Lennox Lewis vs Jack Dempsey

This.

It is beyond laughable to think that even the lighter version ( 16 stone 6, which I believe equates to about 238 lbs ) of Lewis who used his jab far more effectively than he did when he was heavier wouldn't snap Dempsey's head back with it from long range. He would simply be teeing him up for the big right hand, then goodnight nurse.

 

Foxy, only in your own mind. Only in your own fantasy...:happy:happy:happy

 

Not really for the most part Ali, Pep, Ray Robinson, Barney Ross and Ray Leonard didn't overcome massive weight disparity. Neither did Whitaker too much. Hagler, Monzon and Arguello never overcame weight disparity. Greb and Duran didn't really beat much bigger men.

Spinks also ko'd 6'7 ****ey. Valuev is 100lbs heavier than Haye/Holyfield, Willard is 65lbs heavier than Dempsey. Willard was also 37, inactive for 3 years and out of shape.

Usually in P4P terms better is simply better. For example Mayweather beating Pacquaio is naturally considered a better win than Pacquaio beating Margarito.

Tunney beating a 32yo Dempsey is in turn naturally a better win than Dempsey beating a 37yo Willard. Greb in turn is a different proposition but better and more proven than Willard overall.

 

Says the guy who is still stuck in WW2.:rofl:rofl:rofl

You sir are no more than a joke, and a bad one at that.

 

It TAKES ONE TO KNOW ONE...You sir would be talking German if not for the "jokesters" of WW2...OR MOST LIKELY NOT TALKING AT ALL...You to "win" your way on boxing lore has the gall to attack my generation who saved your **** in WW2, is the height of irresponsibility....I know more of the history of boxing in my pinkie than you sir in your ego, and without me besmirching a great generation of the past to win points...To shame...atsch

 

You saved NOTHING in WW2. Joe Stalin had already seen off most of the German Army at Stalingrad in February 1943, only a year after your first troops landed in Northern Ireland, never mind mainland or Eastern Europe.

The reality is far from hollywood films starring Audey Murphy, or John Wayne.

In fact all you did in Europe was get in the way with your bungling efforts. Not content with that , only a few years later off you go again bungling your way through South East Asia, only to get sent home with your tails between your legs 4 millions tons of bombs and napalm, plus billions of dollars later.

So spare me your revisionist clap trap.

 

People serving on the Western front, still only had one life to loose!

 

It's lose, not loose. Loose is something that is not tight.

 

Sir you are a left wing ingrate. Try telling your sick revisionist **** at a VFW meeting of remaining WW 2 vets, and see if you are so brave...Of all the posters I have encountered on ESB YOU sir know no shame, and too bad 3000 miles separate us, but even in my dotage, I on behalf of fallen comrades of WW2 would take you on...Get on your knees you revisionist leftie and pray that a Winston Churchill existed...Or an FDR...atsch

 

It is a fact that USSR troops and civilians did the lion's share of the nazi killing and dying in WW2. However, that should not denigrate the smaller contribution by the US. Also, the Soviets would have never accomplished that feat without the super lend-lease... which even Stalin praised.

 

Oh, the fact that I made a typographical error, completely vindicates your previous childish observation!

 

U.S. Was fighting two fronts lest we not forget.

 

Russia lost the most in terms of people however let's not forget Britian.

Firstly, Britain was the only Allied country to be continuously in arms against the Axis powers for the entire war.

Secondly,after the French surrender in June 1940,Britain was the only country to remain opposed to the Germans, and continue fighting.A British surrender, negotiated peace, or defeat in 1940 would have left Germany in control of continental Europe, probably up till the present day, as Hitler would then have been able to turn his full resources against Russia, and thus defeat them.

Thirdly, it was the British leader, Churchill, that convinced USA to help with weapons and war materiel in 1940 and 1941, and then, after Pearl Harbour, concentrate American resources on a 'Germany First' policy of securing Victory in Europe as a priority, including extending Lend Lease military aid to the Soviet Union.

Finally,Britain's geographical position provided the base for the American build up of men and resources that was needed to successfully prosecute the war against the Nazis.Without Britain, an amphibious invasion launched across the Atlantic by USA was, with the best will in the world, impractical to say the least.

Those in favour of USSR having made the biggest contribution to Allied victory seem to forget that, under the Pact of Steel, Stalin supplied the Germans with oil, grain,steel and other materials which they used to feed their war machine, right up till Operation Barbarossa in 1941. Secondly, Russia was only kept in the war in 1942 by substantial aid in terms of strategic raw materials and tanks, warplanes,trucks and so on from Britain and America.Much of the military equipment used by the Russians in the initial defence of Stalingrad came from this source, without which they could well have been overwhelmed.

 

Firstly.

I am not a leftie. I don't EVER vote.

Secondly.

I have fair hair and blue eyes, so I would have willingly taken my chances with the German's had they won.

Thirdly.

You didn't do squat in the second world war, you weren't old enough. You just ride the coat tails of the genuine fighting men like my own father who died last November aged 98. So stop your pathetic whining.

Fourthly.

Your veiled threats are of less than no concern to me. Even if you were my age 67 I wouldn't even hit you with a closed fist, rather I'd slap your face like the whinger you are would deserve.

It is right wing fascist garbage like you that gave rise to Hitler and his cronies.