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 06-26-2007, 01:43 PM   #1
dmt
Hardest hitting hw ever
ESB Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 1,175
vCash: 1000
Default What was so bad with Dempsey vs Gibbons?

Please answer

Let's analyze:

Dempsey was 28 years old when he met Gibbons, still close to his physical prime but also a little on the slide having gone into a two year layoff, not quiet as sharp as he had been 4 years ago. Yet Dempsey won 12 or 13 rounds against Gibbons, not managing aknocout. So
Just because he was a ko artist does not mean he has to blow away everyone infront of him. People say “he struggled,” “Gibbons made him look bad”. Utter rubbish. When u win nearly all of the rounds then it’s hardly struggling.

Now……………
Jim Jeffries, at 220 pounds, had a 50 pound weight advantage on an over the hill middle Choynski and fought to a draw
Jack Johnson fought a nd vs O’Brien as champion, a newspaper draw vs over the hill middleweight and some actually thought O’Brien won. Although he clearly beat Sam Lanford, despite a 30lb advantage Sam lasted the distance vs him.
Gene Tunney failed to ko middleweight Harry Greb in all of their meetings, even when Tunney weighed over 185 lb.
Joe Louis was behind on points vs 174lb Billy Conn after 12 rounds. Sure Louis won by ko but atleast Dempsey was never behind vs Gibbons.
Rocky Marciano failed to ko Ezzard Charles in their first meeting whereas Ezzard, as great as he was, had suffered a ko defeat by Walcott at heavy and was coming of a loss to Valdez. The Charles-Marciano fight went the distance and it was actually a close fight!
Muhammad Ali, at over 210lb from memory, went the distance with, and had a close fight with cruiser Doug Jones who he enjoyed a 20 or so lb advantage over.
Marvin Hagler went the distance with former lightweight Duran, failing to win by ko and it was a close fight. I don’t care if you think Duran is a top 5 fighter of all time, he is not an atg middleweight, and was over 24lb ablove his natural weight and was competitive

So before u blame Dempsey for his fight v s Gibbons please look at all these other examples. Regards, dmt
dmt is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old 06-26-2007, 02:04 PM   #2
Duodenum
Champion
East Side Guru
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 5,802
vCash: 1000
Default Re: What was so bad with Dempsey vs Gibbons?

I believe having 15 solid rounds of achievement is crucial to Dempsey's legacy. Without Gibbons, people would forever be asking questions about his endurance. Gibbons is important insofar as he was able to last the distance. This allowed Dempsey to demonstrate that he could perform at a fast pace for an extended period. (At that particular time in boxing, few could or would have taken Dempsey to the end of 15 rounds.)

Marciano's finish at the conclusion of the first Charles match is critical for the same reason. !5 rounds is what separates the men from the boys.
Duodenum is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 06-26-2007, 02:21 PM   #3
C. M. Clay II
Manassah's finest!
ESB Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Brooklyn, New York
Posts: 1,138
vCash: 1000
Default Re: What was so bad with Dempsey vs Gibbons?

Ali weighed 202 against Jones, not 210.
C. M. Clay II is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 06-26-2007, 02:24 PM   #4
dmt
Hardest hitting hw ever
ESB Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 1,175
vCash: 1000
Default Re: What was so bad with Dempsey vs Gibbons?

ok but Ali still had a fair weight advantage over Jones
dmt is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 06-26-2007, 03:17 PM   #5
janitor
P4P King
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 20,568
vCash: 1000
Default Re: What was so bad with Dempsey vs Gibbons?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Duodenum
I believe having 15 solid rounds of achievement is crucial to Dempsey's legacy. Without Gibbons, people would forever be asking questions about his endurance.
I agree.

Although this performence is often criticised it is crucial to Dempsey's legacy because-

A. It proved that he could go a hard fifteen rounds.

B. It proved that he could outbox and not just outpunch a master boxer.
janitor is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 06-26-2007, 06:04 PM   #6
UpWithEvil
Gatekeeper
ESB Full Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 339
vCash: 1000
Default Re: What was so bad with Dempsey vs Gibbons?

Let's not forget that Gibbons himself was an outstanding fighter, never KO'd until the very last fight of a career spanning over 100 bouts and the proud owner of victories over such excellent fighters as Harry Greb, Kid Norfolk, Billy Miske, and Battling Levinsky.

Had Dempsey *not* fought Gibbons, I have little doubt the contemporary revisionists would accuse Jack of having ducked him.
UpWithEvil is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 06-26-2007, 06:16 PM   #7
JimmyShimmy
1050 psi
ESB Full Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: 167lbs - P4P Baddest
Posts: 323
vCash: 1000
Default Re: What was so bad with Dempsey vs Gibbons?

What was bad with the fight:

1) It killed Shelby, Montana as both a future fighting venue and a town.

2) Gibbons did not get paid

3) Because Gibbons was unranked and facing the 'destructive champion' it looked bad when he went the distance.

In retrospect, as UpWithEvil pointed out, had Dempsey not fought Gibbons, he would have remained one of the genuinely good fighters that he never faced along with Wills and Greb.

It's an ugly fight that was filmed from too far away, but Dempsey used his strength and inside fighting ability to bully the game and very talented Gibbons out of the fight.

All things considered it was a good performance, just not typical electrifying Mauler stuff. Watching Dempsey fight was a big n' rare event. It's easy to understand the criticism that followed this one despite the fact it's probably his finest championship win.
JimmyShimmy is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 06-26-2007, 07:04 PM   #8
Duodenum
Champion
East Side Guru
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 5,802
vCash: 1000
Default Re: What was so bad with Dempsey vs Gibbons?

The naysayers might argue that Greb also won 12 of 15 rounds in Tommy's last decison loss before Dempsey. But that was merely another payday for Gibbons. This title fight was for the whole shebang, and the late peaking 83-3-2 Gibbons was prepared for the performance of his career. Tommy would go on to get the best of Carpentier, and kayo the younger Kid Norfolk in six. Dempsey may have been the only man then in boxing who could get the better of Gibbons that day in Shelby. While Jack gets criticized for who he didn't face, he deserves tons of credit for putting the title up against a challenger his handlers wanted no part of. (Jack was also the only man to defeat Billy Miske by stoppage, and the only man to officially defeat Miske in his final 53 fights, 23 of which came after Billy's title shot.)

In 1923, Dempsey outboxed Gibbons, then outslugged Firpo. Not a bad year at all.
Duodenum is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 06-26-2007, 07:14 PM   #9
UpWithEvil
Gatekeeper
ESB Full Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 339
vCash: 1000
Default Re: What was so bad with Dempsey vs Gibbons?

Quote:
If Dempsey were this world class killer heavyweight then he should have taken apart this light heavyweight.
If you were more accurate with your squirting flower you'd have graduated Magna Cum Clowny at Ringling Brothers.

[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]
"No! Wait! Give me another chance! I can do this!"
UpWithEvil is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 06-26-2007, 07:23 PM   #10
UpWithEvil
Gatekeeper
ESB Full Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 339
vCash: 1000
Default Re: What was so bad with Dempsey vs Gibbons?

I'm guessing it's you, clownshoes.
UpWithEvil is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 06-26-2007, 09:14 PM   #11
UpWithEvil
Gatekeeper
ESB Full Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 339
vCash: 1000
Default Re: What was so bad with Dempsey vs Gibbons?

Quote:
And, as usual, you would be wrong.
Being called "wrong" by you is like Dubya Bush calling someone dimwitted. The irony of your complete lack of self-comprehension make such claims laughable, and not in a "laughing with you" sort of way.

Quote:
Get yourself a mirror. Look in it.
Oh, Narcissus!

Quote:
That ugly mug you see is who I'm talking about.
See, that's what I'm talking about Clownshoes. You don't know me, you've never met me, but you're perfectly happy to claim I'm ugly. It's just like your ill-conceived boxing confabulations - no proof, just your own ignorant assertions wrapped in baloney and foisted off as some sort of informed opinion, rather than the delusional rantings they are.

That's why you'll always be Perfesser Clownshoes. You're here to entertain with your clownish antics; serious debate obviously isn't in your repetoire, but you'll throw the heck out of a pie.

[Only registered and activated users can see links. ]
"Yoohoo! It's me! Revolver! But don't tell anybody!"
UpWithEvil is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 06-26-2007, 09:14 PM   #12
Dempsey1238
Champion
East Side Guru
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 5,015
vCash: 1000
Default Re: What was so bad with Dempsey vs Gibbons?

Dempsey Gibbons was a pretty good fight. Sure it did not have the action of the Firpo fight or the Carp fight. or even the Willard fight. but for 15 rounds, Gibbions would hold and try to tie up Dempsey's arms, and Dempsey would score with boby punchings and rabbit punchings. As Jimmy said, it was a bad fight, and it was film far away. Did they ever heard of close ups in that era lol.
Dempsey1238 is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 06-27-2007, 12:46 AM   #13
dmt
Hardest hitting hw ever
ESB Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 1,175
vCash: 1000
Default Re: What was so bad with Dempsey vs Gibbons?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Homicidal Hank
The problem is that Gibbons was a light heavyweight who lost to Harry Greb the year before - Gibbons only weighed 171 lbs for his fight with Greb. Greb only weighed 163 lbs. Gibbons weighed 175 for the Dempsey fight. If Dempsey were this world class killer heavyweight then he should have taken apart this light heavyweight. Marciano's first fight with Charles is similarly revealing. Charles was shot, and had a glass jaw, yet Marciano could not put him away.

The Gibbons fight reveals what the Charles fight reveals: both Dempsey and Marciano are overrated.
Duran was a former lightweight, had lost to Benitez before Hagler, then was destroyed by Hearns. This shows Hagler was over rated
dmt is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 06-27-2007, 01:25 AM   #14
dmt
Hardest hitting hw ever
ESB Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 1,175
vCash: 1000
Default Re: What was so bad with Dempsey vs Gibbons?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Homicidal Hank
Only if you think Duran and Gibbons are comparable. But that would be a ridiculous comparison. Hagler would destroy a fighter of Gibbons' ability.
you are not feeling well today, r u? Gibbons would box circles around Hagler and win an easy decision. If Hagler could not ko an overweight Duran, then he could never ko the speedy Gibbons. No way
dmt is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 06-27-2007, 05:38 AM   #15
janitor
P4P King
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 20,568
vCash: 1000
Default Re: What was so bad with Dempsey vs Gibbons?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Homicidal Hank
The problem is that Gibbons was a light heavyweight who lost to Harry Greb the year before - Gibbons only weighed 171 lbs for his fight with Greb. Greb only weighed 163 lbs. Gibbons weighed 175 for the Dempsey fight. If Dempsey were this world class killer heavyweight then he should have taken apart this light heavyweight. Marciano's first fight with Charles is similarly revealing. Charles was shot, and had a glass jaw, yet Marciano could not put him away.

The Gibbons fight reveals what the Charles fight reveals: both Dempsey and Marciano are overrated.
So what dose the fact that Larry Holmes, not only got taken the distence by a light heavyweight but lost his title to him reveal?

That Holmes was beyond overrated or that you aply double standards?
janitor 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 02:27 PM.


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