The Thing people dont get about Willard vs Dempsey

Discussion in 'Classic Boxing Forum' started by itsa, Jan 7, 2016.


  1. swagdelfadeel

    swagdelfadeel Obsessed with Boxing

    19,065
    20,545
    Jul 30, 2014
    But but but It would've been different, if it took place at a different time period.
     
  2. Perry

    Perry Boxing Junkie Full Member

    9,343
    1,536
    Apr 26, 2015
    That's ONE bookmaker fool. The official betting odds for this fight were 9-5, 8-5 for FOREMAN so you are lying. Nobody picked Frazier to win.
     
  3. swagdelfadeel

    swagdelfadeel Obsessed with Boxing

    19,065
    20,545
    Jul 30, 2014
    That isn't the question though, is it? :nono
     
  4. swagdelfadeel

    swagdelfadeel Obsessed with Boxing

    19,065
    20,545
    Jul 30, 2014
    ONE bookmaker picked him to win.
     
  5. red cobra

    red cobra Loyal Member Full Member

    38,042
    7,557
    Jul 28, 2004
    Bull****...anti-Dempsey revisionism at it's most ridiculous!
     
  6. Perry

    Perry Boxing Junkie Full Member

    9,343
    1,536
    Apr 26, 2015
    LOL. and in your very small mind that's enough to state Frazier was the favorite? You are a liar by stating the betting odds for this fight favored Frazier.
     
  7. janitor

    janitor VIP Member Full Member

    71,575
    27,221
    Feb 15, 2006
    My point is that many of the rule changes since then would actually favour Dempsey.

    A number of things that happened in that first round, would have seen the fight stopped today.
     
  8. mattdonnellon

    mattdonnellon Boxing Junkie Full Member

    8,617
    1,884
    Dec 2, 2006
    Willard wasn't much good at any stage.
     
  9. janitor

    janitor VIP Member Full Member

    71,575
    27,221
    Feb 15, 2006
    That is definitely debatable.

    People are quick to forget that he was seen as almost unbeatable at one point.
     
  10. swagdelfadeel

    swagdelfadeel Obsessed with Boxing

    19,065
    20,545
    Jul 30, 2014
    I never said that in this thread. You said NOBODY favored Frazier. I bought up, not only a person, but a bookmaker. :think
     
  11. mattdonnellon

    mattdonnellon Boxing Junkie Full Member

    8,617
    1,884
    Dec 2, 2006
    mass media maybe but the boxing scribes, in general, didn't rate him very highly at the time. And with good cause. His best wins, old Johnson in an ideal conditions match for him, Frank Moran who wasn't any good himself and who?
     
  12. Perry

    Perry Boxing Junkie Full Member

    9,343
    1,536
    Apr 26, 2015
    It depends on what specifically you are talking about.

    Willard was considered the best of all the white fighters of Johnsons time once McCarty tragically died. As per Fleischer Willard was the first white hope of that time "that was trained to fight over twenty rounds". His conditioning prior to fighting Dempsey was superb. He did not train hard for the Dempsey fight again as per Fleischer he was in bed past noon time on many days in camp.

    Fleischer....."Willard had only a rudimentary knowledge of the finer points of the game but his conditioning made him a match for any man alive".
     
  13. itsa

    itsa Boxing Addict Full Member

    4,747
    48
    May 22, 2015
    nobody else could even touch johnson like that before or since. Its a case of willard being at his peak and losing that peak quick.

    I dont know how any modern rules favor dempsey. almost all of them favor Willard
     
  14. swagdelfadeel

    swagdelfadeel Obsessed with Boxing

    19,065
    20,545
    Jul 30, 2014
    :lol::lol: Please stop. It's excruciating. :rofl:rofl
     
  15. Richmondpete

    Richmondpete Real fighters do road work Full Member

    7,140
    5,026
    Oct 22, 2015
    Basically because he was tall. Nothing has changed. Many people see Tyson fury as a future atg because he's 6'7 with a decent jab and functional footwork