Originally Posted by burt bienstock
SO, why did it take an absolutely prime Joe Louis THIRTEEN rounds to ko a big lumbering punching bag Abe Simon in 1941...Louis hit Simon with everthing he had for 13 rounds til the referee stopped the bout with Abe Simon protesting ???
No big punching bag who ever lived survives 13 rounds with a prime hellacious puncher like Dempsey....
Give Dempsey his due...Our ANCESTORS who saw the man and raved about
his onslaughts were just as smart as you or me PP...Learn from the past...
There is enough footage of Dempsey for people to make their own comparisons of him to others without relying so heavily on the word of those who were around during both his and Louis's time.
In instances regarding people such as Harry Greb or Maxie Rosenbloom, we have no choice but to go by what others have said due to a severe lack of film. This is obviously not the case with Dempsey and we can make our own decisions regarding Dempsey and others without relying on the word of old timers who idolized him.
I like Dempsey as much as the next guy, but there is absolutely no denying that people have a tendency to rate their personal favorite great fighter who's fighting at the time above anyone who comes after them. It happens all of the time. People who were around during Louis's era claimed (and those who are still living still claim) that Louis was the best ever by far. The same is said for Marciano and Ali's eras aswell. When you have fighters who are larger than life figures, the people at the time will refuse to admit or believe that someone who came after the said fighter is better.
Watching the films of Dempsey and Louis tells me that Louis was the better fighter. Looking at the oponents and what happened with them tells me Louis is the better fighter and beat better oponents. I see noone on Dempsey's record that I don't think Louis would not have beaten, and likely beaten in more impressive fashion. The same can't be said about Dempsey with Louis's record in my opinion.