Originally Posted by janitor
Overlooking for one second the fact that we don't even have half of Dempsey’s pre title run.
The Fulton win is outstanding. Perhaps the most complete domination of a top contender in the history of the sport.
Miske, Brennan, Morris and Levinsky are all good wins. These fighters were all key players in the heavyweight division at the time, and were all pretty much at their hiatus during Dempsey pre title run. These were essentially the fighters who would have probably held a top 10 ranking, had such rankings been compiled at the time. You would also have to factor in that with the exception of Miske, they were utterly annihilated.
Gunboat Smith, Porky Flynn and Arthur Pelkey were name fighters who were on the slide by then.
In all, I don't think that many heavyweight champions amassed a better resume en route to the title.
His point stands though, doesnt it?
Undoubtedly Dempsey is one of the all time greats, but that pre title run maybe has the question marks over it, with the timing of the losses. Fulton is obviously great Win. And willard is a vastly underated win today. But outside of that, how good were the other wins? Obviously if he beat the name fighters he beat, in their prime then it was a sensational run. But the question is did he? I have not yet seen anyone dispel the raw boxrec data he has supplied with any of the fighters. Burts remarks ring true and there is no doubt he was a great,. Maybe the greatest. But how great was his actual run?
I flip on Dempsey, more than any other ATG, so i am interested see some serious counter arguments defending Seamus posts, but i have yet to see anyone really take up what i think is a pretty fairminded challenge despite an obvious agenda.