Boxing  

Forum Home Boxing Forum European British Classic Aussie MMA Training
Go Back   Boxing News 24 Forum > Boxing > Classic Boxing Forum


Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 02-27-2009, 09:15 AM   #61
PowerPuncher
P4P King
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 20,610
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Jacks Dempsey ranking - arguments

Quote:
Originally Posted by McGrain View Post
Conn would get destroyed. He was the perfect man to tackle Louis, with that beautiful plan, but you can't control the range against Dempsey with tactics like those. Early KO. Spinks would go the same way he went against Mike.
And he KO's that Tunney in under 3, oh no wait
PowerPuncher is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old 02-27-2009, 09:16 AM   #62
McGrain
Diamond Dog
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 37,093
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Jacks Dempsey ranking - arguments

Quote:
Originally Posted by PowerPuncher View Post
And he KO's that Tunney in under 3, oh no wait

Tunney, Spinks and Conn are all very different fighters. That's sort of the point.

And anyway or no, I wouldn't pick that inactive version of Dempsey that lost to Tunney over a shitload of fighters I would pick him to beat if you scoooped the one from the Willard fight.
McGrain is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 02-27-2009, 09:19 AM   #63
PowerPuncher
P4P King
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 20,610
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Jacks Dempsey ranking - arguments

Quote:
Originally Posted by McGrain View Post
Tunney, Spinks and Conn are all very different fighters. That's sort of the point.

And anyway or no, I wouldn't pick that inactive version of Dempsey that lost to Tunney over a shitload of fighters I would pick him to beat if you scoooped the one from the Willard fight.
I think its likely Spinks and Conn were better than anyone Dempsey beat, they aren't easy fights and Spinks can bang, especially at cruser, Dempsey probably beats both none the less. Charles I think could beat Dempsey
PowerPuncher is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 02-27-2009, 09:20 AM   #64
Bummy Davis
Champion
East Side Guru
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: New York
Posts: 9,302
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Jacks Dempsey ranking - arguments

I light of what I have read here I have to say the negatives against Jack where that he was not active enough and he did not fight Wills. I think those two issues where not Jack's fault in fact he was as active as any heavyweights before him. I still pick Jack to beat any heavyweight before him and any heavyweight leading to Joe Louis ( and he still had a chance to beat Louis) . I think the fact was such a big star outside the ring and the 1st million dollar gate fighter had an impact on his career. ( he was a star) I do not see a prime Dempsey having trouble with Sharkey,Schmeling,Carnera,Braddock,Baer.

The fighters that would give him trouble would be Walcott,Charles but Dempsey had Power and speed and a great left hook and right hand. A prime Dempsey would have had trouble with Tunney( best legs until Walcott and Ali and some pop) but would have beaten him IMO. Dempsey's inactive legs started moving slow by then but he still had great 2 fisted power (showed it vs Tunney(long count) and Sharkey....In light of all that I will Rate Dempsey at # 4 behind Louis,Marciano,Ali....I give those 3 the edge over him but I would nor undermine Dempsey to beat anyone of them on a given night....He had power and speed and pressure(a problem for Louis) he could match Marciano with early power and edge him with speed but lose in the stamina dept.....He had a great left hook and speed vs Ali and had a great chance but Ali had great feet and even edged Tunney here. My top 4

Louis...fought the best dominated the longest (never lost in his prime) 25 defences best combo/power puncher

Marciano...Short career but a snapshot of 2fisted power,stamina,Heart,Determination..fought the best of his era and got out with 3-4 fights left...retired 49-0 43 Ko's and beat the (best who beat the best of his day)

Ali fought the best opponents overall (questions about Liston's 2 fights) but the 1st was on the level IMO...Foreman " best win" exposed big G.....Wars with Frazier but had his trouble with the smaller, less slow men with stamina. and the pressure fighter, Norton..IF Cooper,and Frazier could hurt him Dempsey could have a chance...Ali had one of the best hand speeds(Patterson and Tunney close) and the best feet at Heavy(Tunney close)....

I would not argue with top 3 being in any position but think Dempsey falls slightly short because of inactivity and the fact that he did not fight Wills. It could have been politics but I judge Holmes for not fighting Page,Dokes,Weaver,Coetzee,Tate,Thomas and I take it off his standing...Holmes would have had a decent chance of beating all these men because he was better conditioned than most of then and Dempsey IMO would have beaten Wills ( he was slow and easy to hit) but they did not fight the best of there era and should have to pay for it (POLITICS OR NOT)

Last edited by Bummy Davis; 02-27-2009 at 09:38 AM.
Bummy Davis is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 02-27-2009, 09:28 AM   #65
McGrain
Diamond Dog
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 37,093
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Jacks Dempsey ranking - arguments

Quote:
Originally Posted by PowerPuncher View Post
I think its likely Spinks and Conn were better than anyone Dempsey beat, they aren't easy fights and Spinks can bang, especially at cruser, Dempsey probably beats both none the less. Charles I think could beat Dempsey

Conn was masterful at controlling range and timing, but you don't control range with timing and footwork against a fighter who is so good at closing the distance, has footwork that is every bit as good going forwards as Conn is going in the opposite direction, and hits that hard and that fast. Dempsey is all wrong for Conn, it is a horrific match up and one of those weird ATG encounters where I don't think Conn has any sort of chance at all and would lose 10/10.

Spinks is a little different, and is in the same bracket at around this weight as the best men Dempsey beat, there we are in partial agreement, but his movement isn't going to save him, and he probably has the slower hands - but even if he doesn't, however hard he can hit he can't hit as hard as concisely as Dempsey. A better fight than Conn, but not one I would ever, ever favour Micheal in.

I pick Dempsey cleanly over Charles, upright and sound with wonderful hands, he doesn't have the inside smarts to deal with Dempsey's offence or the outside speed to keep him at range.

Walcott has a much better chance.
McGrain is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 02-27-2009, 10:13 AM   #66
PowerPuncher
P4P King
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 20,610
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Jacks Dempsey ranking - arguments

Quote:
Originally Posted by McGrain View Post
Conn was masterful at controlling range and timing, but you don't control range with timing and footwork against a fighter who is so good at closing the distance, has footwork that is every bit as good going forwards as Conn is going in the opposite direction, and hits that hard and that fast. Dempsey is all wrong for Conn, it is a horrific match up and one of those weird ATG encounters where I don't think Conn has any sort of chance at all and would lose 10/10.

Spinks is a little different, and is in the same bracket at around this weight as the best men Dempsey beat, there we are in partial agreement, but his movement isn't going to save him, and he probably has the slower hands - but even if he doesn't, however hard he can hit he can't hit as hard as concisely as Dempsey. A better fight than Conn, but not one I would ever, ever favour Micheal in.

I pick Dempsey cleanly over Charles, upright and sound with wonderful hands, he doesn't have the inside smarts to deal with Dempsey's offence or the outside speed to keep him at range.

Walcott has a much better chance.
Like I said I don't fancy Spinks or Conn either, but Conn would simply box and move before probably getting caught up with. Spinks-Dempsey would be like a Hearns-Hagleresque war imo, Dempsey will get caught with big counters and hurt, maybe dropped but hes too strong, fast relentless and ofcourse Tysonesque for Spinks

Now Charles is a tougher kettle of fish. Firstly Charles is better technically and punches much more compact than Dempsey. I just see Charles punches getting their first in exchanges. He's also better using range and moving. He was also an excellent counter puncher and could pick Dempsey off. I see Charles taking Dempsey for these reasons. In a series though Charles would also possibly be ko'd.

Charles also fought at a much higher level than Dempsey and wasn't far off beating Marciano past his prime.

I'd pick Dempsey to KO Walcott though
PowerPuncher is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 02-27-2009, 10:21 AM   #67
McGrain
Diamond Dog
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 37,093
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Jacks Dempsey ranking - arguments

Quote:
Originally Posted by PowerPuncher View Post
Now Charles is a tougher kettle of fish. Firstly Charles is better technically and punches much more compact than Dempsey. I just see Charles punches getting their first in exchanges. He's also better using range and moving. He was also an excellent counter puncher and could pick Dempsey off. I see Charles taking Dempsey for these reasons. In a series though Charles would also possibly be ko'd.
Firstly, I flat out disagree with you that Charles is the more compact puncher. Charles is amongst the more compact punchers ever at around that weight, but Dempsey throws crushing punches over shorter distance using less span to get them home with more torque. That's what my eyes tell me, I am happy with that.

Charles was a good counter-puncher, yeah, but he struggled with Bivins on the inside, and Demspey was far, far more dynamic and about as difficult in that area (though Bivins may have been more difficult, not much in it though).

In addition, Dempsey has better handspeed. That makes counter-punching without genius really difficult. Does Charles have that genius? I think possibly, dressed up in technical excellence and sometimes going unnoticed, but not definitely - and he doesn't hit hard enough to take total advantage of it if he did, IMO.

Dempsey by stoppage is my pick.
McGrain is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 02-27-2009, 11:04 AM   #68
PowerPuncher
P4P King
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 20,610
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Jacks Dempsey ranking - arguments

Quote:
Originally Posted by McGrain View Post
Firstly, I flat out disagree with you that Charles is the more compact puncher. Charles is amongst the more compact punchers ever at around that weight, but Dempsey throws crushing punches over shorter distance using less span to get them home with more torque. That's what my eyes tell me, I am happy with that.

Charles was a good counter-puncher, yeah, but he struggled with Bivins on the inside, and Demspey was far, far more dynamic and about as difficult in that area (though Bivins may have been more difficult, not much in it though).

In addition, Dempsey has better handspeed. That makes counter-punching without genius really difficult. Does Charles have that genius? I think possibly, dressed up in technical excellence and sometimes going unnoticed, but not definitely - and he doesn't hit hard enough to take total advantage of it if he did, IMO.

Dempsey by stoppage is my pick.
I also like Charles defense and timing against Dempsey's low guard and wrecklessness. In essense Charles will find it easier to hit Dempsey than vice-versa. I'm not sure Dempsey is faster prime for prime and I think although he could punch compact he liked to punch wide and swing for the rafters sometimes and Charles shots would be straighter and more down the pipe.

I also think Charles power is getting downplayed, he may well have been more cautious after killing Baroudi. He had 51kos and stopped Moore, Marshall and Ray amongst many many top class fighters. He also put his combinations together very very nicely

I know I won't change your opinion, and I'm not 100% on Charles winning, fascinating match up though
PowerPuncher is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 02-27-2009, 11:09 AM   #69
Bokaj
Champion
East Side Guru
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 7,183
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Jacks Dempsey ranking - arguments

Quote:
Originally Posted by Holmes' Jab View Post
A few places outside of the top 10, just behind Foreman (who also doesn't make my 10).
Yeah, that sounds abut right.

And one more thing: If I see anymore talk of Dempsey not really ducking Wills and Greb, that it was Kearn's and/or Richard's fault, I'm gonna retch.

He ultimately has to take responsibility for who he faced and who he didn't. D'Amato, for example, wanted Patterson to duck Liston for ever, but Patterson couldn't live with that so he gave Liston a shot, even though he probably felt he had no chance. Dempsey could have made the fights happen, but he didn't. End of story.

Anyway, why they didn't happen isn't at all as important for his legacy as the simple fact that they just didn't happen, period. We can't know for sure how Dempsey would have done against his two most formidable competitors. Without that knowledge it's impossible to have him in a top 5 IMO, and I personally don't even have him in my top 10.
Bokaj is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 02-27-2009, 11:10 AM   #70
McGrain
Diamond Dog
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 37,093
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Jacks Dempsey ranking - arguments

Quote:
Originally Posted by PowerPuncher View Post
I also like Charles defense and timing against Dempsey's low guard and wrecklessness. In essense Charles will find it easier to hit Dempsey than vice-versa. I'm not sure Dempsey is faster prime for prime and I think although he could punch compact he liked to punch wide and swing for the rafters sometimes and Charles shots would be straighter and more down the pipe.

I also think Charles power is getting downplayed, he may well have been more cautious after killing Baroudi. He had 51kos and stopped Moore, Marshall and Ray amongst many many top class fighters. He also put his combinations together very very nicely

I know I won't change your opinion, and I'm not 100% on Charles winning, fascinating match up though
I absolutey disagree that Dempsey will be easier to hit. IMO his head movement is the best in the history of the division. It is far, far more arbitrary than Tyson's or Frazier's. He's hard to land on coming in, harder than arguably any swarmer i've ever seen at any weight. Arguable, but not unreasonable IMO.

We agree that Charles may get underated for power, and that this is a fascinating match up, though.
McGrain is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 02-27-2009, 12:07 PM   #71
jaffay
New Orleans Hornets
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Warsaw, Poland
Posts: 1,990
vCash: 215
Default Re: Jacks Dempsey ranking - arguments

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bokaj View Post
Yeah, that sounds abut right.

And one more thing: If I see anymore talk of Dempsey not really ducking Wills and Greb, that it was Kearn's and/or Richard's fault, I'm gonna retch.

He ultimately has to take responsibility for who he faced and who he didn't. D'Amato, for example, wanted Patterson to duck Liston for ever, but Patterson couldn't live with that so he gave Liston a shot, even though he probably felt he had no chance. Dempsey could have made the fights happen, but he didn't. End of story.

Anyway, why they didn't happen isn't at all as important for his legacy as the simple fact that they just didn't happen, period. We can't know for sure how Dempsey would have done against his two most formidable competitors. Without that knowledge it's impossible to have him in a top 5 IMO, and I personally don't even have him in my top 10.
You think that Dempsey could do that fight (Bivins) all by himself, without his promotors, without the help of authorities? In racism era? Read the conditions on which that fight was to be made. $250000 bond and ticket limit price $15!
jaffay is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 02-27-2009, 12:10 PM   #72
turpinr
Belt holder
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: lancashire
Posts: 4,849
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Jacks Dempsey ranking - arguments

in saying that i'm not a fan of dempsey ,i've got to disagree that he ducked willis.i dont think marciano ducked nino valdes either.i just dont think it wasn't in their make-up
.pity their managers' didn't have the same integrity
turpinr is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 02-27-2009, 12:22 PM   #73
jaffay
New Orleans Hornets
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Warsaw, Poland
Posts: 1,990
vCash: 215
Default Re: Jacks Dempsey ranking - arguments

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bokaj View Post
Yeah, that sounds abut right.

And one more thing: If I see anymore talk of Dempsey not really ducking Wills and Greb, that it was Kearn's and/or Richard's fault, I'm gonna retch.

He ultimately has to take responsibility for who he faced and who he didn't. D'Amato, for example, wanted Patterson to duck Liston for ever, but Patterson couldn't live with that so he gave Liston a shot, even though he probably felt he had no chance. Dempsey could have made the fights happen, but he didn't. End of story.

Anyway, why they didn't happen isn't at all as important for his legacy as the simple fact that they just didn't happen, period. We can't know for sure how Dempsey would have done against his two most formidable competitors. Without that knowledge it's impossible to have him in a top 5 IMO, and I personally don't even have him in my top 10.
Ali ducked Monzon
jaffay is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 02-27-2009, 01:05 PM   #74
ChrisPontius
March 8th, 1971
East Side Guru
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Holland
Posts: 9,643
vCash: 238
Default Re: Jacks Dempsey ranking - arguments

Quote:
Originally Posted by turpinr View Post
it was when dempsey said louis joe louis was glass chinned that my dad nearly smashed our tv to bits.
Thanks for sharing that!
ChrisPontius is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 02-27-2009, 01:14 PM   #75
OLD FOGEY
Belt holder
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 3,835
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Jacks Dempsey ranking - arguments

Quote:
Originally Posted by hhascup View Post
Back in 1950, the AP asked sports experts in the United States to select the Greatest Athletes in each sport. Here's how they rated the Fighters.

Greatest Fighter - 1st Place Votes:
1. Jack Dempsey (Heavyweight) 251
2. Joe Louis (Heavyweight) 104
3. Henry Armstrong (126-147 Lbs.) 16
4. Gene Tunney (Heavyweight) 6
5. Benny Leonard (Lightweight) 5
6. Jack Johnson (Heavyweight) 4
7. Jim Jeffries (Heavyweight) 2

Greatest Male Athlete
1. Jim Thorpe
2. Babe Ruth
3. Jack Dempsey
4. Ty Cobb
5. Bob Jones
6. Joe Louis
7. Red Grange
8. Jesse Owens
9. Lou Gehrig
10. Bronko Nagurski
11. Jackie Robinson
12. Bob Mathias
13. Walter Johnson
14. Glenn Davis
15. Bill Tilden
16. Glenn Cunningham
17. Glenn Morris
18. Cornelius Warmerdam

All the rating that came out before 1960, had Dempsey as the #1 Heavyweight of all-times. After that they had Louis, now most have Ali.

I remember my friend Bert Sugar had Dempsey as #1 for a long time, now he has Louis, then Ali and Dempsey in 3rd. I asked him why he changed his rating, and he said that he listened to what others had to say, such as old time trainers and other boxing historians & experts.
Thanks for printing these--what really stands out on the boxing list is that Harry Greb got no support at all. I think he would get my vote as the best of the first half of the century, p4p.

The top athletes are also very interesting. I am somewhat surprised that only Dempsey and Louis represent boxing, and I would have expected Johnny Weissmuller, Honus Wagner, Don Hutson, and Ernie Nevers, among others, to have made this list.

By the way, the AP end of the century poll, is I remember correctly, had the top five heavyweights as:

1. Ali
2. Louis
3. Marciano
4. Dempsey
5. Johnson

Ali and Marciano came after 1950, so only Louis changed places with Dempsey. I think there just wasn't enough time to put Louis' accomplishments in proper perspective in 1950.
OLD FOGEY is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Reply

Boxing News 24 Forum > Boxing > Classic Boxing Forum

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump





All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:26 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Boxing News 24 Forum 2013