Question:Why some have Rocky overJack?

Lately some posters have Rocky Marciano over Jack Dempsey in a H2H fight. During Marciano's reign virtually ALL boxing people who saw both at their bests , chose the much, much FASTER Dempsey to ko the slower Marciano. I who saw Rocky ringside, cannot disagree with the vast majority
who chose Dempsey over Marciano. Comments ?

 

Dempsey was faster AND had a better footwork IMO.......
And I don´t think Marciano was the harder hitter like many here.....

 

That is something I wonder about as well. The one that really gets me scratching my head is how Jefferies is considered some bum today, but for many many years was considered right there with Louis and dempsey. I believe Fleischer had him in his top 5 into the 60s.
There is a thread floating around here the last few days, about goldman describing the type of fighter it would take to beat Marciano. Somebody said that they thought it sounded like Frazier. i thought he described Dempsey, or Louis.

 

Mc, true a lot of folks choose the fighter of their youth over a later fighter, but my contention stands that in the 1952-4 era of Rocky's title reign someone polled a slew of boxing experts as to who would have won between the prime Jack Dempsey and the present champ Marciano ? I recall
about everyone polled picked Jack Dempsey over Marciano, because of Dempsey's great speed, two handed punching power and untopped
toughness in the trenches...Such a majority in favor of Dempsey by
top boxing people who saw BOTH certainly impressed me greatly. I loved Rocky Marciano whom I first saw at MSG decimate brave Carmine Vingo,
but he missed at least half his punches, and Dempsey would not miss
and anyone the young Dempsey could hit he kos...To me I see this most very likely outcome...I think that the 2 guys that would be a DANGER to the Manassa Mauler [1919-23] would be Joe Louis and Mike Tyson because of their comparable handspeed and power...A motivated Dempsey was the
roughest meanest heavyweight ever, I believe...Tough as Marciano was a Dempsey or Louis beats Marciano's wild swings to the punch, and as we know SPEED KILLS...Cheers...

 

Of course Marciano would be a danger to Dempsey or ANYONE in the top ten. But we are talking about the most LIKELY outcome in the fight between Dempsey and Marciano...Styles make fights for sure...

 

I think Dempsey would have to fight well. If he got dragged into the trenches, he'd get outfought, ground out, and very likely stopped quite late.

If he consistently used his speed and his feet, I have to favor him over Marciano by decision.

Gun to my head, I'd pick Dempsey. Its one of his better ATG h2h matches.

 

Marciano is a league above Dempsey, he has a much better defence, less reckless, is a better puncher, better at pacing himself, better bodypuncher, better at breaking his man down, carried his power late in fights, could get past the jab, better counterpuncher. Marciano had every punch in his arsenal, Dempsey only had a left hook

Everyone underrated Rocky in his own time and he destroyed great after great, while everyone overrated Dempsey who didn't beat anyone really and got twice completely dominated by Tunney the best fighter he faced. Marciano time and again even past his prime beat down fighters the level or Tunney in Charles, Walcott and Moore.

Dempsey isn't even fast, why does that myth keep getting repeated?

 

I wouldn't rate Patterson over Foreman or choose him H2H, despite that he's MUCH faster and MUCH more athletic...That's simply not all there is.

 

It comes down to a couple of things.

As Power Puncher says, everybody underrated Rocky in his own time, while everybody overrated Dempsey. The rest of what he says is emotional.

It might theoreticaly be the case that Dempsey could have dismantled Marciano. It is even plausible.

The verdict of history seems to be that Marciano fought and beat everybody available, while Dempsey didn't.

The take home leason, is that if you want to be regarded as an all time great in the eyes of history, then fight everybody.

 

Dempsey in his prime wasn't fast ?
Dempsey just had a left hook ?
Why do you bring up the old bromide that Tunney beat the prime Dempsey who at 32 years of age hadn't had a fight for THREE long years ?
why can you not take Dempsey in his prime instead of the acknowledged
old rusty Dempsey of 1927 ?
Everyone overated Dempsey...B.S. tell that to the thousands of fighters, trainers and spectators who saw him at his best ? But of course you know better...Whether or not Marciano would have beaten a prime Dempsey is not the point. It is a matter of opinion which I respect as I too love Rocky who I was fortunate to see ringside...But to spout nonsense that "Dempsey was not fast in his actions', and Dempsey did not have a right hand is bogus...furthermore Marciano did not face prime youngsters in Ezzard Charles, Joe Walcott and Archie Moore, when he fought them as they were all in their waning days in the ring...and how would Marciano fared if he took off for three years and without a tune-up bout took on a razor prime Gene Tunney ? Not very well I fear...

 

Dempsey vs. Marciano?...get the EMT's ready...someone is going to get hurt...this is a GREAT PPV!!! Love Dempsey...met him as a kid in NYC...but I would not bet against a prime Marciano...