Dempsey, Liston, Holyfield, Frazier.

So, does Dempsey receive a defacto loss because the Wills bout never materialized? It somewhat seems that way in these parts. And even though most thought that stylistically he held an upperhand against a fighter like Wills, he should neither receive a win. He signed for the bout (twice if memory serves). It did not happen. We have to move past the unanswerables and look at guys like Brennan, Morris, Willard, Levinsky, Firpo, Flynn, Gibbons and Sharkey... those he did defeat. I contend it is a better list than Liston compiled.

 

As for Jack Dempsey in terms of "Elite wins", i don't rank Sharkey as "Grade A", & he lowblow cheated to win... imagine if Golota's DQ losses against Bowe were counted as stoppage wins!

 

i see what you're saying but i don't think he's being penalized for losing but, fairly, being penalized based on his legacy and resume for the lingering questions and absence of 2-3 great fighters he (likely) would have beaten.

put another way: what if holyfield didn't fight bowe, moorer or lewis (aka wills/greb/etc.)? what if instead he lost a multiple fight series to jesse ferguson (aka willie meehan), went to hollywood, came back years later and twice lost to tyson?

 

i think it counts on his resume as a "W" but the nature of the win certain lowers it's value

 

Yes.

I don't rate Dempey's legacy as low, i just rate it below the others.

The Manassa Mauler is still top 15 ATG material at heavyweight.

 

It could've been a DQ loss in modern times imo.

Plus Dempsey was getting his ass whupped when he lowblow cheated to steal a victory from the jaws of defeat.

 

Sharkey is certainly a grade A win. Much better than Frazier's win first over Quarry, which might be the second best result on his resume.

 

Well i rate Quarry as "Grade B" too.

Maybe Sharkey is "Grade B+" from a legacy standpoint.

Losing to Carnera in his first & only title defense really brings him down.

 

Holyfield





Frazier

Dempsey



Liston

 

I still contend that Dempsey's resume was deeper than Frazier's and just plain better than Liston's.

 

And I thought you rank fighters and what they did. :huh

Somebody on here (choklab?) posted in the past good arguments that Liston was only the premiere hw from the Folley and Machen fights on since Williams wasn´t ranked when Liston fought him and Valdez was shot and the rest of his opposition wasn´t that impressive during that time.

 

I think this list is better - Cleveland Williams x2, Patterson x2, Machen, Folley, Bathea, Valdes, Harris. They were considered better in their own time as they proved they were the best and look loads better on film

Klompton brought forward evidence suggesting the contract was a publicity stunt and the fight could have been made. I seem to remember him having a Dempsey quote saying he didn't want to fight Wills after he beat Willard

Still I wouldn't count it as a defacto loss, more a case of not being proven against the best

 

Valdez was shot and what did Williams do to be so high ranked. Bethea and Harris were decent but would be amongst the worst of Dempsey´s opponents. Patteson on the other hand would be Dempsey´s best win while Machen and Folley would be up there with Sharkey - I think Dempsey´s win over Sharkey is still the better one since Dempsey was nearly shot then.

 

apart from his cruiserweight days Holyfeild was always overshadowed by another fighter, be it Tyson going to jail or bowe and lewis who he did not get the better of. evander was considered a great over acheiver until the tyson win was blown out of proportion. Dempsey was not overshadowed by anyone.