Wlad v Dempsey

The only evidence you need is a newspaper account and a lot of Dempsey's whole different account. The only reason is he's telling a lie and he forgetting what lie he told last. Also all the people who were there calling it a dive.

 

But yea I was a little harsh orri. I'll let the poll decide. Sorry.

 

This content is protected

One side of the era debate comes from Venus and the other comes from Mars!

Neither would waver if their predictions were going to be tested!

 

I think allot of people pick their favourites, their heros. Either that or they genuinely don't understand the advantages of size and the big improvements in technique

I used to pick against Wlad because I'm not a fan of his, part in backlash to his idiotic fans but I'm less of a fan of being disingenous and Wlad is a good man even if I don't like his style or his fanatic fans

My fave HW growing up was Ali, I hate to say it but Wlad may well beat him

 

I'm going to go ahead and disagree with that. I see Louis getting jabbed up and brutally KO'd early. You can't just slowly stalk Vlad while at a massive size and reach disadvantage no matter how good your combinations might be. It's not going to work. Louis doesn't have the defense to avoid getting pulverized by the jab, let alone the power shots, and he doesn't have the footwork to get to Vlad. Louis practically had to have his feet set to throw hard punches, that's not going to work against a guy as quick and mobile as Vlad.

 

You honestly think Wlad has an easier time with Louis than he does with Dempsey?

 

Vlad can put either one's lights out with one punch. I think Louis beats Dempsey, but stylistically how is Louis going to trouble Vlad? You can't just slowly shuffle along after Vlad and expect to catch him with something.

 

style wise that isnt a hard argument..i think head to head Louis beats Dempsey 75 times out of 100...with about 50 KOs and 25 decisions. I think Dempsey wins by decision a few times and wins by ko maybe 20 times with a few draws.

Having said that...styles make fights..for example..I also think Dempsey gives Ali a harder fight and likely wins more out of 100 fights with Ali than Louis does....footwork and all that.....

 

How is it fair putting a 240 pound modern heavyweight that has the advantage of modern nutrition and training and technique to a 180 pound fighter from almost 100 yeas ago and then they say oh Dempsey has no chance against Wlad Dempsey is bad...And the sadder thing is Dempsey actually has a shot against Wlad which makes it even worse on Wlads behalf because a 180 pound 6'1 guy from almost 100 years ago with little rope pulleys and basic nutrition may just knock him out...Put Wlad in the 20's and Dempsey now with modern training and we'll see what would happen, even keep Dempsey in the 20's with Wlad and he'd murder him

 

I'm saying people often call Dempsey overrated ect but they're calling him overrated because he's being put against guys that are so far ahead of his time it becomes unfair, yet he has a shot at beating them which shows that he isnt really overrated, if he can be matched against Wlad who's almost 100 years ahead of him and with all the nutrition and more advanced training Wlad has and still have a great chance at beating Wlad then Dempsey must not be as bad as people make him out to be

 

You have seen Wlad jab so many memdiocre fighters into submission, that you have lost all sense of perspective, and started to imagine the faces of the all time greats on their bodys.

Wlad is a great fighter and a fine champion, but we have to get some sense of perspective here. He is a fighter with a good outside game, and virtualy no inside game. That works against the calibre of opponents he is fighting, but it isn't going to work against guys like Dempsey or Louis.