Boxing  

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


View Poll Results: where do you rank dempsey?
top 5 33 31.13%
top 10 39 36.79%
top 15 20 18.87%
top 20 5 4.72%
top 25 4 3.77%
not even in my top 100 5 4.72%
Voters: 106. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 06-18-2007, 09:42 AM   #31
Rattler
R.I.P. - George Jones
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: The Grand Tour
Posts: 2,029
vCash: 75
Default Re: Where do you rank Jack Dempsey??

Quote:
Originally Posted by McGrain
He could have fought white men of course. Greb would have been an interesting customer.
Who? Who would've been worth the effort financially? Greb, great as he was, was undersized and wouldn't have made Dempsey a lot of money for the risk. We've established that the "coin" heavily influenced Dempsey's career. Greb is a HUGE risk, for a fight where Dempsey would be heavily expected to win anyways.

Quote:
As for the other thing, all i'm really saying is that Dempsey's wealth and popularity came to him DESPITE of what he did as a boxing champion rather than BECAUSE of, in a way that is probably not possible for the other two sportsmen you mentioned.
Tiger Woods had a $50 million dollar endorsement deal with Nike before he won his first Grand Slam. LeBron had a $90 million dollar shoe deal before he ever played a professional game. The difference between then and now, and how much success an athlete could have is monumental.

If you weren't HW champ, forget making a lot of money in boxing - especially if you weren't a HW to begin with. Without that HW title, you better believe Dempsey's financial opportunity is severly affected. It's not like he could go out and get a commercial deal for Hanes underwear after his career was over. Holding the belt equaled money; not having held it or being expected to hold it. Not in those days.

Quote:
Then you must explain why De La Hoya, Bernard Hopkins, Max Schmeling, Jeffries and Willard made fights when rolling in clover. Though I agree that Greb's MAD schedule was financially motivated, there is clearly middle ground for rich fighters.
De La Hoya has fought 11 times in the last 7 years. Not even an average of two fights per year, which is near average nowadays. Why? Because he could sit and wait for the next big payday to show.

All these guys have something in common with Dempsey - once they started making money, they fought less frequently. That's why you aim for the titles - the money, and the freedom to fight when you want, not at the whim of keeping yourself noticed to garner a title fight. Dempsey is an aggrevated version of that, but it's the same thing.

Quote:
It ain't the end of the story bro.
That's why I said, "But it's not..."

Quote:
There are other achievments besides winning the linear heavyweight title. Like winning the more closely contested frequently defended Coloured Heavyweight Title. Or taking out great and accomplished fighters.
Of course. But ranking these guys, is subjective in every way. We know Wills and Langford were great, but how great? We can't really be sure. It's not their fault they didn't get the chance to fight Dempsey, but who's to say that Dempsey doesn't just dispatch of them easily and make the argument moot? It's possible.

I rank Wills 13th and Langford 15th - because of what they did regarding the colored title. But, I favor Dempsey's style to beat them. So I rank him higher.

Quote:
Not unreasonable, but I don't have him that high.
Of course.
Rattler is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old 06-18-2007, 09:46 AM   #32
Jack Dempsey
Legend
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: The sooner the safer
Posts: 3,613
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Where do you rank Jack Dempsey??

Quote:
Originally Posted by McGrain
It certainly is a freakish thing to do.
I understand some people do not rate him, but that sort of placing is an insult
Jack Dempsey is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 06-18-2007, 09:58 AM   #33
McGrain
Diamond Dog
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 37,457
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Where do you rank Jack Dempsey??

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rattler
Greb, great as he was, was undersized and wouldn't have made Dempsey a lot of money for the risk
But since when is it ok to duck a guy who could beat you because the money isn't right (never mind because of their colour, though I know there were cirumstances)? Why would we ever say, "Ali didn't fight Frazier, there wasn't enough cash, so it's OK"? And even if something like this did happen, who would Ali be fighting instead? Because he'd be fighting somebody.

If a fighter becomes a victim of his times and suffers because of it, I have sympathy, but he still has to suffer. Dempsey shared an era with arguably two of the best ever in Greb and Wills and failed to fight them and also failed to fight someone else instead. I personally cannot excuse him for this failure because there was money to be made in the movies - as a fighter. As a man, I excuse him, but not as a fighter.



Quote:
Tiger Woods had a $50 million dollar endorsement deal with Nike before he won his first Grand Slam
I am absolutley certain to the tune of 100% that that deal would contain provisos regarding his activity as a golfer. He's expected to earn that crust.


Quote:
If you weren't HW champ, forget making a lot of money in boxing - especially if you weren't a HW to begin with. Without that HW title, you better believe Dempsey's financial opportunity is severly affected.
Fair enough. But he still has to take the hit as far as legacy goes.

Quote:
De La Hoya has fought 11 times in the last 7 years. Not even an average of two fights per year, which is near average nowadays. Why?
Because he is semi-retired and because he is fighting at the absolute pinicale of the sport. 11 in 7 is only slightly below average, as you've stated. And he doesn't need the money. There is no way Oscar is boxing for the cash.


Quote:
I rank Wills 13th and Langford 15th - because of what they did regarding the colored title. But, I favor Dempsey's style to beat them.
Actually so do I, though my limited knowledge makes Dempsey only a slight favourite in the Wills fight. But as you've said it's pure speculation because the fight never took place. Load most of the blame onto society - Dempsey takes a small portion. Wills is totally blameless. In situations like this one I always ere on the side of the wronged man, it's not subjective but there it is. Wills deserved his shot and the champ didn't give him one. Probably he was taking singing lessons.

It's a pleasure discussing this stuff with you.
McGrain is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 06-18-2007, 10:00 AM   #34
Bad_Intentions
Belt holder
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Miami FL, USA
Posts: 3,688
vCash: 153
Default Re: Where do you rank Jack Dempsey??

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack Dempsey
I understand some people do not rate him, but that sort of placing is an insult
i know, it's pretty sad
Bad_Intentions is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 06-18-2007, 10:00 AM   #35
McGrain
Diamond Dog
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 37,457
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Where do you rank Jack Dempsey??

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack Dempsey
I understand some people do not rate him, but that sort of placing is an insult

It's actually fairly reasonable to dismiss someone who places Dempsey in the bottom half of the top 100 as a boxing expert. It could be said to betray a lack of knowledge or bias which is so endemic that every word that man offered up for consideration could be dismissed out of hand.
McGrain is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 06-18-2007, 10:02 AM   #36
Bad_Intentions
Belt holder
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Miami FL, USA
Posts: 3,688
vCash: 153
Default Re: Where do you rank Jack Dempsey??

atleast mcgrain's opinion of placing dempsey in the top 15 it's better than not placing him in the top 100.

dempsey was the babe ruth of boxing, he even became more famous than baberuth in the 1920's.
Bad_Intentions is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 06-18-2007, 10:22 AM   #37
Rattler
R.I.P. - George Jones
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: The Grand Tour
Posts: 2,029
vCash: 75
Default Re: Where do you rank Jack Dempsey??

Quote:
Originally Posted by McGrain
But since when is it ok to duck a guy who could beat you because the money isn't right (never mind because of their colour, though I know there were cirumstances)? Why would we ever say, "Ali didn't fight Frazier, there wasn't enough cash, so it's OK"? And even if something like this did happen, who would Ali be fighting instead? Because he'd be fighting somebody.
I'm not saying it's okay - I'm just saying that some people value money, others value legacy and competetive virtue and some value both. I think that once Dempsey tasted the good life, it affected in what direction his career went.

Quote:
If a fighter becomes a victim of his times and suffers because of it, I have sympathy, but he still has to suffer. Dempsey shared an era with arguably two of the best ever in Greb and Wills and failed to fight them and also failed to fight someone else instead. I personally cannot excuse him for this failure because there was money to be made in the movies - as a fighter. As a man, I excuse him, but not as a fighter.
I place a great deal of value on head-to-head with these rankings. So, I'm going to rank Dempsey high. So, while I do agree he must be "punished" for how his career went following his obtaining the title, it's not as marked as it would be for you or somebody else.

Holyfield fought EVERYBODY, but he also lost a lot of those fights - whereas Dempsey didn't do the fighting, but only lost to Tunney and Miske once he became the established fighter we think of him as. Does Holy get more credit for taking the fights and losing than Dempsey for not taking them at all?

Quote:
I am absolutley certain to the tune of 100% that that deal would contain provisos regarding his activity as a golfer. He's expected to earn that crust.
I would defer to you on that, but the point is the opportunity was there for him to earn it. Nobody was gonna pay a million dollars to Dempsey if he became world champ. The money offers only came once he won it and for as long as he kept it.

Quote:
Fair enough. But he still has to take the hit as far as legacy goes.
Absolutely - but then we're back in the waters of subjectivity and personal inclination.

Quote:
Because he is semi-retired and because he is fighting at the absolute pinicale of the sport. 11 in 7 is only slightly below average, as you've stated. And he doesn't need the money. There is no way Oscar is boxing for the cash.
Then why even worry about negotiating money matters? Take $5 million a fight, no matter what. It's an assload of money. And why do it on Pay-Per-View.... isn't a legacy enhanced if people can see you perform at a high level? There's no doubt legacy and competetiveness plays an important part for De La Hoya, but for a guy who doesn't need the cash, he sure makes an effort to optimize his ability to get every last penny he can get.

Quote:
Actually so do I, though my limited knowledge makes Dempsey only a slight favourite in the Wills fight. But as you've said it's pure speculation because the fight never took place. Load most of the blame onto society - Dempsey takes a small portion. Wills is totally blameless. In situations like this one I always ere on the side of the wronged man, it's not subjective but there it is. Wills deserved his shot and the champ didn't give him one. Probably he was taking singing lessons.
I can't fault you for sympathizing with Wills plight; I'm only attempting to give an understanding to why Dempsey chose the things he did do... or didn't. It's just not enough for me to overlook how good, in a pure boxing sense, Dempsey was.

Quote:
It's a pleasure discussing this stuff with you.
Mine too.
Rattler is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 06-18-2007, 10:32 AM   #38
McGrain
Diamond Dog
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 37,457
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Where do you rank Jack Dempsey??

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rattler
I'm not saying it's okay - I'm just saying that some people value money, others value legacy and competetive virtue and some value both. I think that once Dempsey tasted the good life, it affected in what direction his career went.
Our loss I guess!



Quote:
I place a great deal of value on head-to-head with these rankings. So, I'm going to rank Dempsey high. So, while I do agree he must be "punished" for how his career went following his obtaining the title, it's not as marked as it would be for you or somebody else.
...actually head to head is the most important aspect for me too. I do factor in other stuff. Truth be told Dempsey's inactivaty as champ is just a personal gripe of mine. In all of heavyweight history would there have been more combined quality in the ring in any other fight if Dempsey had stepped in with Wills? Only Ali-Frazier comes close I think.

[qoute]Does Holy get more credit for taking the fights and losing than Dempsey for not taking them at all?[/quote]

This is actually an interesting one. Another way to ask the question: can Hollyfield look great losing tough fights to all time top 30 fighters than Dempsey can beating men who are not in his class?



Quote:
Then why even worry about negotiating money matters? Take $5 million a fight, no matter what. It's an assload of money. And why do it on Pay-Per-View.... isn't a legacy enhanced if people can see you perform at a high level? There's no doubt legacy and competetiveness plays an important part for De La Hoya, but for a guy who doesn't need the cash, he sure makes an effort to optimize his ability to get every last penny he can get.
Very fair point. I would say that De La Hoya wanted to be every bit as succesful as a promoter as he was as a fighter, if not more so. He'd want to do the best business possible, that is just in him, and business success tends to be measured in terms of money in the bank. All kidding aside, he may lack your vision in this matter! Put it this way, I think he'd do things differently in 20 years time, looking back.

Got to split now, family commitment.
McGrain is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 06-18-2007, 10:44 AM   #39
PowerPuncher
P4P King
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 20,610
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Where do you rank Jack Dempsey??

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rattler
There is an impact. It would be foolish not to take that into account - but if I'm only going to rank fighters by accomplishment, then why bother bringing the likes of Wills and Langford up? They didn't win the title. End of story. But it's not.... and I think Dempsey did enough prior to winning the title and after winning the title to be high up the rankings.
.
Accomplishments are not simply titles but more importantly beating great fighters. Wills and Langford would have both been champs if given equal opportunities.

Who are Dempseys wins that rank him so high? He simply hasn't beaten great fighters and didn't face the best of his time

Dempsey looks great on film and was very skillfull, head to head he probably ranks higher. But because he didn't face the best even this is hard to be sure of
PowerPuncher is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 06-18-2007, 10:53 AM   #40
Rattler
R.I.P. - George Jones
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: The Grand Tour
Posts: 2,029
vCash: 75
Default Re: Where do you rank Jack Dempsey??

Quote:
Originally Posted by McGrain
Our loss I guess!
Definitely.

Quote:
...actually head to head is the most important aspect for me too. I do factor in other stuff. Truth be told Dempsey's inactivaty as champ is just a personal gripe of mine. In all of heavyweight history would there have been more combined quality in the ring in any other fight if Dempsey had stepped in with Wills? Only Ali-Frazier comes close I think.
While I'm bothered by the "what-if's" that Dempsey created for himself and his legacy, I'm reminded that this guy lived an extremely meager existence for a large part of his early life. I can only surmise, having never been there myself, that being that poor has a huge affect on how you view the world and what you value most. We can't forget that these guys are human, in a brutal sport where most fighters never reach enough success to live comfortably, at least. That's why a Joe Louis can do what he did and still end up a greeter at a casino in Las Vegas.

Quote:
This is actually an interesting one. Another way to ask the question: can Hollyfield look great losing tough fights to all time top 30 fighters than Dempsey can beating men who are not in his class?
I give Holyfield credit for losing tough to Bowe and Lewis; as I do for Dempsey, being out of shape and doing what he did against Tunney in the rematch - against a tough stylistic matchup. A loss is a loss, but there's good and bad losses. Holyfield's got some doozy "good losses", which helps him.

While not deserving as much, Dempsey still gets credit for the manner in which he won as champion. Look at Hagler; he beat Duran, without great difficulty, but he was supposed to demolish him and he didn't, so it gets held against him. But beating Duran, under any circumstance, is an accomplishment because he's that damn good.

Brennan, Gibbons, Carpentier and Miske are not Wills, but they aren't meat. Dempsey was supposed to trump them and he did. There's something to be said for doing what you're supposed to do.

Quote:
Very fair point. I would say that De La Hoya wanted to be every bit as succesful as a promoter as he was as a fighter, if not more so. He'd want to do the best business possible, that is just in him, and business success tends to be measured in terms of money in the bank. All kidding aside, he may lack your vision in this matter! Put it this way, I think he'd do things differently in 20 years time, looking back.
I think De La Hoya will be sufficiently satisfied 20 years from now; he's too smart to not realize exactly what he does and how it's measured in all ways.

Quote:
Got to split now, family commitment.
Family always comes first.
Rattler is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 06-18-2007, 11:00 AM   #41
janitor
P4P King
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 21,334
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Where do you rank Jack Dempsey??

Quote:
Originally Posted by PowerPuncher
Who are Dempseys wins that rank him so high? He simply hasn't beaten great fighters and didn't face the best of his time
Just because sombody dosn't fight the best available challenger dosn't mean that their resume is necisarily worse than that of sombody who did.

Dempsey beat a prety deep body of opposition.
janitor is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 06-18-2007, 11:07 AM   #42
Sonny's jab
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
vCash:
Default Re: Where do you rank Jack Dempsey??

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rattler

Holyfield fought EVERYBODY, but he also lost a lot of those fights - whereas Dempsey didn't do the fighting, but only lost to Tunney and Miske once he became the established fighter we think of him as.
15 years into Holyfield's career, and at the age of 37 (past his best, methinks) the only people to beat Holyfield were Bowe, Moorer and Lewis.
That's not "a lot" of losses.

Moorer was the weakest name of the three, but he was an undefeated southpaw, and the fight was VERY CLOSE.

Lennox Lewis was a great fighter.

Riddick Bowe was a real quality young strong undefeated fighter. You'd be hard-pressed to find many challengers as good as a 1992 Bowe who were defeated by any of the great champions.

Bowe was still young and undefeated in 1993 when Holyfield outboxed him.

Holyfield was competitive in both his losing efforts with Bowe, and certainly in the 2nd fight with Lewis. The Moorer loss was razor-close.

Holyfield was good enough to beat Bowe and Moorer while they were still top-level contenders/champions.

These are the facts.

Quote:
Does Holy get more credit for taking the fights and losing than Dempsey for not taking them at all?
Well, I ask myself : would I rate Holyfield higher if he had failed to face Bowe, and Lewis and had just racked up a string of wins over lesser fighters ?
Answer : No, I'd rate him lower.

Therefore, Holyfield gets more credit.
 Top
Reply With Quote
Old 06-18-2007, 11:10 AM   #43
janitor
P4P King
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 21,334
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Where do you rank Jack Dempsey??

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sonny's jab
Well, I ask myself : would I rate Holyfield higher if he had failed to face Bowe, and Lewis and had just racked up a string of wins over lesser fighters ?
Answer : No, I'd rate him lower.

Therefore, Holyfield gets more credit.
Dempsey might not have faced his Lennox Lewis but he anihilated his Michael Moorer.
janitor is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 06-18-2007, 11:11 AM   #44
Rattler
R.I.P. - George Jones
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: The Grand Tour
Posts: 2,029
vCash: 75
Default Re: Where do you rank Jack Dempsey??

Quote:
Originally Posted by PowerPuncher
Accomplishments are not simply titles but more importantly beating great fighters. Wills and Langford would have both been champs if given equal opportunities.
Probably.

Quote:
Who are Dempseys wins that rank him so high? He simply hasn't beaten great fighters and didn't face the best of his time.
I believe that Fulton, Brennan and Miske all would've been the HW champion if Dempsey wasn't in their way. Were they "great" in the sense that Wills, Langford or Dempsey are? No. But they were very good. Of the white HW's, they were the best.

Quote:
Dempsey looks great on film and was very skillfull, head to head he probably ranks higher. But because he didn't face the best even this is hard to be sure of
Yes, it is. But we can assume, which is the lynchpin of all these rankings, and I assume in favor of Dempsey.

I don't disregard anyone else for thinking otherwise.

But it does make for good debate.
Rattler is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 06-18-2007, 11:31 AM   #45
Rattler
R.I.P. - George Jones
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: The Grand Tour
Posts: 2,029
vCash: 75
Default Re: Where do you rank Jack Dempsey??

So, by your definition, HH... the HW division is now better than it's ever been?

I mean, if it "gets better over time" and all that.
Rattler 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 07:37 PM.


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