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 02-28-2009, 05:02 PM   #121
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 janitor View Post
Above al we need consistency.

Is a fighter asumed to be a shell after a long layoff or is he asumed to be at his best and to have lost because he would have lost anyway?

You cant refuse to make any alowance for Jack Dempseys layoff going into the Tunney fight but refuse to give Jack Johnson any credit for beating Jeffries because of the long layoff.

Many of the same people who try to reduce Jack Johnsons win over Jeffries to as close to zero as they can, respond to the argument that Dempsey was coming off a long layoff going into the Tunney fight by quoting Dempsey and Tunneys respective ages. Incidentaly Johnson was only two years older than Jeffries.

There is definitely some double standards at play here.
"Johnson was only two years older than Jeffries."

Something is wrong here. Johnson was three years younger than Jeffries, but one year OLDER than Dempsey was in 1926.

I don't know what to make of this argument. I can tell that in the real world, Dempsey laid off three years and did no better against Tunney than Jeffries did against Johnson. Jeff ended up being ko'd because the fight went beyond ten rounds. It is quite possible in my judgement that Jeff would have lasted a scheduled 10 with Johnson to lose a decision, and have at least won a couple of rounds. Dempsey didn't win a round against Tunney and it is doubtful he could have lasted a full 15.

There is no doubt that Dempsey would have had a better chance against Tunney if he had been active. I don't quite know if I should cut him slack because he wasn't active, though. It seems like giving him a pass because he laid off. This might be all right if it was due to factors beyond his control as was the case in the later Joe Louis and Muhammad Ali layoffs. But neither of those men were beaten nearly as badly as Dempsey was either right after their long layoffs or for years afterward.

One issue which complicates everything is that both Tunney and Sharkey appear off their records and off of film to be considerably better than Willard, Brennan, Carpentier, Gibbons, and Firpo. It is hard to tell if Dempsey going back is the key factor, or to what extent just running into more talented opposition is the key factor.

Last edited by OLD FOGEY; 02-28-2009 at 05:18 PM.
OLD FOGEY is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old 02-28-2009, 06:40 PM   #122
McGrain
Diamond Dog
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 36,381
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Jacks Dempsey ranking - arguments

Quote:
Originally Posted by OLD FOGEY View Post
1. "Dempsey had a very good slip and duck type of defense."

I notice this is being debated. I would say this is true to a degree, but he carried his hands low and, off the film, just was not all that hard to hit. Brennan hits him on chin pretty consistently with uppercuts. Firpo catches him on the chin. Tunney and Sharkey bang him pretty consistently. I notice that if someone goes on the offense against Dempsey, like Firpo, Tunney, and Sharkey, he doesn't do very well when fighting purely on the defensive.

2. "Quality wins--Firpo, Willard, J Sharkey, Gibbons, Carpentier, Brennan, Miske, Gunboat Smith, Morris, Levinsky, Fulton, Pelkey"

I guess Flynn, Homer Smith and a couple of journeymen could also be on this list, but still this is, I think, an ordinary list for an ATG candidate, and a close look at it shows a real problem with ranking Dempsey in the top five and perhaps even the top ten. He didn't beat most of the best men around. Gibbons, Brennan, Miske, Gunboat Smith, and Levinsky lost to Greb. Gibbons, Carpentier, and Levinsky lost to Tunney. Fulton, Firpo, and Gunboat Smith lost to Wills. Two others, Morris and Pelkey were ordinary. That leaves the old, overweight, and inactive Willard, and the very erratic Sharkey.

3. "Film"

a. Willard--impressive performance--A +
b. Brennan--Dempsey struggles against average contender, rallies to stop him in 12--C
c. Carpentier--Carpentier is just a much smaller man. The official weight was given as 172. Many claimed it was more like 164. What can't be denied is that Rickard closed Carpentier's workouts to the press so his small size would not be publicized--C at best.
d. Gibbons--Gibbons had lost to Greb, but at 32 was still a good fighter. His weight was 175 and his wins over top heavies rather slim--C+ or B-.
e. Firpo--Dempsey knocks Firpo down 9 times and out in two, but skates beyond the rules a couple of times and is himself knocked down three times (off the film) and out of the ring. Kind of a hard fight to judge as Firpo was strong but very crude--B
f. Tunney I--Tunney dominates fight--has no trouble outboxing Dempsey and handling him in the clinches. Dempsey shows heart and toughness, but is certainly outclassed--D
g Sharkey--Dempsey is outclassed for 6 rounds and then knocks Sharkey out with one punch in the 7th when Sharkey is not looking. Tough fight to rate. Certainly Dempsey shows heart and power, but the fight also raises questions--B
h. Tunney II--A replay of the first fight, except for the explosion in the 7th. Dempsey again shows power. Whole issue clouded by "long count" but Tunney probably could have beaten the count--C+

Evaluation--Dempsey looks better on film than any earlier champion, but not as good as Tunney. I think there are severe flaws in his low-hands defense. His chin was good but certainly he could be hurt. What is more impressive is his ability to fight when hurt. His power gives him a shot against anyone. A solid top fifteen. A fair pick for the lower reaches of the top ten. I judge top five as too high.

I think this is a peach of a post.

I disagree that Tunney looks better on film than Jack, neccesarily, but I agree with almost everything else written here.
McGrain is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 02-28-2009, 10:07 PM   #123
pugilist_boyd
BUSTED UP PUG
ESB Full Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: missouri,usa
Posts: 414
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Jacks Dempsey ranking - arguments

my top five in there (primes) louis,rocky,ali,tyson,dempsey,in no certain order-the last 3 in there primes i think were unbeatable
pugilist_boyd is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2009, 09:59 AM   #124
he grant
Historian/Film Maker
East Side Guru
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 7,308
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Jacks Dempsey ranking - arguments

It's tough to argue with Old Fogey because od Dempsey's inactivity as champion and not fight Wills ... I disagree with some points but the argument has merrit ...
he grant is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2009, 11:09 AM   #125
Dempsey1238
Champion
East Side Guru
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 5,015
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Jacks Dempsey ranking - arguments

Quote:
Originally Posted by mcvey View Post
No , Tunney stated it several times in print , in the 1st fight Tunney nailed Dempsey with a right hand in the 1st round ,it landed high on Dempsey's left cheek,the only time he really connected with Dempsey's jaw was with the left hook that put Dempsey down ,momentarily in the 8th round.Dempsey was guided out of the ring because his eyes were swollen shut nothing wrong with his jaw. A mere 10 rounds? I suggest you watch those 10 rds Dempsey took a hiding.

Not sure I agree with you there. fight II, Rounds 2, Tunney tag Dempsey at the end of the round with a clean shot on the chin. Dempsey was stun, and Tunney follow up with more punchings, before bell rang.
Round 4, Middle part of round, Tunney lands a jab on Dempsey's chin. Dempsey is stun once again.

Round ten, Tunney is just landed at will mostly. Dempsey's eye is close.
Dempsey1238 is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2009, 11:53 AM   #126
ChrisPontius
March 8th, 1971
East Side Guru
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Holland
Posts: 9,632
vCash: 238
Default Re: Jacks Dempsey ranking - arguments

Quote:
Originally Posted by janitor View Post
I think that this is an issue that you will have to confront again, sooner rather than later.

I will expect you to adopt a consistent position next time we talk about the value of Johnsons best wins or how damaging Dempseys losses to Tunney are.
What are you talking about, have you been following the discussion? Poster Mcvey cited Tunney that Dempsey was hard to tag on the chin (which obviously was about the Dempsey-Tunney fights only), and i responded to that. Jeffries being old against Johnson has **** all to do with it, unless Johnson made a statement that Jeffries was very hard to tag on the chin.. which, incidentally, would have similar merit.
ChrisPontius is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2009, 02:08 PM   #127
janitor
P4P King
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 20,568
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Jacks Dempsey ranking - arguments

[quote]
Quote:
Originally Posted by OLD FOGEY View Post
"Johnson was only two years older than Jeffries."

Something is wrong here. Johnson was three years younger than Jeffries, but one year OLDER than Dempsey was in 1926.
My apologies.

I was trying to make the observation that the age difference between Johnson and Jeffries was similar to that between Dempsey and Tunney.

Quote:
I don't know what to make of this argument. I can tell that in the real world, Dempsey laid off three years and did no better against Tunney than Jeffries did against Johnson. Jeff ended up being ko'd because the fight went beyond ten rounds. It is quite possible in my judgement that Jeff would have lasted a scheduled 10 with Johnson to lose a decision, and have at least won a couple of rounds. Dempsey didn't win a round against Tunney and it is doubtful he could have lasted a full 15.
This is more or less as I see it.

Two fighters coming off long layoffs to fight the best heavyweight around with similar results.

I do think that Dempsey came closer to beating Tunney (with the long count) than Jeffries came to beating Johnson.

Quote:
There is no doubt that Dempsey would have had a better chance against Tunney if he had been active. I don't quite know if I should cut him slack because he wasn't active, though. It seems like giving him a pass because he laid off. This might be all right if it was due to factors beyond his control as was the case in the later Joe Louis and Muhammad Ali layoffs. But neither of those men were beaten nearly as badly as Dempsey was either right after their long layoffs or for years afterward.
You seem to be taking a moralistic atitude that Dempseys layoff should not be taken into acount because it was self inflicted.

I think that when judging how he would have done against a prime Tunney it is irrelevant whether the layoff was caused by being drafted into the army or malice on his part.

Quote:
One issue which complicates everything is that both Tunney and Sharkey appear off their records and off of film to be considerably better than Willard, Brennan, Carpentier, Gibbons, and Firpo. It is hard to tell if Dempsey going back is the key factor, or to what extent just running into more talented opposition is the key factor.
I think that Tunney and Sharkey are beneficiaries of more sophisticated cameras than Dempseys earlier oponents. Tunney looks awsome against Dempsey and Heeney but does he realy look anf better than Tommy Gibbons when he fights Georges Carpintier?

My bigest disagrement with your position is when you say that Tunney and Sharkey had better resumes than Miske Gibbons etc.

Tunneys resume hangs verry heavily on his wins over Jack Dempsey and if you take that away it is substantialy inferior to that of Tommy Gibbons.

Is it a stretch to imagine a prime Gibbons beating the Dempsey that fought Tunney?

Sharkey on the other hand has a far deeper resume than any of Dempseys oponents but he was clearly far less consistent than Tommy Gibbons.
janitor is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2009, 02:11 PM   #128
janitor
P4P King
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 20,568
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Jacks Dempsey ranking - arguments

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisPontius View Post
What are you talking about, have you been following the discussion? Poster Mcvey cited Tunney that Dempsey was hard to tag on the chin (which obviously was about the Dempsey-Tunney fights only), and i responded to that. Jeffries being old against Johnson has **** all to do with it, unless Johnson made a statement that Jeffries was very hard to tag on the chin.. which, incidentally, would have similar merit.
I am making the observation that you refuse to give Johnson any credit for beating Jeffries because of his layoff but also make little or no alowance for Dempseys layoff when judging his losses to Tunney.
janitor is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2009, 02:46 PM   #129
ChrisPontius
March 8th, 1971
East Side Guru
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Holland
Posts: 9,632
vCash: 238
Default Re: Jacks Dempsey ranking - arguments

Quote:
Originally Posted by janitor View Post
My bigest disagrement with your position is when you say that Tunney and Sharkey had better resumes than Miske Gibbons etc.

Tunneys resume hangs verry heavily on his wins over Jack Dempsey and if you take that away it is substantialy inferior to that of Tommy Gibbons.

Is it a stretch to imagine a prime Gibbons beating the Dempsey that fought Tunney?
Well i think you're pushing the envelop a bit here. Tunney won 19 of 20 rounds against Dempsey, in 10 round fights which favored Dempsey at that point. Sharkey dominated him until he got fouled and then TKO'd/quit. Gibbons lost the vast majority of the rounds. If the Tunney fights were close or even competitive losses, i could see the merit in your point, but Dempsey was dominated, easily. I think there's more to it than just a 3 year lay off, when being only 31 years of age (contrary to Jeffries who was 35). And it's not like Dempsey was fighting on a busy schedule before that either; since he won the championship, he was very well conserved. Of course, this is also true about Jeffries.


As for Miske, he pretty much went even with Dempsey when he was in his prime, and not ill to the degree that he was a 7-to-1 underdog even after going even with him in the past.


Quote:
Originally Posted by janitor View Post
I am making the observation that you refuse to give Johnson any credit for beating Jeffries because of his layoff but also make little or no alowance for Dempseys layoff when judging his losses to Tunney.

Arg!!!!!!!! How can you be this ignorant?!?

Let me repeat it one more time.

Mcvey quoted Tunney as "Dempsey was hard to tag on the chin". This was about the Dempsey-Tunney fights. I then said that film proves otherwise, because Tunney tagged him plenty on the chin. What the HELL does this have to do with making little allowance for a layoff? It's not a career judgment, just an observation! FFS!
ChrisPontius is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2009, 04:06 PM   #130
janitor
P4P King
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 20,568
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Jacks Dempsey ranking - arguments

[quote]
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisPontius View Post
Well i think you're pushing the envelop a bit here. Tunney won 19 of 20 rounds against Dempsey, in 10 round fights which favored Dempsey at that point. Sharkey dominated him until he got fouled and then TKO'd/quit. Gibbons lost the vast majority of the rounds.
Yes but Tunney fought Dempsey after a long layoff while Gibbons got the best version while himself arguably past his prime.

If we swap them the outcomes might theoreticaly be reversed.

Incidentaly, Tunney publicaly stated that he avoided Gibbons and only fought Greb for the first time because he thought it would be an easier fight.

Quote:
If the Tunney fights were close or even competitive losses, i could see the merit in your point, but Dempsey was dominated, easily.
Apart from the 19 seconds when Tunney was on the floor.

In Tunneys own words:

"I would have beat the count after ten seconds but I dont know if Dempsey would have finished me off".

Quote:
I think there's more to it than just a 3 year lay off, when being only 31 years of age (contrary to Jeffries who was 35).
Jeffries was at his absolute peak when he retired and there was only the layoff to seperate him from his prime.

Quote:
And it's not like Dempsey was fighting on a busy schedule before that either; since he won the championship, he was very well conserved. Of course, this is also true about Jeffries.
Dempsey had been in over 120 profesional fights at the time when he retired.

Jeffries had been in about 40.

Quote:
As for Miske, he pretty much went even with Dempsey when he was in his prime, and not ill to the degree that he was a 7-to-1 underdog even after going even with him in the past.
Miske gave Dempsey a close run in the first fight, lost the second and got destroyed in the third.

But what would he have done to the Dempsey that Tunney fought?

Dempsey dosnt see the final bell in this scenario.

Quote:
Arg!!!!!!!! How can you be this ignorant?!?
Just chill.

We dont have to be rude to eachother.

Quote:
Mcvey quoted Tunney as "Dempsey was hard to tag on the chin". This was about the Dempsey-Tunney fights. I then said that film proves otherwise, because Tunney tagged him plenty on the chin. What the HELL does this have to do with making little allowance for a layoff? It's not a career judgment, just an observation! FFS!
I guess it was on my mind and you just triggered it.

Last edited by janitor; 03-01-2009 at 04:22 PM.
janitor is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2009, 04:33 PM   #131
ChrisPontius
March 8th, 1971
East Side Guru
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Holland
Posts: 9,632
vCash: 238
Default Re: Jacks Dempsey ranking - arguments

Quote:
Originally Posted by janitor View Post

Jeffries was at his absolute peak when he retired and there was only the layoff to seperate him from his prime.
This is true, but then Jeffries took a 5 year lay-off without (as far as i know) any exhibitions or sparring. In fact, he was around 290 lbs when he entered training camp, Dempsey was trim and in good shape.


Quote:
Originally Posted by janitor
Dempsey had been in over 120 profesional fights at the time when he retired.

Jeffries had been in about 40.
How do you know this? You just make up a random, unsubstantial number of 60 extra fights for Dempsey, but only 20 for Jeffries despite Jeffries fighting in a more "obscure" period, reporting wise.


Quote:
Originally Posted by janitor
Miske gave Dempsey a close run in the first fight, lost the second and got destroyed in the third.
He was terminally ill in the third so we can scrab that one. The first one was a draw, and the second one was only 6 rounds and very close from what i've read. Not exactly convincing stuff.

Quote:
Originally Posted by janitor
But what would he have done to the Dempsey that Tunney fought?

Dempsey dosnt see the final bell in this scenario.
Speculation.

Quote:
Originally Posted by janitor
Just chill.

We dont have to be rude to eachother.



I guess it was on my mind and you just triggered it.
We don't have to be rude to each other, but i explained nicely twice the circumstances, yet you kept repeating your statement like a blindfolded horse follows it's path. You gotta do something.
ChrisPontius is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2009, 05:10 PM   #132
janitor
P4P King
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 20,568
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Jacks Dempsey ranking - arguments

[quote]
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChrisPontius View Post
This is true, but then Jeffries took a 5 year lay-off without (as far as i know) any exhibitions or sparring. In fact, he was around 290 lbs when he entered training camp, Dempsey was trim and in good shape.
Jeffries might have had a tune up fight against Sam Berger (Audley Harrison of the era) before fighting Johnson.
janitor is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2009, 06:02 PM   #133
ChrisPontius
March 8th, 1971
East Side Guru
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Holland
Posts: 9,632
vCash: 238
Default Re: Jacks Dempsey ranking - arguments

Quote:
Originally Posted by janitor View Post


Jeffries might have had a tune up fight against Sam Berger (Audley Harrison of the era) before fighting Johnson.
Sure, but even if he did, the mountain he had to climb to comeback still by far outweighs the one Dempsey climbed.
ChrisPontius is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 03-02-2009, 02:35 AM   #134
Boilermaker
Belt holder
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 3,860
vCash: 685
Default Re: Jacks Dempsey ranking - arguments

[quote=janitor;3536336]
Quote:


Jeffries might have had a tune up fight against Sam Berger (Audley Harrison of the era) before fighting Johnson.
How did he go?
Boilermaker is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 03-02-2009, 04:26 AM   #135
mcvey
P4P King
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: The Garden Of England
Posts: 20,013
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Jacks Dempsey ranking - arguments

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dempsey1238 View Post
Not sure I agree with you there. fight II, Rounds 2, Tunney tag Dempsey at the end of the round with a clean shot on the chin. Dempsey was stun, and Tunney follow up with more punchings, before bell rang.
Round 4, Middle part of round, Tunney lands a jab on Dempsey's chin. Dempsey is stun once again.

Round ten, Tunney is just landed at will mostly. Dempsey's eye is close.
Im repeating what Tunney said I wasnt in there with Jack .So if you disagree, its with Tunney ,not me
mcvey 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 02:21 AM.


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