Originally Posted by PowerPuncher
Speculative in favour of Dempsey and the evidence just doesn't suggest that. Prime Miske took Dempsey to a draw, Meehan beat/drew him without Dempsey catching up to him, Brennan took him into the late rounds. None of these are as good as Tunney
Dempsey also dominated Tommy Gibbons.
He dominated Brennan in their first meeting from all accounts.
He KO'd Fred Fulton (a reknowned left jabber with massive reach) within a few seconds.
Actually he did have Meehan dumped on the canvas and in all sorts of trouble in their 1918 match, but was outpointed in the other 3 rounds.
Jack Dempsey may have shaded Miske, I don't know.
Tunney was in his absolute prime in 1926-'27. Dempsey was considerably past his. And still Dempsey had Tunney on the deck (the ONLY man to ever do so). That needs to be acknowledged.
What 3? Dempsey doesn't have a jab, he doesn't use it to control a fight, close distance or set up other punchers. He's the definition of not having a jab, even if he could perhaps throw 1 once in a blue moon, itís irrelevant to how it would influence a fight
Well, I'm not as concerned about it as you are. But he threw more jabs than you give him credit for. Dempsey boxed just fine.
Dempsey too throughout his career was picked off from range and not just by Tunney but by lower tier types like Brennan and even Firpo smashed him on the way in. It seems Miske earned his draw with the same tactics
All aggressive fighters get hit on the way in sometimes. Holyfield got hit plenty. Foreman got hit. Frazier, as you mentioned. Tyson - in spite of the mythical version of his defensive abilities, could be picked off at range.
I make no alibis for Dempsey's flaws - all fighters have flaws/
Ali was open to a quick left hook.
A guy with a fast accurate left hook, long arms and fast feet .... eg. Dempsey ... would be a serious challenge for the immature Clay of Feb.'64.
In my opinion.