Dempsey's vaunted run to the Title

And what is with all the hate towards Seamus? He's posted facts in order to generate a debate about one of boxing's classic heroes. Is that not the purpose of this forum?

 

good, objective post but top contender status, both of dempsey and the men he beat, is only as good as the fighters themselves are. fulton was ok but tony thompson was a top contender to wlad and richard hall was a top contender to roy jones. the status doesn't mean much unless you beat the best and quality fighters to earn it.

 

agreed. BUT put tyson in the roaring 20s, with only newspapers and accounts of his most famous exploits and have descriptions of the legends he beat (marvis frazier was 12 feet tall and made of iron) passed down the generations and watch his legend grow!

 

Of course being the top contender is a relative status, but it is the goal of any pre title run and Dempsey did achieve that goal in a way that say him pick up a lot of hype. as I say there isn't really much to criticise for me.

Foe instance some of the best pre title runs in hw history are Lewis, Louis, Johnson and Liston.

Are any of those significantly better than Dempsey's?

I think Lewis has perhaps the best pre title (up until the unification fight with holyfield) run in history.

Johnson has a great resume with hindsight in terms of name but plenty of those names were far from peak so i wouldn't say that's much better.

Louis beat up former champs in devastating fashion plus a lot of faded contenders is his run much better?

Liston gets massive praise for his pre title run, and does that rank significantly higher than Dempsey's?

If you take out the filler fights he still has dominations over Levinsky, Morris, Fulton, Flynn, Brennan and a points victory over Miske. That's a fair share of the best contenders and solidified his position as best contender which, as i said earlier, is the point of any pre title run.

 

Dempsey! Dempsey! Dempsey!

 

Were you even around in Lewis' fighting days?? Lewis' pre-title run?? Up to Holyfield!!!???? Hahaha that wasn't pre-title!?? Hahahaha Holy was virtually at the end of his career - Infact I would say Lewis was past his prime by Holy hahahaha Lewis pre-title run ended with Razor Ruddock??

 

Dempsey's legacy--as a fighter--is secure.

Revisionists will never be satisfied, revisionism is endless fun, but--unless we throw out several generations' opinion--it will never prevail.

The three solid legs on this stool:

a) the consensus of the generations from 1919 to well past 1950: fighters, trainers, writers, fans, by and large pointed to Jack Dempsey as the greatest fighter ever witnessed, pound for pound. Disregard of this is dangerous: it is to ignore history, plain and simple.

b) the endorsement of Sam Langford, just three years removed from Toledo: "Well if he (Harry Wills) ever fights Dempsey, my money will be on the present champion. Dempsey is the greatest fighter I have ever seen. He hits twice as hard as Jim Jeffries and is as fast in the ring as James J. Corbett."

c) the available film. Making the effort to get past the jerky sepia, Dempsey's speed, movement, punching form, one-punch power and savageness are there. His little-man-sicced-on-a-big-man destruction of the iron-chinned Wlllard, which started with a one-punch perfect left-hook knockdown is amazing. The Firpo fight shows a champion, outweighed by over 25 pounds, going to war against a powerful puncher, surmounting an out-of-the-ring knockdown, to prevail by clean 2nd-round kayo.

In the end, only the truly great win over the non-fans. In my time, young Mike Tyson and Manny Pacquiao won over the mainstream, where others didn't. And rightfully so. Greatness always begets legend. Blind men extolling the virtues of the great Jack Dempsey is merely a tribute. No blind men will ever wax poetic about Lennox Lewis. Rightfully so.

Greatness is a rare thing, and no amount of revisionism will touch it.

 

Yeah I was actually I remember back then when boxing was still a mainstream sport. I'd be discussing the big fights in class at school. Good times.

If we're comparing cross era I can't in good conscience class alpha belts the same as undisputed championships. Holy was the number 1 hw in the world after his destructions of Tyson and moorer. So until Lewis beat him I see it as pre title.

 

Yeah but Bowe was undisputed champ after dethroning Holyfield - but then he refused to fight Lewis and forfeited the belt to Lewis rather than face him so that's the point Lewis takes up the belt?? Or did I miss something? Lewis then lost the title to Oliver McCall - who in turn lost it to Frank Bruno who then got smashed to defeat and dethroned by the returning Mike Tyson and the rest is history

 

Bowe never seemed scared of Lewis but his management did. I do think a fight would have happened though had Lewis not lost.

Either way Lewis didn't gain recognition as a true champion until the Holy fight. Same way Johnson didnt gain recognition as true champ until the Burns fight.

 

I do think Bowe had a little fear in him of Lewis just enough that he wouldve trained his ass off had they fought. Agree that his management sabotaged his career to a certained degree.

 

Yeah I agree there. I don't think Bowe ran from the fight, just that his management steered him away from it. The fight would have come off eventually had Lewis bit lost and I think Bowe would have done him at that point.

 

Bravo Prime, as you stated, Dempsey's place is cemented in history by
all of his generation up to Ray Arcel. His likes we will never see again..
:good:good:good

 

But this isn't strictly the case though is it.

Some people thought Levinsky beat Greb.

Dempsey's early destruction of Levinsky, would certainly have looked a lot better than a debatable decision win.