Other posters were comparing Dempsey to Floyd, but I wasn't one of them. But I do think Dempsey was the type of fighter who would take a punch to throw a punch, and he was certainly hitable. Watch the video, Brennan hit him clean in first 5-6 seconds. You can only allow that to happen so many times before you come across a Liston, or a Lewis type fighter and it's lights out. I agree Dempsey had a better beard than Patterson and as mentioned he had a pretty good inside game as well, but his down fall would be his defense, and I think Liston would manage to throw as couple of jabs and time him coming in.
As stated Liston lost to Martin 4 yrs past age when Dempsey had retired, the other fighters you identified Liston actually beat, albeit the second and third time round with Marshall, who is to say how good shall we say Whitehurst would have done against Dempsey if they fought. Lets not forget Dempsey lost twice against fatboy Willie Meehan, the last time only 10 months prior to Dempsey beating Willard, now are you saying that Willie was a world class fighter or heavy handed? The thread is about the fighters Dempsey in 1919 and Liston in 1960. Liston last loss before 1960 was in 1954 and the Martin loss was in 1969 so apart from the Ali losses that is a 15 year gap between the Marshall loss and the Martin loss. Dempsey had a helluva whallop of course he did but that did not stop him losing fights to the likes of Meehan x2 or Flynn?. Dempsey only managed 2 draws, and later a ko against light heavyweight Johnny Sudenberg, who had a record on retirement of 9 wins (3 by knockout), 32 losses, and 18 draws, was Sudenberg a heavy hitter, No. 1960 Liston beats 1919 Dempsey, are either fighter defensive masters of highest echelon no, are they sluggers, yes, scary fighters, yes, have heavy hands, yes, but all things considered Liston has the better tools physically and in his armoury to win.
Usualy the man with the faster hands who lands the most punches wins. Categorising fighters stylistically only works with non champions. If two exceptional fighters meet (Who are both exceptions to a rule) where does that leave the labelling of stylistic groups? A very good saying is a good boxer always beats a good fighter because a good boxer can always fight but if that was the hard and fast rule why do so many boxers lose to fighters? To categorise champions both must be utterly reliable at the same level, willing to put it all on the line. This is simply not the case with all the men Liston beat and in fact Liston himself.
No. These were only 4 round fights, some say exhibitions. why should they count? At top level you need more rounds than that against a negative old stager. Meehan knew not to take fights that were set much longer if he was against anyone decent.
He was right then. America should have kept out of WWI anyway. Maybe if we don't get involved there is a stalemate, no treaty of the versailles where germany is unjustly punished, hence no Hitler, etc. I know some jack wagon is going to try to 'insult' me now by calling me some infantile names. I don't give a rat's ass.
Now neither you or i were there, but Dempsey in his court appearance on draft evasion charges in 1920 for which he was acquited, Dempsey when asked about fights he had during the War and their results said "i got careless with Willie Meehan he outpointed me, the other times i did all right, seventeen knockouts in twenty two bouts", that is not the reply from a boxer who took part in an exhibition. They were competitive fights with proceeds going to Armed Service Charities, however the fights were on the level and competitive, seventeen opponents being knocked out is not exhibition material.
So you would hold it against Dempsey that he cant knock out willie within 4 rounds? How many times did Liston go past 4rounds? I cannot think of a famous official fight that was set for just 4 rounds.
I raised the name of Meehan and Sudenberg merely in response to your comments regarding Listons opponents, Liston blasted out opponents quickly and other opponents lasted the distance, likewise for Dempsey. Dempsey agreed to these 4 round bouts, now it is not the then or now Champion distance, however the fights were legit. Now if you believe Dempsey beats Liston so be it, they were from differing eras and neither are now alive so we will never definitely know either way. I believe Liston would be the victor. But oh for the opportunity to have a time machine to put such matchups together, even i would cough up for PPV then, unless i could get ringside seats of course. Alas it not going to happen so will have to make do with informed debate here:thumbsup
There is a pretty strong argument that Dempsey never was stopped, and the Flynn fight was fixed. Dempsey fought Meehan in 4 rounders because at that time, California only allowed 4-round bouts. You fight within the parameters of what the law will allow. That is why John L. Sullivan's fights mostly were 4 rounds - because that was all that law enforcement would allow at the time. Meehan was a spoiler who had over 100 wins and could make anyone struggle in a mere 4 rounds. Meehan seemed to do worst against tall, long-range fighters with long arms. Anyone else, he was real trouble to overcome in only 4 rounds. Dempsey did deck him in their final bout, and had a broken hand coming into the fight, his badly puffed hand noticed by a reporter even before the fight. Dempsey said he did not want to pull out, owing to his desire to raise funds for the war effort/soldiers and sailors relief. He fought for free.
I do not like Dempsey coming straight at Sonny Liston, I expect he'd nail Liston with some good shots but he's not getting him out of there. After an initial engagement Sonny's strength in close would over power Jack and then his jab would keep him at range, punching range. I'd expect to see Liston start backing Jack up and Dempsey would have a hard time surviving that way. With two punchers like this I can't see the fight going that long, Liston by 5th round KO.