Wlad v Dempsey

Dempsey was an excellent boxer.
Anyone who's seen the Dempsey-Gibbons fight in its entirety can see that he has a suitcase full of skills and tricks.

 

Dempsey to quick to slick to tough and hits as hard as anyone

 

Dempsey is probable the most vicious hitting heavyweight ever

 

Wlad not only has all the advantages of a modern superheavyweight; he was a more dominant and active champion as well.

 

Not necessarily true, but he could have faced better competition after he became champ. The Wills situation was particularly unsatisfying, as the forum's discussions have rehashed ad infinitum.

 

Dempsey was not "to" slick. He got floored by one of worst title challengers ever. And for all intents and purposes, he should have been declared KO'd.

Wlad defuses Dempsey with his normal amount of effort and stops him between rounds 6 and 9. No 188 pound tough guy is going to do what is necessary to defeat Wlad's steel gate game plan.

 

He is "probable" not. Actually not by a long shot.

 

Dempsey's unpredictable and his movement is too fast and explosive for Wladimir too handle. Wladimir fights predictable fighters with little to no footwork,the only person with fast feet he struggled to hit(Haye)

 

Wlad manhandles him... Povetkin would beat Dempsey, sorry but its the truth. Any boxing fan who doesn't wear rose colored glasses know the old school Heavyweights would get their asses kicked by modern day HW's. there is no way Dempsey and others would be able to survive in the post Marciano eras.

 

Most historians would disagree with you

 

glover last time ill respond too you

Wladimir would have a time hitting a moving target while Wladimir just stands still in the ring. We're talking Jack from Willard vs Dempsey. Wladimir can't hit a moving target it..25% vs Haye?

 

You only have to look at Dempsey sparring vs Bill Tate to see how slick he was, but then again you're just a scumbag

 

Dempsey wouldn't even be a contender today:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aJkiwu_04dw

Wlad would KO him in a terrible mismatch.

 

How are historians experts on head-to-head competition by the way? "This era isn't as good as 20 years ago" has been said for the past 120 years. Historians are great researchers- and often great writers- but most have an embarrassing bias to the era they're most fond of...even to the point of thinking heavyweights from the 1880s were better than those today. Ask them to talk through and old film of what makes these fighters so special and they'll avopid it like the plague.

Make up your own mind...thinking is something you are capable of too....thinking is very important. :good

 

Sorry? I'd take a word of known historian over a man who has a vendetta against a former great fighter.