. The court also made this clear.

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

If Dempsey wanted this fight like he claimed he wanted it since 1919, it was right there to be had. And for a sum that was worth more than the Tunney fight. The only person responsible for Dempsey breaching the contract was Dempsey. This also happened at the same time that Dempsey was barred from fighting in NY for a refusal to fight...Harry Wills.

[Willie Pep 229]

What I know about Fitzsimmons is that after he sold the contract to the Chicago Coliseum Club, he then tried to help Dempsey get out of the contract. Dempsey argued in court that there was no contract, conceivably because Fitzsimmons initially bounced a check to Dempsey, so the claim would be that it made the original contract null, and thus there was nothing to transfer over. The problem is that Dempsey signed a new agreement with the Chicago Coliseum Club afterward. The court didn't buy the notion that there was no contract, stating:



Once the new agreement was signed, Fitzsimmons had nothing to do with the arrangement. The court also made this clear.



If Dempsey wanted this fight like he claimed he wanted it since 1919, it was right there to be had. And for a sum that was worth more than the Tunney fight. The only person responsible for Dempsey breaching the contract was Dempsey. This also happened at the same time that Dempsey was barred from fighting in NY for a refusal to fight...Harry Wills.

More an more I think Floyd Fitzsimons is somehow connected to Dempsey breaching the 192 6 contract.

First Dempsey signs for a Wills fight in the fall of '25 with Fitzsimmons; that contract gets abrogated and Dempsey resigns with Fitzsimmons and a firm from Chicago; not sure but it now seems Fitzsimmons sells his share of the contract to the the Chicago firm; Dempsey then breaches the 1926 contract with the Chicago firm, in late spring, by public announcement through the newspapers; Dempsey then signs to fight Tunney (with Rickard): Fitzsimmons then amazingly appears as Dempsey's manager for Tunney fight in in '26.

Fitzsimmons was whispering something in Dempsey's ear.

[travestyny]

More an more I think Floyd Fitzsimons is somehow connected to Dempsey breaching the 192 6 contract.

First Dempsey signs for a Wills fight in the fall of '25 with Fitzsimmons; that contract gets abrogated and Dempsey resigns with Fitzsimmons and a firm from Chicago; not sure but it now seems Fitzsimmons sells his share of the contract to the the Chicago firm; Dempsey then breaches the 1926 contract with the Chicago firm, in late spring, by public announcement through the newspapers; Dempsey then signs to fight Tunney (with Rickard): Fitzsimmons then amazingly appears as Dempsey's manager for Tunney fight in in '26.

Fitzsimmons was whispering something in Dempsey's ear.

He didn't break it by public announcement through the newspapers. He was contractually bound to have an insurance company come and check him out and he declined by writing a letter to the promoters saying, "Stop kidding yourselves. You have no contract and I'm too busy training for Tunney." That's when the contract was officially broken.

I think moreso than Fitz whispering something, Rickard was whispering something in his ear. Remember, Rickard said this at the time that the Wills fight was signed:

I'll bet anyone in here a suit of clothes that Dempsey and Wills won't fight in 1926. And I'll bet the same way that Dempsey and Tunney fight this year.

Let's say Fitz and Rickard were a part of it. What's the point? Dempsey still broke a valid contract of his own accord. Remember, he claimed that he was owed $125,000 on March 13th. That was the very day he signed the new contract. It doesn't take a genius to know that if you are owed $125,000, you don't accept $10 to bind you to a contract instead. Fitz is on record saying he and Dempsey were happy with the contract. Then later, you have Dempsey saying that the contract was void because Fitz bounced a check to him months before. A newly signed contract is void because of something that happened previously? IT MAKES NO SENSE, and the court agreed that it made no sense. If there was no contract to transfer over, then what the hell did you sign, Mr. Dempsey????

With all due respect, I wish you would stop treating Dempsey like a mindless puppy dog. It is impossible that he bears no blame for breaking this contract. You can't just keep blaming everyone else: Kearns, Rickard, you even tried to blame Wills, and now Fitz.....when the common denominator is Dempsey. If he wanted this fight, it was there for him to have with a valid contract that was followed perfectly by the promoter.


Finally, Dempsey himself said that after the Tunney fight, he would DEMAND the Wills fight. Well now you want to demand it....but not in 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26? They played these games with Wills for years. I get that you're on Dempsey's payroll, but come on man. Stop with all the excuses. The man didn't want this fight.



I don't see how adding Fitz to the caper absolves Dempsey. At this point you should just admit that you are biased and trying to find a way to shift blame from Dempsey. The court clearly states who broke this contract. It wasn't Kearns, Rickard, Fitz, or Wills. It was Dempsey.

[travestyny]

I thought it was my speculation that Dempsey's claim was there was no contract to transfer over because of Fitz previous bounced check. In fairness, I noticed that in my documents is a statement from Dempsey confirming that this was in fact his defense:

It is true that a $10 bill figured in a supplementary agreement, but this was invalidated when Fitzsimmons contract became void upon the no-payment of funds. If Clements has a contract, I don't know where he got it.

I know where Clements got the contract, Dempsey. You signed it and gave it to him!!!!



As for claiming nothing happened, I'm sure he's well aware when the initial $300,000 was supposed to be delivered as per the contract. Also the contract made clear that he was to keep that sum if for ANY reason the fight didn't come off. They made it easy for him to accept this contract and ride it out, and he stepped out with excuses that the court didn't buy, and no one else should buy in my opinion.



PS. This was NOT to be another Dempsey ducked Wills thread. As far as I'm concerned, this has already been proven ad nauseam.