Joe Louis' five largest purses....

[JohnThomas1]

1. $625, 916 (Conn II)
2. $349, 228 (Schmeling II)
3. $252, 522 (Walcott II)
4. $240, 833 (Max Baer)
5. $199, 500 (Nova)

:good

[mr. magoo]

HE was under paid in my opinion. Dempsey was making comparable or better purses nearly 20 years earlier, and Louis had greater stardom. Louis should have made a bit more money.

[Manassa]

HE was under paid in my opinion. Dempsey was making comparable or better purses nearly 20 years earlier, and Louis had greater stardom. Louis should have made a bit more money.

Why are you always trying to play the race card??

[JohnThomas1]

Why are you always trying to play the race card??

Where's the race card in that post?

:huh

[ChrisPontius]

1. $625, 916 (Conn II)
2. $349, 228 (Schmeling II)
3. $252, 522 (Walcott II)
4. $240, 833 (Max Baer)
5. $199, 500 (Nova)

:good

Corrected for inflation (kept in original order):

1. $7.140.388
2. $4.993.799
3. $2.880.746
4. $3.693.541
5. $2.949.299


Today, fighters earn more despite boxing being much bigger back then.

[JohnThomas1]

Corrected for inflation (kept in original order):

1. $7.140.388
2. $4.993.799
3. $2.880.746
4. $3.693.541
5. $2.949.299


Today, fighters earn more despite boxing being much bigger back then.

Hahaha, pray tell are those figures accurate???


:oops:

[mr. magoo]

Why are you always trying to play the race card??

I wasn't playing the race card, and how often have I done it to warrant the claim " always? "

[sthomas]

$350,000.00 in 1936? for Schmeling # 2 was some serious cash in the middle of the depression. I don't know the inflation rate but many cars in those days were less than $1000.00 and now about $30000.00 or more, 30 x more. Here in California my parents bought their first house for $5000.00 in the mid. 1940's and it would be worth about $350,000.00 now, 70 x more. I think food these days is relatively cheap in comparison though. Just for the hell of it I'll say $350,000.00 x 40 for inflation = $14,000,000.00. That's some serious dough for the young champion Joe Louis.

Dempsey may have made more because he was fighting in the roaring 20's, & thing were going like gangbusters. Once that depression hit, it really but the brakes on things. Then WW II comes along, that didn't help earning power either.

[mcvey]

Yes Ive noticed that about you KKK :lol:

[dmt]

HE was under paid in my opinion. Dempsey was making comparable or better purses nearly 20 years earlier, and Louis had greater stardom. Louis should have made a bit more money.Maybe the great depression had something to do with it, and that Dempsey came along at a time where economy was boosting

[ChrisPontius]

Hahaha, pray tell are those figures accurate???


:oops:
There are several sites that allow you to calculate the value of the dollar between various years. Obviously the results differ a bit per calculator, but no more than ~10%.

[Ted Spoon]

Dempsey's purses were a combination of the boxing boom in the 1920's, his explosive style and Richards ingenious promoting ideas. The Tunney rematch was not topped until Ali/Frazier I - that puts things into perspective.

Joe Louis did very well, financially, considering the desperate era he shared.

The Baer purse was mighty big early on because Max was fresh off losing the title and still considered a big threat. This is what probably sprung Louis into action in what he described as his best ever night in the ring.

[Sonny's jab]

HE was under paid in my opinion. Dempsey was making comparable or better purses nearly 20 years earlier, and Louis had greater stardom. Louis should have made a bit more money.

Quite simply, Joe Louis did NOT "have greater stardom" than Jack Dempsey.


Corrected for inflation (kept in original order):
$7.140.3882.
$4.993.7993.
$2.880.7464.
$3.693.5415.
$2.949.299
Today, fighters earn more despite boxing being much bigger back then.

Ah, yes, but without the technology of satellite TV and the PPV system they wouldn't make a fraction of what they make.

[mr. magoo]

=Sonny's jab]Quite simply, Joe Louis did NOT "have greater stardom" than Jack Dempsey.



I think there is enough evidence to prove that he did Sonny.

Dempsey never engaged in a fight where he had virtually most of the world behind him the way that Joe Louis had when he fought Max Schmeling. The political tension of America vs Germany helped both Max and Joe's popularity, but it was a match of mutch greater magnitude than any of Dempsey's biggest bouts. What's more, Joe Louis was a star of the people, and I mean ALL the people. Whites, Blacks, Jews, men, women, rich , poor etc. all rallied to him and viewed him as a hero. Dempsey was only a hero to some but not everyone.

[ChrisPontius]

Ah, yes, but without the technology of satellite TV and the PPV system they wouldn't make a fraction of what they make.

Yes indeed.


Fighters earning less makes for better fights and more risks being taken.

[Dempsey1238]

I think with the new guard of Dempsey dieing out or all ready dead, its pretty easy to forget that Jack Dempsey was a major star, he is consider the FIRST SUPERSTAR of the ring, and that includes the likes of Sullivan and Johnson. No one was able to draw in a crowd like Dempsey did.
Non of Joe Louis's title fights, even the Schemling rematch drew in the crowd like Firpo, Carp and Tunney. Even a non title fight like Jack Sharkey made a million at the gate.

I think only the Baer fight made a million about. Sure if we compare Louis to say Corbett or even Sullivan in regards to purses, than ok, But when a Dempsey fight was stage, it was a whole other level in regards to money. Dempsey's star at the TIME, was bigger than Louis. Only in recent times, did Louis surpase Dempsey in stardom.

[Dempsey1238]

I think there is enough evidence to prove that he did Sonny.

Dempsey never engaged in a fight where he had virtually most of the world behind him the way that Joe Louis had when he fought Max Schmeling. The political tension of America vs Germany helped both Max and Joe's popularity, but it was a match of mutch greater magnitude than any of Dempsey's biggest bouts. What's more, Joe Louis was a star of the people, and I mean ALL the people. Whites, Blacks, Jews, men, women, rich , poor etc. all rallied to him and viewed him as a hero. Dempsey was only a hero to some but not everyone.

Perhaps in this regard, BUT EVEN THAN, the Dempsey Tunney fights drew in more people than Louis Schmeling, sure they may watch the fight in a movie house, but the major money is lived at the fight. They didnt watch it, they heard it on the radio.

The lived in crowd is the thing that parts the million $ gates from Joe Louis and Dempsey. And no the rematch with Schmeling did not draw in a million.

[mr. magoo]

Perhaps in this regard, BUT EVEN THAN, the Dempsey Tunney fights drew in more people than Louis Schmeling, sure they may watch the fight in a movie house, but the major money is lived at the fight. They didnt watch it, they heard it on the radio.

The lived in crowd is the thing that parts the million $ gates from Joe Louis and Dempsey. And no the rematch with Schmeling did not draw in a million.

Dollar amounts is only half the story. The US economy in 1938 was in no where near the shape that it was in the 1920's. America was in horrible economic shape during the 30's. Besides, what does money have to do with popularity? Who cares if millions of poor Americans were listening to the fights on the radio rather than showing up in fancy white hats and pretty dressess at an outdoor arena??? This is about stardom, not about spending money at an over priced event.

[Dempsey1238]

Still, Louis was unable to draw the crowds that Dempsey command. I give Dempsey booste in "Stardom" power in this regards.

All of Dempsey title's fights OUTSIDE of Gibbions and Brennen, were Million $ gates. Louis could not have drew in a crowd like Dempsey did. There is a reason Dempsey was paid more, He was able to draw in larger crowds, that not even Babe Ruth could do. That has to count for something.

[TBooze]

1. $625, 916 (Conn II)
2. $349, 228 (Schmeling II)
3. $252, 522 (Walcott II)
4. $240, 833 (Max Baer)
5. $199, 500 (Nova)

:good

-30% managers cut; -10% trainers cut; -10% Braddocks cut; -training expenses; -Tax... oh wait, he tended not to pay that; but looking at his over heads you can to a point understand why!;)