Originally Posted by The Mongoose
Nah, Marciano got in the game late and his already banged up body was lucky to hold up as long as it did.
Dempsey was fighting professionally since he was 19.
I don't think Rocky would have lost to Tunney twice though. If he had lost his drive as much as Dempsey did during his celebrity years, he would have just hung them up. Marciano strikes me as an "all or nothing" kind of guy who wouldn't have fought on if he wasn't completely commited.
Dempsey was fighting in saloons from the age of 14...By the time he was 32 he was fighting 18 years...A long time for anyone...you say that Rocky wouldn't have lost to Gene Tunney twice...Did you not know that Dempsey
did not FIGHT FOR THREE YEARS, when he foolishly without a warm-up bout ,without his mentor Jack Kearns, fougfht Tunney in 1926 . ?
THREE years in Hollywood screwing the slent screen sirens and without a tune-up made JacK Dempsey , Jack Dempsey in name only...Tell me M what HW in history could not fight for three years, and without ONE tune-up fight,at the worn age of 32 beat the razor-sharp underated Gene Tunney ?
Can you picture Rocky Marciano retire from boxing for three years and nary a warm-up bout beating a Gene Tunney ?
I have posted this before and wish not to reheat any arguements but when Marciano [who I loved and saw ringside] was champion, their was a poll of
boxing writers and ex fighters who saw Dempsey before Tunney, and Marciano,then in his prime. The question was "who would have won between Jack Dempsey and Rocky Marciano, in their primes" ?
Dempsey was the pick by almost unanimous choice to beat Marciano, because of Dempsey's great speed on the attack, two handed punching
and equal toughness...And I concur with the vast majority...If Jack Dempsey in his prime would lose, it would be to a great boxer who could avoid trench warfare....